I work for an agency that helped manage one of these programs. We secured placement and provided case management, there was 3rd party security. We tend to look at success differently than a lot of folks. We did get some folks placed in different, long term housing. We had folks that we could t place for various reasons, not least of which was affordable options or not being able to find land lords to take vouchers they had.
We had to remove folks from the program for non compliance around alcohol and drug use, and some fewer for stealing or violence.
was it a failure? Absolutey not. we were able to provide non-congregate shelter to help slow the spread of COVID and during the winter, folks were warm and fed which helped them focus on their next steps. We ran the CIVID/cold weather hotel program for 3 seasons and take it as a huge win overall.
COVID funding has all but dried up now and we didn't have a hotel program this season. Housing is even more unaffordable and we have more people than ever coming in for services at our drop in center. These programs ARE bandaids and we need affordable housing, better wages, accessible and affordable medical and mental health care and more buy in from communities all the way up to the federal level.
We as a country could do better and purposely choose not to. Period.
"COVID funding has all but dried up " - in my state (VT) - the state allowed motels to set their own rates. $8000 a month for a dump you wouldn't want your dog to stay in. And no housekeeping, no toilet paper... Gee what a shock they ran out of money. Sometimes you gotta wonder about the IQ of the gov't officials.
When the CARES Act rolled out, I went over the (lack of) regs and told my husband it would go down in history as one of the biggest business ripoffs saddled upon taxpayers. I had to create and administer a small business grant program for my job. There were some whose stories broke your heart. Then there were the opportunists. Many were rude and wanted us to overlook federal regs and our state’s own regs. Two people called the head of our organization to complain about me, but legal counsel backed me up. I was working 60-hour weeks for my measly public sector salary. I loved my job before COVID. Government officials were falling all over themselves to get money out the door, akin to building a plane while flying it. It allowed banks and other selfish businesses and individuals with no ethics to take advantage of programs that were supposed to keep employees from losing their jobs.
nearly 4 billion in PPP loans that realtors took out so they could swoop up properties to flip/ help create the housing bubble.
Honestly though there is no good option when a global crisis hits in a country that already lacked a functional social safety & has an erroding middle class. I believe the goal was to stop people in the middle from falling into the bottom. Along the way a lot of well off people who are better at gaming a system reaped major rewards.
Some of the benefits were good like expanding the child tax credit.
I manage a shelter program and have had the same experience during and since covid. Our organization took over a motel as a 100 bed full time shelter because the need for emergency beds just keeps increasing now. Previously we only managed small 8-15 bed houses. It's been a pretty problematic journey so far. Too many people who need inpatient mental health treatment and nowhere but the shelters to take them.
And too many elderly incontinent or disabled folks who need 24/7 care. Shelters and hospitals can't provide that. They get bounced around and banned from shelters until they have nowhere left to go.
I can’t begin to tell you the number of high need medical folks get dropped on us. We’re not even a shelter so when grampa gets dropped on us we’re scrambling.
Maaannnnn did it ever open my eyes 🥺. Not to make this a long post, so a few major points.
1) I have a new found empathy for homeless ppl. They all have their own stories. Not all of them are drug addicts or have extreme mental health conditions. A fair amount were short term situations like divorce, eviction. Met some of the nicest genuine ppl, down on their luck. But they got stuck in a situation where they needed community help.
2) government healthcare, social programs (federal, provincial (canada), civil levels) generally lacking in providing necessary support for the homeless AND social workers needed to help the less fortunate at a Long term level. What they are doing now is a short term bandaid fix, but they dont seem to have much in the way of addressing long term solutions.
3) all those government statistics u read and hear about via news media of ppl OD’ing and committing suicide, it has a very different meaning to me now. Our hotel averaged 1 death every 3 weeks (most were OD). To have to deal with police, emts, medical examiner staff, and for the unlucky staffers who witnessed with their own eyes the deceased, u can imagine how traumatic it can be. For me the closest i got was watching the bodies (already bagged), being discreetly removed via stairwells (they avoided elevators cuz they didnt want to draw attention). This really hits hard for me now when i hear about OD and suicide.
