There's lots of noise in SF about homeless people "refusing shelter" and "They want to live in tents!" And that we should force them to accept the shelter against their own will, "for their own good!" Many SF folks rationalize their desire to not see homeless people, by convincing ourselves that refusing shelter is an irrational behaviour, and that we know better.
We don't consider the fact that people might be refusing shelter when that shelter is worse than a tent.
“They want to live in tents”
“They don’t want to work”
“They don’t access healthcare before it’s an emergency”
No matter who it is, the refusal to access something when it would be expected to bring the person substantial benefit should immediately raise the question of the nature of what shelter/job/healthcare they’re being offered, not an assumption that they prefer to be unhoused/impoverished/sick.
@aredridel@mekkaokereke. When i was homeless in L. A. I had the option to join a live-in church-based shelter. But they would have split up me and my husband. I'm not from L. A. I didn't know anybody so you couldn't be more right. It's better to sleep outside than be sheltered away from your family. 💯
@mekkaokereke Don't say every intervention. I know a few mentally ill people who will refuse shelter because "the CIA has bugs in the room", or other such imagined evils. (Not that the CIA is good - but these people are not interesting to the CIA)
@bluGill even then we have to take them seriously to get psychosis treated. You have to treat people as human beings with agency to get it to work.
And in the case of paranoia? It’s an irrational response but often to something that is also rationally distressing. The specifics may be way off base but the “I don’t want it” usually has a damn good reason.
@mekkaokereke Having dealt with such people you make it sound a lot easier than it really is. Their "I don't want it" doesn't have a good reason at all.
I'm not claiming all or most homeless are like this. I have no insight into the homeless in general. I just have insight into a subset. I'm not claiming SF doesn't need to do better.
You make it sound a lot easier than it really is, to separate who has "good reasons" for refusing something, vs those who don't.
Err on the side of kindness and respect. Assume they have valid reasons.
The paternalistic, dehumanizing assumption that people need to have their agency violated "for their own good" is incredibly dangerous. Even clinicians who are trained for it don't find it easy to make that call.
Most people who are suspicious of institutions have good reason, after being traumatized and abused in the past. Some of them may ALSO have schizophrenic symptoms that complicate matters but it doesn't invalidate the fact that they have been abused. Such people need to be treated with extra kindness and patience to calm their fears-- NOT to be treated like disobedient animals.
I've never had psychotic symptoms-- just garden variety anxiety and depression-- but I've been treated as a second-class citizen more than once by people whose supposed job it was to help me. I can only imagine what my friends have gone through when their more intense symptoms act up.
The VAST MAJORITY of people who are houseless and/or struggling with mental illness and/or substance issues, will LEAP at any kind of helpful resources that aren't toxic-- but it's going to take work to build such resources, and more work to prove to people that it's not just another abusive, paternalistic trap baited with false hope.
If we force this person to move into an apartment then would they not be essentially correct that the government is tracking them around and modifying their behavior?
Obviously they would be wrong about the CIA specifically, but they would be correct that most shelters and supportive/transitional housing buildings have a lot of surveillance cameras which are actively reviewed by staff and sometimes law enforcement.
@bluGill@mekkaokereke@aredridel As always, so-called "mentally well" people are far more likely to victimize so-called "mentally ill" people than vice versa.
@mekkaokereke@aredridel It is a hard problem. My solution is to start on the low hanging fruit: people who would take shelter if it wasn't so bad. Then once we take care of them start looking at the rest. This solution is terrible, but it is better than we are doing now and we can do it.
@mekkaokereke I follow a homeless lady on social media who is in Chicago, she has a storage cart that she keeps what she has left of her belongings on, and if she goes to a shelter she can’t bring all that stuff. And she doesn’t want to lose it because it’s all she has left of her former life. I assume she will eventually change her mind when it gets cold because she’s also pregnant. It’s a sad sad situation. Awhile back I posted a link to the Chicago public housing waitlist, more than half the properties have a 25 year waitlist. Maybe two of the properties had a 1 to 3 year waitlist, but I think that was senior housing only
@mekkaokereke this is very true. There is also an added level of complexity: even a good shelter is not theirs.
