Homelessness Causes and Solutions

[Vol8188]

I think there’s an obvious reality that no one wants to face when it comes to our homeless issues in our country.

We don’t have homelessness because “people just can’t afford a place”. If we did, that would be an easy solution and in most situations it would solve itself (friends and family would step in where government falls short).

We have homelessness due to severe mental health issues (schizophrenia being a major example) and drug addiction.

Numerous politicians tell us they will make housing more affordable, put x amount into helping the homeless, etc. But no one has the courage to say they will lock any of these people up against their will (I’m not saying all need to be).

I think it’s a valid political debate to have and one that never takes place. Are serve schizophrenics better off living on the street or should they be placed in mental health facilities?

 

[Vol8188]

I think about this frequently because I’m frequently having to care for these people. I have one who comes to see me numerous times per week. I have my nurses take his vitals and room him. I listen and make sure he has no real complaints (it’s normally something like “they stole my blood!”) and then have them take him off my schedule so it doesn’t charge Medicaid for a visit (unless he has an actual medical need, rare).

I think part of why he comes by is to simply get out of the heat. So I’ll have my nurses put him in a room and give him some water and I’ll see the other patients first and let him hang around. Keeps him out of the lobbying making people uncomfortable

 

[marcusluvsvols]

I think about this frequently because I’m frequently having to care for these people. I have one who comes to see me numerous times per week. I have my nurses take his vitals and room him. I listen and make sure he has no real complaints (it’s normally something like “they stole my blood!”) and then have them take him off my schedule so it doesn’t charge Medicaid for a visit (unless he has an actual medical need, rare).

I think part of why he comes by is to simply get out of the heat. So I’ll have my nurses put him in a room and give him some water and I’ll see the other patients first and let him hang around. Keeps him out of the lobbying making people uncomfortable

You're a good man for this. Some say that character is what one does when nobody is watching. That rings true. Another measure of character, at least to me, is how one treats "the least of us". Those who are weaker, poorer, in need of help or that one has authority over. Many times this is where the rubber meets the road so to speak. Some folks given the slightest authority or position of power abuse those deemed "less" than them. Jesus, who I believe was the omnipotent God of the universe, washed the dirty feet of his disciples and others. An act of complete humility,service, and love to flawed sinners just like me. Good job being humble and kind to those in need bud. Great example for others.

 

[marcusluvsvols]

I didnt make a choice because I am not sure. I think we BADLY need to address mental health in this country. I don't trust the government to be the one who decides to lock folks away for being mentally ill though. That power would surely be abused by those with power and influence to get rid of people who get in their way etc. You posed a difficult question. I look forward to others answers. Perhaps they will help me decide as well what to choose in the poll.

 

[Vol8188]

I didnt make a choice because I am not sure. I think we BADLY need to address mental health in this country. I don't trust the government to be the one who decides to lock folks away for being mentally ill though. That power would surely be abused by those with power and influence to get rid of people who get in their way etc. You posed a difficult question. I look forward to others answers. Perhaps they will help me decide as well what to choose in the poll.

That’s for sure the issue. Who has the right to decide who is and is not fit to care for themselves.

 

[norrislakevol]

Causes: Drug addiction and mental illness.

Solutions: Forced drug rehab and rebuilding our mental institutions. It's really the only solutions we have. Many drug addicts are homeless because of their choices. They burned too many bridges with family and friends because of their habits, and no one wants them around anymore. Moreover, some get used to the homeless life...no rules.

Anyone who is legitimately homeless because of something other than these two things is quite a rare case, and most of those can get out of it relatively quickly.

 

[Vol8188]

Causes: Drug addiction and mental illness.

Solutions: Forced drug rehab and rebuilding our mental institutions. It's really the only solutions we have. Many drug addicts are homeless because of their choices. They burned too many bridges with family and friends because of their habits, and no one wants them around anymore. Moreover, some get used to the homeless life...no rules.

Anyone who is legitimately homeless because of something other than these two things is quite a rare case, and most of those can get out of it relatively quickly.

Who should make that determination in terms of who is to be held against their will

 

[volfanhill]

Who should make that determination in terms of who is to be held against their will

Don't we already have processes in place for psych holds etc?