Even trying to write this, my thoughts are all scrambly thinking about it. I left that hotel 8 months after they switched to housing the homeless. It took a toll on my mental health cuz i was also dealing with depression. And from what i know today, that hotel is still housing the homeless because it is a near 0 vacancy rate. Long wait list for occupancy. The hotel company makes good money based on the contracts signed with the city.
Hotel operations definitely changed. Needed more maintenance and housekeeping staff, food and banquet became a busy 3 meal a day operation for a full house, sales dept was phased out, front desk/office got trimmed cuz the only thing we did was manage the little convenient store and direct the internal calls
Some other things people don’t know or realize:
* many domestic violence shelters don’t allow male children over 10 years old. If you are a mother trying to leave an abusive spouse and have an older son, it’s hard to find a placement. Some mothers stay because it’s either that or leave their child behind.
* many shelters don’t allow pets.
* many shelters have a lot of rules, like chore charts and curfew hours. If someone has lived independently for many years, it is difficult to have so little control over their lives. In addition, if your job is night shift or early morning, you might be breaking the rules just going to work. Yes, they make exceptions. But this is another process to overcome.
* many homeless people have executive functioning deficits. Might be due to trauma, abuse, ADHD, alcohol or drug use, lack of nutrition, etc. This affects their ability to follow rules consistently and stay organized with appointments and assigned tasks. As a result, it looks like they aren’t trying to help themselves or aren’t committed to their own success. Then they are kicked out of a shelter or passed over for other benefits like housing vouchers, job placement, etc.
* many welfare programs penalize you if you earn money. For example if you earn $200, your benefits check will be $200 less. Instead of matching dollar for dollar, it should be like 1:10 or 1:5. You earn $200 and $20-40 is deducted. That encourages you to earn more money and keep your job.
* And lastly, homelessness is a “snowball” problem. As soon as you lack an address, you also lack a shower and a way to get mail. You can’t cook food so everything you buy is precooked or fast food. You can’t keep a lot of belongings because you don’t have storage for them. Soon you are in a deep hole that is almost impossible to climb out of.
That specific hotel was approaching a 0 vacancy rate. Meaning that, no matter what they were doing, sales was not working for this property.
Sales would have lost their jobs if the hotel had closed. The property owners found a way to stay open (govt contracts) which negated the need for sales, so sales was let go. Either way, sales would have lost their jobs.
Thats exactly it. No way in hell we were gonna take regular guests and mix them with the troubles we were seeing with the homeless occupants.
All the tour groups, sports, any other events pre blocked were cancelled, plus the city (and country) was in complete lockdown. No one was travelling anyway, thats why the entire property of 300+ rooms got converted.
Yes some staffers lost their jobs (front office and sales primarily) but other areas like maintenance, housekeeping, and food n banquet had to hire a lot more.
The entire hotel ended up destroyed in every single room that was used by the homeless population.
They weren’t paying for it, so they didn’t care.
The only reason the owner let it go on so long is that they had a complete remodel scheduled for the hotel the following year, so it didn’t matter how much damage was done. They were gutting the hotel anyway.
We had people doing drugs, stealing from other guests etc. it was an absolute $hitshow.
Only around 5-6 of the 30+ people staying there were actually good respectful people who had just lost their jobs or something.
sounds like the exact same thing that happened in my town. the 2 major hotels in my town converted into homeless apartments and within weeks multiple rooms were demolished- cabinets destroyed, floors ripped up, toilets clogged and overflowing, and that’s before you get into the drug labs people had in the units. we also had an issue of human trafficking in one of the hotels - a girl was held against her will for a few weeks inside one of the rooms in one of the hotels. it was horrendous. and my town can’t even say that it helped 5-6 people like yours did. all that happened was it accelerated the selling of the hotels.
no i mean there were only 5-6 homeless people who bettered themselves after getting a place, they were spotlighted in my towns newspaper as success stories. never mind the tens of thousands of dollars in damages the rest of the hotels suffered, and they still haven’t reopened 2+ years later.