If you are sleeping rough on the streets, or even in a tent city, you have things that are yours. Not much, but some. Your scarcity makes you protective of your things, and the hostility of the general public makes you fearful of others. Homeless communities are rife with substance abuse, mental and physical health issues, and occasional interpersonal politics among those who have been there the longest.
Many shelters also come with weird assumptions—strict religious values, personality judgements, little health support, arbitrary rules that infantilise you—and most reach capacity or shut down or kick you out at some point. So if you leave your spot (or swag, or tent, or trolley) to go a shelter, you feel like it will just be taken from you soon and then you’ll be back here but without your spot/stuff. And maybe having rubbed others in your community the wrong way.
Starving and exposure and scarcity and fear changes you in a way that makes it more difficult to re-integrate than simply being given things or opportunities or aid.
@mekkaokereke we enforce morality on people in many shelters- no partners, no sex, no drinking, no pets… in many of our mayor’s plans it sounds like they’re requiring drug addiction treatment… but if you’re in chronic pain (emotional or physical)
You’re not going to be interested in being forced into treatment.
@mekkaokereke@SteveJonesnono1 A lot of temporary provision for homeless people here in the UK is just awful - plagued with violence, serious drug misuse, dirty… the hotels councils put people in often have rooms smaller than prison cells, no cooking facilities, bad state of repair… and people are expected to seem grateful for being put in these shitty places
Talmadge Wright’s Out of Place: Homeless Mobilizations, Subcities, and Contested Landscapes for a profile of uprisings among the unhoused when shelters are inadequate. https://sunypress.edu/Books/O/Out-of-Place2
The cruel way forwards, is to force people to accept these substandard, dangerous conditions.
The way of kindness, is to improve the conditions at the worst places, to the level of the units that people don't refuse.
And "reducing the bureaucratic delay" involves both simplifying the application process, and not checks notes throwing away homeless people's paperwork every few months in sweeps. "Still gathering paperwork" sometimes means reapplying for documents thrown away in a sweep. 😢
@mekkaokereke
Minneapolis is trying both approaches at once, and the results are…instructive.
We have a relatively small permanently homeless population, probably only a few hundred people. Yet we perennially have highly visible tent encampments. The city keeps destroying them — and destroying these people’s worldly possessions along with them — over and over. It’s expensive. It’s cruel. But at least it…no wait, it’s totally ineffective. Encampments keep reappearing, over and over and over.
@virtualbri@mekkaokereke
Oh, just giving them money is •obviously• cheaper, but local politics would never accept anything that sensible. “Fair” here means “white people should never have to support t h o s e people.”
As for the “place to live” part, housing availability is a huge part of the problem: no amount of support or incentives will get somebody into housing when there simply aren’t enough units.
@mekkaokereke and it would be great if the state agencies, like DHHS, and public Housing, could share information. If somebody is homeless and they get food stamps or Medicaid the state has a copy of their Social Security card and birth certificate and all kinds of stuff that they needed to qualify for that. Couldn’t HUD use those same documents from the state database so they don’t have to be produced over and over and over again?
Also, if you are going into public housing and they want you to supply a criminal records check from every state that you’ve ever lived in, ask them if they can just take a nationwide background check. If I had to pay $25 to every state I ever lived in to get something from the state I would’ve had to wait so long I would’ve lost my apartment. But the company that does background checks for Notary signing agents can do the whole country for $40 in a couple days.
Periodic reminder that NYC has more homeless people, and more homeless people per capita, than SF. 🙂🙃
But NYC has more shelter spots that are suitable for human habitation, and a more efficient intake process, so has far fewer street homeless (tents etc).
This is the most New York photo ever. It shows two buildings. On the left is the Bowery Hotel. Rooms start at $500 a night. The Bowery is a known spot for A-list celebrity watching. It's a fun place. Recommend.
On the right is Project Renewal Kenton Hall Men's Shelter.
San Francisco doesn't have the nation's most severe "homelessness" problem.
San Francisco has the nation's most severe "ineffective, selfish, and punitive response to homelessness" problem.
And before we say that the problem is fentanyl... NYC fentanyl usage is just as high. And before we say the problem is Black people, SF has famously few Black folk left, while NYC has a disproportionately large population of Black people. One in every 20 Black US citizens lives in NYC.
