Homeless in Alaska

>>You can't solve homelessness by giving people homes, because homeless people can't jump through the hoops needed to keep that from being defrauded to death. <<

Utah has used this method to cut their rate of homelessness down to a tenth of what it was. A few other places are trying similar programs. It's not perfect, but it seems to be making enormous improvements.

>> Also, a lot of them are insane. <<

That is a separate, although related, problem. Preventing people with mental disabilities from becoming homeless requires a combination of readily accessible mental health care, support services, and options for living arragements that are secure without being undesirable to them. There are places which do these things, just not enough.

>> Shelters don't work very well because it forces them to deal with other homeless people who will try to abuse them.<<

That is true.

>> You'd basically have to put them in prison, <<

Which is precisely how America currently handles its mentally disabled people, turning them into livestock. The vast majority of inmates either come in with, or quickly acquire, mental problems which make it difficult or impossible for them to live independently. And that's not an accident.

>> or a mental hospital, or some other heavily supervised living situation. Against their will, because most of them would hate that. <<

The circumstances under which it is reasonable to violate someone's agency like that are extremely limited. Mostly society does it out of convenience, which is illegal, but as long as the targets are largely powerless it is rarely prosecuted.

There are many different options for living situations which provide a little or a lot of support for people with mental disabilities, ranging from less formal to more formal in structure. They don't all have to look like institutions. Intentional neighboring is one good example, which is what Waverly does in the Skylark Apartment Building. She manages labile mood with community, because she tried medication and it quashed her creativity, a common complaint with psychotropic drugs.

>> Hey, I resemble that remark! And as someone who is still insane <<

While I respect everyone's right to their own definitions, I should like to point out that you aren't insane by my standards. You're reasonably coherent, can handle everyday tasks, and don't seem to be in a state of constant suffering. Plenty of people have mental disabilities, but there's a long range between that and insane, just as their is between physically disabled and crippled. I think it's important to keep the breadth of that spectrum in mind, because so many discussions overlook it, and that leads to bad policies as well as stigma.

>> and thankfully no longer homeless, <<

\o/

>> I kinda resent the statement that I'd have to be put in a prison or a mental hospital against my will. <<

Societies have shown a bad habit of treating people with mental problems as nonpersons with no rights. This does not solve any problems. It just makes life more convenient for those currently judged acceptable. And the standards for what is or is not "insane" vary greatly according to, largely, fashion. Let's not forget they used to lock up women for having or wanting to have orgasms, or not wanting to have husbands or babies.

>> Enh, also keep in mind, I generally only show my face on the Internet on a good day. On bad days, I am not NEARLY so coherent or able to handle myself, and yeah, sometimes I am suffering. <<

Thanks for sharing. It's helpful to remember that people have their ups and downs, sometimes very down.

>> (Not as much as I used to, and these days I consider it useful pain most of the time, rather than meaningless suffering, but it still happens.) <<

I'm glad it's getting better, and that the trend is toward more functional days than miserable ones.

>> I just usually hide on bad days. <<

I think most of us do that. Certainly there are days when I can sit up, but I'm snarling at everyone, and getting online to snarl at people in comments is not very helpful. Because most people filter what they post, it can look like everyone else is fine and you're the only one who's all fucked up, unless you get into forums or on blogs where people talk about the fucked-up parts of their lives.

I agree that the terms "high-functioning" and "low-functioning" are often abused by caregivers. But so is damn near everything else, because as you point out, society hates people with disabilities or who are simply different.

A variation of use that I find far more helpful is what appears in people with variable conditions. Frex, my digestion is iffy at best. Most of the time it's usable, which means I'm high-functioning; I can't do a much as someone with a healthy body, but I can do as much as I ever can with this body, which is enough for most everyday purposes. Sometimes my body goes out of whack, which means my focus has to shift from things like yardwork and writing for pay to devoting most of my energy for managing the input-output process. Suddenly I'm low-functioning, and that can last for a couple days or a couple weeks. So I routinely describe my ability level in a range: functional, mostly functional, semi-functional, marginally functional, nonfunctional. This tells people around me approximately what shape I'm in and what things are feasible to do -- or not -- today. I know a lot of other folks who use something similar because they need to communicate an ever-shifting level of ability to their families and/or coworkers. It's not meant as a permanent diagnosis, but one could reasonably average out that kind of description based on an activity log.