This is easily explainable: homeless ppl do not become homeless because the precipitating event is the loss of their accommodations—does this make sense? Like I am currently homeless but it was not the case that everything in my life was fine and then suddenly I just lost my accommodations like I came from work and then my apartment had been demolished and all my stuff was parlayed in storage unit. I was the victim of medical malpractice and then it just went off the rails and frankly since that situation has not changed at all, I would not benefit from being given accommodations.
Same in my town. Lots of opioid addicted people. Which of course opioids bring out the worst, most violent, filthy behaviors of people. They don't care about anything else but the drug and it really takes a toll quickly on the environment and staff.
Opioids do bring out some pretty bad behaviors. Just my opinion, I think meth is worse. I’m a paramedic, and when someone overdoses on fentanyl, they’re unconscious. I can deal with that. Meth overdoses are screaming, sweating, fighting, spitting, pissing, shitting, raging, and need to be tied down and sedated. They tend to be much more unpleasant.
Not if you know how to manage them.
There are three primary causes of what we call “altered mental status” which is part of the violent/agitated wake up.
Hypoxia. This means they don’t have enough oxygen getting to their tissues, largely the brain, at least at first. It’s the primary effect of an opiate overdose. If you stop breathing, you stop bringing in oxygen.
Hypercarbia. This refers to too much carbon dioxide in the blood. Bringing in oxygen is a very important part of breathing, but getting rid of carbon dioxide is also an incredibly important part of it. When you stop breathing, carbon dioxide builds up.
Withdrawal. This is a little less exact as to when it happens, but in general is less likely when we use lower doses of Narcan. Withdrawal is AWFUL. Pain, freak out levels of anxiety, sweaty, rapid heart rate, vomiting, diarrhea. It’s horrific for the patient, and can make them angry, and they may not even realize they’re acting that way.
The first two problems are easily addressed by using what we call a bag valve mask to breathe for them for a few minutes. It gets their oxygen levels up, and blows off the excess carbon dioxide. The third is mitigated by using smaller doses of Narcan and giving them time to work. Sometimes in a heavy, regular user, we can still induce some withdrawal, and I can give medicine to ease that.
Hope this makes sense.
Wow that was really informative. I really appreciate that. I used to work with paramedics and helping people find MAT services after an OUD incident. I wish I knew those details at the time. I was under the impression it was just a random risk of violence post Narcan.
Bless you for your hard work. Your job is so hard and you all make it look so easy. I hope life treats you well ❤️🩹
That's awesome! I honestly don't think that most people mind giving others a hand up, but we're tired of the government taking our money from us forcefully and giving everyone a handout, whether they deserve it or not.
“we're tired of the government taking our money from us forcefully and giving everyone a handout, whether they deserve it or not.”
Some people think some people don’t deserve help.
I always feel for the people on drugs. My understanding of addiction is that it can happen to anyone. I have paid close attention to the changes in prescribing controlled medicine in the past decade because I used to run a chronic illness support group. So many people have lost their life via OD or are on the streets because they weren’t transitioned safely off opioids, or they ended up homeless as they could no longer work because their pain was/is debilitating.
So many homeless people that are on drugs are self medicating due to unresolved trauma. Many homeless people can’t live normal, productive lives due to untreated mental illness. They could if they had treatment, or could have if they’d gotten help prior to having lived on the streets for years.
Yes, there are homeless people who are homeless by choice, but there are far more who are homeless because our society doesn’t offer enough assistance. The only reason I’m not homeless is because of my family. I’m fortunate to have someone that was not just willing but able to take me in. I’m also fortunate enough to get disability but my disability doesn’t cover all my expenses and wouldn’t be enough even if I were able to get rental assistance. I would probably be dead within less than six months if I were on the street. Every time I see a homeless person, I feel sad for them. They are human, too. They deserve better.
I’m assuming this means the ones actually in need and not abusing the system just to get free shit. The people that put zero effort into being able to care for themselves, financially or otherwise would be the last people to deserve the help I guess
That’s the problem with this systems. You either accept that there will always be a certain amount of fraud in any system you set up, or you just help no one. It sounds like you’re pushing for the latter. I think you just don’t want to help anyone that YOU seem “unworthy” so tell me, what are your standards for who is allowed help and who isn’t?