@mekkaokereke The MAIN Reason San Francisco has a Homeless population is the MILD CLIMATE. NO Freezing to death in the winter here... Try Sleeping outdoors in Boston or NYC... You would die... Eureka California also has a large homeless population because It's a very valid lifestyle to set up a tent in the forest...
@Gregvan@mekkaokereke yeah that doesn't follow. Edmonton Alberta has heartbreakingly many people living in tents and improvised shelters. The temperature this morning is -4 C, almost every winter has a stretch of days where the daytime high doesn't top -30.
We also have expensive housing and generations of neglect for building a path back to stable housing. The shelters have conditions so bad they're empty except at times when it would be lethal to stay outside.
@dragonfrog@Gregvan@mekkaokereke Can confirm. Here in Montpelier Vermont, I passed three different homeless encampments just driving out to the next town over this weekend, and it's regularly below freezing at night. One makeshift A-frame out of tarps in the woods, a collection of tents under a bridge, and a couple of folks in campers and cars in the park and ride.
The hotel program for the homeless that started early in the pandemic ended this year, and it shows.
@dragonfrog@Gregvan@mekkaokereke Oh, and we have a church which opens a warming shelter during the winder normally; but it only has about 10 beds, while the last estimate of the unhoused population that I have seen was about 60.
There might be slightly less incentive to find more permanent housing in areas with milder climates, but the housing shortage and affordability issues are present across the country (and it sounds like in Canada too), including colder, rural areas.
There's an amazing individual named Steve Wallis that has a popular YouTube channel that teaches people how to camp... affordably... not in campsites... In urban environments... and avoid unwanted attention... and stay warm...
(OK, he teaches people how to survive unsheltered homelessness.)
Choosing to make EVERY third WORD in your POST all CAPS doesn't necessarily make it TRUE.
I just pointed out that the HOMELESS POPULATION in NYC is HIGHER than the homeless population in SAN FRANCISCO. So your mild climate THEORY doesn't even make sense in this THREAD.
Homelessness is driven by HOUSING AFFORDABILITY. In short, homelessness is POLLUTION emitted by rich people.
If cities don't provide adequate SHELTER for homeless, then people live on the STREETS or in tents.
There's this belief that homeless people in other parts of the country come to San Francisco "for the weather." I'm not sure if the people who believe this have experienced SF weather... 🤔
Most homeless folk in San Francisco are from the city. They were housed in the city, then lost their housing.
@mekkaokereke the alternately barely veiled and completely unveiled hatred of the homeless that i see in every reply to a local news story about homelessness in SF really shows how dead set many people here are against helping anyone. they don't want to pay for proper services, they don't want to see them on the streets. policy wise it's a non-answer. only a few are willing to say out loud that the logical implication of their stance is extermination.
Homelessness in a city, is strongly correlated with the affordability of that city. And the number of people living in tents, is correlated with the percentage of homeless people that are sheltered.
I'm not kidding when I say that homelessness is pollution emitted by rich people. Homeless people are victims of that pollution.
During Covid lockdowns, rich people fled SF for Atlanta and Austin. Home prices went up in both places, but Atlanta built enough new entry level homes to keep the "minimum monthly rent/mortgage" accessible.👍🏿 Austin did not. So homelessness in Austin is increasing faster.
Homeless people aren't making their way to Austin for that famous Texas weather.🤷🏿♂️
@mekkaokereke It's wild how much the NIMBY's have seized control of San Francisco and the Bay Area in general... or really California in general :drgn_sigh:
@mekkaokereke
Was just listening to a great podcast about this. If Books Could Kill did an episode about San Fransicko and did what seemed like a great job dissecting the arguments in the book, and pointing out some real valid criticism of how homelessness is handled by both liberals and conservatives
@mekkaokereke@kcivey my theory has been that the weather makes it harder to ignore the problem: if NYC can’t get people into shelters, the media is asking the mayor about preventable deaths. If people in California aren’t sheltered, fewer die from exposure relative to things which aren’t as directly seen as government failures (“they were addicted” “He jumped in front of a car!”) or even help existing political pushes (“we need a stronger hand to fight street crime”)
I mean, yes, but also no. The thing that's so frustrating to me is that people say that New York is forced into this by the consent decree. But New York only has that consent decree because a class action lawsuit was brought on behalf of the unhoused, and that class action lawsuit could only be brought because of language in the state constitution.