 

[norrislakevol]

Who should make that determination in terms of who is to be held against their will

Kind of what volfanhill said. The police can determine the mental cases and the drug addicts. It would be easy enough for those recommended for care to dispute it, and prove it if they were sane and drug free.

 

[Vol8188]

Don't we already have processes in place for psych holds etc?

True but only for people who intend to harm themselves or others. I see parents of people in their early twenties having their first psychotic break, and as long as they deny care, I just have to tell parents that if express any desire to harm anyone to call the police.

 

[norrislakevol]

True but only for people who intend to harm themselves or others. I see parents of people in their early twenties having their first psychotic break, and as long as they deny care, I just have to tell parents that if express any desire to harm anyone to call the police.

I mean, that makes sense, but for the homeless it would have to be a different ballgame if we really want to clean up the streets.

 

[Vol8188]

I mean, that makes sense, but for the homeless it would have to be a different ballgame if we really want to clean up the streets.

I agree. I’m open to placement of those with untreated schizophrenia. The kind of homeless guy on the street who starts telling that “midgets injected me with bleach” (real thing I’ve been told).

 

[lawgator1]

It is already the law in many places that a person who is a danger to themselves or others due to mental illness can be held for a period of time for evaluation- in Florida it is 72 hours but can be extended if a psych evaluation demonstrates a need to do so.

But its for acute problems, such as threats of suicide. Its not a long term solution to what you are talking about.

I am always torn when I see the people at the intersections with signs. Sometimes kids or pets in tow. But then I find myself at a convenience store and a person I assume is doing that is standing in line paying for beer with pocket change.

So my reasoning self tells me that handing them cash will just make the problem worse. But its depressing (and sometimes can be scary, at night in particular).

 

[marcusluvsvols]

Don't we already have processes in place for psych holds etc?

Pretty sure involuntary commitment varies from state to state but i know in some/most? States the longest one can be held against their will absent suicide/homicide attempts is 48-72 hours. These are better than nothing, but 2 or 3 days isnt enough time to even finish severe withdrawal from hard drugs or severe alcoholism. I am definitely not saying the way things are done now is right or sufficient...just stating what i have heard and seen. I am sure 8188 and Doc know better how it varies etc. We definitely need longer term mental health and rehab facilities though IMO. The opiate crisis alone...all by itself...justifies having lots more facilities nationwide. I say this as a small govt conservative...but we waste so much money on other crap that I think this is a vital need that could be paid for by trimming the fat elsewhere.

 

[volfanhill]

Pretty sure involuntary commitment varies from state to state but i know in some/most? States the longest one can be held against their will absent suicide/homicide attempts is 48-72 hours. These are better than nothing, but 2 or 3 days isnt enough time to even finish severe withdrawal from hard drugs or severe alcoholism. I am definitely not saying the way things are done now is right or sufficient...just stating what i have heard and seen. I am sure 8188 and Doc know better how it varies etc. We definitely need longer term mental health and rehab facilities though IMO. The opiate crisis alone...all by itself...justifies having lots more facilities nationwide. I say this as a small govt conservative...but we waste so much money on other crap that I think this is a vital need that could be paid for by trimming the fat elsewhere.

We never trim the fat. And states should be covering this. And that's probably why it doesn't exist anymore. Dropped for budget reasons

 

[Vol8188]

It is already the law in many places that a person who is a danger to themselves or others due to mental illness can be held for a period of time for evaluation- in Florida it is 72 hours but can be extended if a psych evaluation demonstrates a need to do so.

But its for acute problems, such as threats of suicide. Its not a long term solution to what you are talking about.

I am always torn when I see the people at the intersections with signs. Sometimes kids or pets in tow. But then I find myself at a convenience store and a person I assume is doing that is standing in line paying for beer with pocket change.

So my reasoning self tells me that handing them cash will just make the problem worse. But its depressing (and sometimes can be scary, at night in particular).

What I’m proposing is to expand that definition of “danger to yourself” well beyond intentional self harm.

There’s a lot of people on the streets, who should be in psych wards but deny treatment

 

[jvol1]

Sort of ignoring the high cost of living cause of homelessness at the moment. Many have jobs but still cant afford housing, or cant get jobs that would pay enough to take them off of the street.