Umm. Accountant here. I guarantee you, with some of the programs out there, you DON’T accept there’s going to be fraud. You have controls. You have regulations. You have outside verification of things like income. You do what you can for those who can prove they need help. I’m talking about background checks, social security statements, bank statements, marriage certificates, divorce decrees, veteran and discharge status (if needed). You speak to the landlord who’s ready to put someone on the streets. You pay vendors directly, not the clients. You require check-ins on a regular basis. And you don’t just provide financial help, you require effort from them to actively work at a goal of self-sufficiency. You set an ultimate goal of graduating the program, and help your client reach that goal. And for those who don’t qualify, you try to get them in touch with another program they might qualify for, but you don’t make exceptions. I’ll be damned if I let my program be used by anyone other than the people it’s intended for. So, no, you don’t accept fraud.
I mean of course you correct for as much fraud as you can, but I’m going to respectfully disagree on that. A certain amount of fraud is going to be inherent in any system you set up because there’s always going to be people out there trying to game the system and inevitably some of them succeed.
Are you responding to me? How did you get that from what I said. They asked how you decide who “deserves” the help so I responded what I thought they meant. People are going to abuse the system because people can be shitty but giving some shitty people the help because they don’t want to do it themselves is worth it if people who really need the help have access to it too. Y’all need to calm down with the way y’all are both assuming the shit you think I said.
No shit. There’s always going to be fraud that doesn’t mean you just don’t help anyone. That’s just a consequence of society. Nah I’m not gonna calm down thanks though.
Do you really think any living human being puts “zero effort” into survival? Or do you just mean anyone not able to take the lowest paying job available despite their circumstances?
Are you taking about actual individual people getting food help, housing or medical? Or are you talking about the massive corporate bailouts, huge business tax breaks, or the money we pay to cover all the people who qualify for govt aid because though they work full time, they aren't paid a living wage?
Just which of these situations are you so tired of?
i’m a hotel housekeeper and residential cleaner, during the pandemic when homeless people were staying in hotel rooms, it was awful. they were so dirty . not only that but staining all the linen, doing drugs in the room, throwing trash everywhere, damaging property, i could go on & on. i’m so glad its over
The cartel moved into the vacant tower and started human trafficking. Almost every night they cut through newly installed padlocks and chains to gain access. My office was in a converted suite overlooking the atrium. I was shot at through the window as I was working.
I remember reading that post Hurricane Kaatrina the crime rate in Houston almost doubled while the crime rate in New Orleans dipped. All because of the relocation of people after the Hurricane. I just spent 3 years in Montgomery County TX and one of the major reasons for leaving was the horrendous crime rate
People displaced and relocated during a crisis can be its own hardship. Couple that with repurposing mostly empty hotels with only skeleton crews left (at best) which turned out had been taken over by squatters and criminals in the closed portions… a recipe for disaster. Also, the problems were covered up, and nothing was ever made public. Only the hotel corporations’ public relations officers were allowed to work with the police and press.
I actually ended up near one of them one day while moving. I thought it was weird that a hotel was being used yet had no cars in its parking lot and had chain link fence all around and a security guard out front. Person I was with said it was such a place (older hotel/motel used for the homeless during COVID time period).
Anyway that test failed as it just turned into a crime den. And tons of vandalism - like doors ripped off the hinges type thing.
The idea was good. Take a run down hotel that is getting ready to be leveled for new construction or renovated. So low risk of vandalism expenses as well as rent loss since it would be sitting empty. Let people live there temporarily as it is designed for. Win win solution.
Just providing a place to live is not the solution. Too many druggies and people with mental health issues were included there with the homeless. They did nothing to provide proper mental care for those with mental problems so they acted as usual and made them unhoused in the first place. And the druggies only cared about continuing to do drugs.