Everybody keeps ignoring the fact that people who cared about the issue of what happened to the poor in society got language that mattered included in the state constitution in the first place.
In essence, a commitment was made a century ago, and it's legitimate to ask why that commitment was made. And, yes, it might be because the consequences of not making it were more fatal in New York than elsewhere.
I think it's a real interesting question what happened in New York to get that language in their constitution.
@mekkaokereke Rich mofos buying real estate and raising rents to unaffordable heights is causing homelessness. It’s the wealthy buying property to increase their wealth.
@mekkaokereke The Tenderloin is too precious for people to live there. As is every neighborhood facing overcrowding refugee infllux. Housing first then the human rights of ALL. Build for Humanity
@mekkaokereke my belief is that in places where the weather will kill you, both sides are more motivated to make housing situations work, whereas a human can live outside in SF year round and exposure is not necessarily going to be a likely source of mortality. A year of living outside in NYC is not survivable without considerable equipment.
And people live outdoors year round in New York, and places much colder than New York. Steve Wallis teaches homeless and unsheltered people how to "stealth camp" and how to survive in the cold. He frequently spends the night in cities, below freezing temperatures.
And I don't know where the myth that "California weather is so warm that homeless people don't die from the cold" comes from.
If you sleep on the concrete, unsheltered, in California, in winter, during a cold snap, you don't wake up. The cardboard isn't just a poor attempt at comfort. It's critical insulation. Falling asleep directly on concrete during winter, can be fatal. Even in California.
@mekkaokereke@tiotasram A LOT of US homeless shelters/transitional housing/similar are run by private Christian groups/churches.
While their ostensible rules may just be the "sensible" "no booze no drugs" (albeit out of their own classism and assumptions, as opposed to actual concern and helping people get sober) a whole lot will demand attendance to services/engagement in unpaid labor for the church/org, and will also discriminate against LGBTQ people or people who insist on not converting
@mybarkingdogs@mekkaokereke@tiotasram the local Christian shelter has a strict curfew in addition to what you listed. Clients can't have a job on 2nd shift. They can't bring outside food into the shelter.
@mekkaokereke We've made the whole system impossible. Even assume someone wants to build small shelters for them. Say, a shed big enough for their stuff and a cart. Before you know it we have "Well, it has to be (X sq feet) big, and have central plumbing and..." and before we know it its costing $1500 a month and all they want is a safe place where they won't freeze, won't get killed, and can keep their stuff from getting taken. They want a tent lets get them a !@#$ing amazing tent.
Unfortunately my dogs got old, and are chasing tennis balls in heaven right now. But when they were alive, I couldn't imagine giving up my dogs to move into checks notes a single room occupancy hotel in the Tenderloin.
I'd definitely live in a car / tent for my dog.
People do understand the concept of "emotional support dog" when we're talking about rich people taking dogs into expensive restaurants, but don't understand it when we're talking about surviving homelessness.
@mekkaokereke
You know what’s special about the tent? It was their tent. It was their ‘house’ and their rules. It was their dignity. Given that they rightly trust nothing and no one, why would you go into a shelter you got pushed into?
@mekkaokereke our "give me liberty or give me death" culture has a hard time imagining why someone would take their chances with the elements instead of a microcosm of North Korea. But if you lack imagination, you could always, you know, talk to a homeless person about the situation.
@mekkaokereke Exactly. Give people an alternative that is actually better than living on the street and they will almost certainly take that alternative. The shelters are unfortunately not that for most people.
@mekkaokereke right. let's see - my daughter was in a shelter only to have a tweaked out meth addict beat the shit out of her and take her stuff. that's only one incident out of many. shelters are dangerous places.
@mekkaokereke "we should force them to accept the shelter against their own will, "for their own good!"
We meaning Mayor Breed, the one who, well before becoming Mayor, as President of the Board of Supes, decided that the best thing to do to improve the over 1600 people long waiting list for permanent housing, was to get rid of the list entirely?!
The fact is that there isn't enough housing for them to move into, and that Breed has repeatedly blocked voter-approved funds to build it.
Add comment