The best fix would be social insurance that would provide basic housing and food for those in need and health care. Unfortunately, the country isn't ready to consider that ideologically at this moment.

 

[volfanhill]

Sort of ignoring the high cost of living cause of homelessness at the moment. Many have jobs but still cant afford housing, or cant get jobs that would pay enough to take them off of the street.

The best fix would be social insurance that would provide basic housing and food for those in need and health care. Unfortunately, the country isn't ready to consider that ideologically at this moment.

Nonsense

 

[Vol8188]

Sort of ignoring the high cost of living cause of homelessness at the moment. Many have jobs but still cant afford housing, or cant get jobs that would pay enough to take them off of the street.

The best fix would be social insurance that would provide basic housing and food for those in need and health care. Unfortunately, the country isn't ready to consider that ideologically at this moment.

I disagree with basically all of this. For starters the idea that there should be 1 person per home. Sure, some people can’t afford to live alone. If so, don’t.

You can’t simply put untreated schizophrenics in a house. It’ll become unlivable in a week or less.

 

[McDad]

This post likely adheres to the maxim of 'the exception does not disprove the rule'.

My only first hand experience with homelessness was a tenant prospect. She was getting some help to find a place through a church. She was physically abused by her hubby. Fearing for her and her daughter, she finally called the cops and the man went away "for a long time". That act of bravery cost her their apartment. She couldn't afford rent by herself. She had a decent job but it wasn't enough. They were evicted and living in the car. She wasn't addicted to anything. She was dealt a bad hand...legit orphan whose guardian had passed. It was literally her and her daughter against the world. No family. We tallied up her monthly expenses and came to discover it was more expensive to live in her car than it was to live in a budget apartment. The day before she was to sign the lease, she got in as an alternate to a subsidized housing unit.

I think about her and her daughter often. I hope they are getting by.

 

[jvol1]

I disagree with basically all of this. For starters the idea that there should be 1 person per home. Sure, some people can’t afford to live alone. If so, don’t.

You can’t simply put untreated schizophrenics in a house. It’ll become unlivable in a week or less.

What does one person per home have to do with it? Housing is unaffordable at the moment whether there are 1 or 20 people living in the house. Surely, the hoards of homeless would have thought of this "let them eat cake" solution you've provided.

Once schizophrenics are stable, they could be fine in a house. What's the point of treating them if you're just going to put them back in a stressful situation on the street which will likely cause the return of their symptoms?

 

[hog88]

Why are we seeing such a big increase in mental illness around the country? Answering that question would be the place to start.

 

[K-town Vol Fan]

Are serve schizophrenics better off living on the street or should they be placed in mental health facilities?

You serious Clark?

 

[McDad]

Once schizophrenics are stable, they could be fine in a house. What's the point of treating them if you're just going to put them back in a stressful situation on the street which will likely cause the return of their symptoms?

Our posters who are in healthcare are invited to correct my post.

McRib had a mandatory psyche rotation in her rounds as a therapy intern. The unsolved challenge of stabilizing the mentally ill is that once their meds are dialed in, they feel so normal many stop taking the medicine. And then they relapse back to their unmedicated psychosis which they try to manage with street drugs. Unless they have a family member dedicated to the constant battle of giving and verifying the meds are taken, the relapse rate is daunting.

Of the many who can reach a point of stabilization, very few stay there.

(Her experience was 30 years ago so meds and protocols may have improved since then).

 

[Vol8188]

What does one person per home have to do with it? Housing is unaffordable at the moment whether there are 1 or 20 people living in the house. Surely, the hoards of homeless would have thought of this "let them eat cake" solution you've provided.

Once schizophrenics are stable, they could be fine in a house. What's the point of treating them if you're just going to put them back in a stressful situation on the street which will likely cause the return of their symptoms?

When you say many have jobs that can’t afford housing, it makes me assume you’re calculating this at a rate of 1 income per house. If your income is low enough, you should be living with a roommate or family member.

No, housing isn’t so unaffordable that 20 people together can’t afford a home.

They’ve not thought of my solution because the majority are chasing their next fix or their own delusions.

“Once they’re stable”…..you’re missing the point. If they were stable and willing to accept treatment, they’d be a lot less likely to be on the street in the first place.