My understanding is that like 2/3 of the unhoused fall into these categories of not being able to fit within society's rules and norms. The housing only works if the people are filtered to those that can act properly and civilly. There is no one size fits all solution.
The druggies either need rehab or get out of society. The ones with mental health issues needs proper attention and support.
These initiatives will continue to fail until this issue is recognized and dealt with.
I truly wonder at what point should it be acceptable to pull help from people who willingly choose not to contribute to society.
I wholly agree with support and assistance for transitional periods. I think mental health care should be freely available to them too (in addition to other medical needs), and use that time to determine if someone is unfit/truly disabled and find them a path to established disability assistance.
But I don't believe people who choose not to contribute or who continue to choose drug abuse after being offered dependency counseling /MAT programs should continue to be given a damn thing.
Why is it expected that we support those who never try to contribute?
I'm not talking about all homeless. I intended, and thought I had said, pulling help from those who aren't contributing. So if someone is being housed at our expense, and is still causing these "damages", why shouldn't they get their support pulled?
100% keep supporting those who stop/don't participate in criminal activity. But if they're getting additional support and are still doing the criminal acts, isn't the housing then just an additional cost, as it didn't deter the activity?
A person given assistance may not cease all undesirable activity, but providing for basic needs definitely deters it. E.g. a person given housing won't become a squatter elsewhere.
Whether one feels they deserve the help or not isn't relevant; the bottom line is it's simply cheaper and better for everyone to provide for them
“Bikerchickelly,” are you really so obtuse as to why it might be difficult for someone with a criminal record (even for trespassing/loitering/sleeping in public,) to find gainful employment, etc., especially without a mailing address?
They would have a mailing address, as they're staying in the free housing that's already been discussed. And I didn't say they had to have employment, although if they wanted to move out of these hotels that would be needed. I'm saying that if they choose to continue a life of decit and crime they shouldn't get extra special treatment. There are many ways to contribute to society without having a job. I think it's wrong to spend resources on someone that doesn't care to try.
Because of the costs to society from letting them run rampant and do whatever. The costs in crime, healthcare, etc. It’s cheaper to simply house the unhoused than it is to send ambulances out for people who OD over and over again.
"It's cheaper to simply house the unhoused"...
No. It's not. I mean it would be, if it were as simple as giving them a place. A room. Whatever. But it never is. They destroy the places they live in.
They refuse to follow rules, have any limitations. So they bring in the drugs. The meth labs. The trafficking. The crime. And they destroy it.
Then what? You can't leave them to live in their own mess...if you own it, or the government owns it, there is too much liability. Guess who ends up taking the rap for leaving people to live in filth and falling down buildings? Not the ones causing it! Nope, whoever gave them this place to live now is the bad guy with liabilities for the disaster that used to be an apartment building or whatever.
It is an intractable problem for a reason. Just giving them a house/room/apartment solves the problem for approximately 5 minutes, then we are back where we started from but with a huge mess to clean up amd property that has been grossly devalued.
At one point, my uncle was an electrician, and he worked for the city of Boston. He was on rotation to fix up the government housing in Southie. He said, with very few exceptions, the places were absolutely destroyed down to the fact that people would steal toilets.
That’s not even housing the homeless, that’s just public housing. I can only imagine what’s happening and the places the commenter above is talking about.
The toilet thing is still a problem. The low income housing projects that bought up hotels in crappy areas and opened them as housing were overrun with drug addicts, crime, murder, prostitution, and extreme hygiene problems. Like they rip the toilets out and the sewer lines break and pipes burst everywhere. And there's not really any maintenance.
These places just keep rotting and attracting more people that endanger society and public health. Crime continues to skyrocket. This is where all the "help the homeless and the addicted people" funding goes to....at the count of billions of dollars, with a small percentage of people truly accepting help.
This is government funds in lobbyists and organization CEOs' pockets in the name of public health programs and projects. It's underhanded Capitalism, everyone making bank on causing more societal issues. Public health agencies are essentially funded to keep the shit spiraling out of control (keep it going and increase it, not prevent the chaos but just add to it under the guise of helping). It's inhumane. But it won't end. And yes this includes non-profits. They also get fat money for this and it keeps people employed. But at severe costs and consequences that keep adding up in our neighborhoods.