My main beef is how little disability support has anything to do with the person at heart. Most of it is about faking normal. This is a problem because health care is supposed to be about optimizing someone's health. There are things I can do to boost my functionality, and that includes acknowledging the low-function times when I have to quit trying to do normal stuff, pop the hood, and figure out how to fix whatever's gone wrong with my innards this time. Almost all of that is stuff I've learned on my although, although I confess that a couple of the most important elements were courtesy of a few good doctors.

Who controls language, largely controls thought. I think we might get better results if we put more effort into coining our own terminology based on our needs, insisting on using that, and refusing to acknowledge the rest. It starts a lot of fights, but the information that gets through is more accurate. The autistic community coined one of the best rules: "Nothing about us without us." That should be a groundrule for every group maintenance ever.

Simply put, housing solves the homeless problems for those who are willing and able to take advantage of it. That seems to run about 90% of the population, based on pilot programs. A solution that fixes 90% of a problem is generally considered a success. One can then examine the remaining part of the problem, and consider whether it needs some other solution in addition or instead of the first one.

Also, housing greatly undermines the route into chronic homelessness. If you get people off the street quickly, then they tend not to deteriorate so far that they want nothing to do with society anymore. You can fix the damage before it gets too bad. Better yet are the programs aimed at preventing homelessness by identifying people in vulnerable positions, to make sure they don't lose their homes in the first place.

It won't fix everything, no. But it's one hell of an improvement over the current mess.

>> Many, many years ago I read a Doris Lessing story about a homeless old woman who lived on the streets with the help of her cat, who caught and brought her pigeons to eat. And deep down, that's my fear...except possibly without a loyal and competent cat. <<

:( Yeah, I know the feeling.

>> And. I am middle class, and my husband says our retirement savings are in decent shape, etc- but they have been trashed twice by stock market collapses that enriched the wealthy, AND people want to gut Social Security...

This is not because I want sympathy; I am lucky! And yet, it still seems like a possible fate despite all this- and how much more for others! <<

Exactly. L-America has created an environment of pervasive anxiety and depression because there is no real security for anyone. Survival has become a paid privilege, and almost nobody makes enough money to pay the prices charged for it in old age. >_<

>> ETA- OH, and we need to be able to keep our cats in said housing! <<

Agreed. I have seen a few motions in that direction, but most shelters forbid animals of any kind, and that discourages people from going there.

>> I do my best to support everything that makes life more possible and pleasant for EVERYONE, and yes- that includes HOUSING for people who are homeless, as a first thing, without requiring the hoop-jumping that most areas now require. <<

Good for you. A key reason people remain on the street is because it hurts less than seeking help. Think about that. The 'help' (really, helpiness) available is so abusive that sleeping outside is preferable and indeed often safer. If the goal is to assist people, it's a failure. If the goal is to shame and hurt people for having problems, it's a success. 0_o

>> "Seeking help" is a sore point for me. Privileged as I currently am. <<

People who offer help routinely fail to recognize that the primary reason folks choose to avoid help is because their past experiences with it have been extremely negative. Caregivers think not seeking help is stupid. Well, getting yourself hurt when you could've avoided it is stupider.

>>When I really needed help myself, there was nothing. My father was sexually abusive; my mother was agreeable with that; and The only way I could get a college education was to bow to that.<<

Wow, that sucks. :(

>>I moved out ON my 18th birthday. I self-supported for over a year... which OUGHT to have meant that my parents' income was irrelevant for scholarships, etc.<<

It's a problem because of responsibility without autonomy. New adults are cast out of many services aimed at children, but often do not accrue full adult freedoms like choosing where to live or how to spend their money. Since college students are legal adults, parental income shouldn't factor in, unless the parents choose to help. But the system is set up in a way that tremendously reinforces abuse.

>> No one would believe any of this, though, so there was no help. <<

Feel free to prompt for fixits. I have characters in many situations that share aspects with this.

>> And yeah- this is first world problems. <<

I hate that term. It belittles problems which can be life-wrecking in scope.

>> but still- I learned NOT to ask for help. Even when I was close to homeless- suicide seemed better than dealing with my realistic options.<<

And this is why I hate it, because it leads to precisely this result. When people's problems are scorned, they learn not to seek help because it is unavailable or abusive. Then problems are harder or even impossible to solve. >_<

>> Happy ending, though- I have survived them all. :) AND got my education, AND have a happy life! <<

You won. Screw them. \o/