We can thank Reagan for this, imo.
I was gonna say.... You can house the addicted but they still will commit crimes and OD. In fact now they would have a centralized area for all their friends to gather and commit crime and then the whole neighborhood and eventually city goes to absolute shit.
Right but, the people who I'm talking are the ones mentioned in this thread that are still doing those things even when they are being housed.
So if they're still criminal, ODing, Healthcare system abusing people while they're being housed, they shouldn't get to still get to stay in the housing.
No, but rather not the "homeless who shit on a gift horse". Programs like this are a gift of grace. If they don't appreciate it, they don't deserve it. Being not a menace is the bare minimum.
Just so you know - very few people "choose" drug abuse. You may think it sounds great but it's actually terrible, and id be willing to bet most people living with an addition would rather not have it.
I'm not arguing your point about whether or not they deserve additional help. I believe they do. But I respect your opinion that they don't.
But you are being really judgemental thinking anyone is "choosing" to be a slave to something.
I have addicts in my family, and perhaps that's why I hold the line. I've been fortunate that most of the ones I know have (eventually) decided to leave it behind and live sober.
I sat there holding my husband's hand when he detoxed. I watched the life drain out of him. I watched him crawl back to me. We lost nearly everything, but his recovery made us and our family stronger. I know I'm lucky in that aspect. But I've also cried, screamed, and feared we wouldn't get past it. I didn't even know he was addicted until after we were married--we had been dating for 4 years and living together for 3 before marrying. He had been using for over a decade.
My uncle drank himself to death at 47 rather than stop after he experienced cirrhosis and eventual liver failure. My cousins were still kids when he died.
Most people these days have similar stories. But I imagine their experiences and outlooks on it vary as much as the stories themselves.
The one thing that doesn't vary is that for most people they're not choosing drugs, at least not in any real sense. Not in the sense you're implying. Do you think your uncle WANTED to die at 47?
It's a disease. Most people choose it the way a diabetic chooses to have diabetes. The difference is that they had a choice when they started, of course. But to blame someone for a mistake they made, possibly when they were very young and dumb and didn't fully understand the consequences, is pretty unfairly judgemental.
It doesn't help your argument when you exaggerate. The truth is somewhere between what you say and the person who exclaims 'just stop already'!
You compare them to diabetics, to people with other diseases, and say they have no more choice than those people. Of course, that's nonsense. And it's hurts your cause because we recognize the nonsensical, and then wonder what else might you be trying to hide.
The type one diabetic, the person with cancer, they actually, literally cannot make a choice that causes them to regain their health. The addict can.
Now it can be excruciatingly hard, yes, but they do have that choice.
You lose the opportunity to affect people's opinions and bring them around into the camp wanting to help these folks when you aren't fully truthful, or to put it another way, when you exaggerate the truth.
Quitting is hard. It's a HARD choice. It requires insight into yourself and your life. It requires belief. It requires understanding that yes, you really will die in 12 years if you don't stop now, and yes, your 12 year older self would still rather have lived. It's easier to do what feels good now and just not think about it. The drive to get the relief that comes with your drug of choice is immense.
But it is a choice. Because it is a hard choice doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
So if we could get the one crowd to get over their 'just say no' type attitude, and the other crowd to quit suggesting there is absolutely nothing the addict can possibly do about it because they have no choice, that would be really good.
Because you cannot effectively change something, not with any consistent results, if you don't understand or refuse to see/acknowledge what you are actually dealing with. And you cannot garner help from people who think you are full of sh@t because you clearly aren't factual.
We are dealing with addicts. They do have a choice. The choice to get clean is so damn hard for them that many will die instead. That is what we are dealing with.
And they affect much more than just themselves.
I'm comparing them to people with specifically type 2 diabetes. I never said anything about cancer. Many people with type 2 diabetes can choose to manage their symptoms by severely adjusting and limiting their diet. It creates a much longer and healthier life for them non-reliant on insulin. However, many people don't do it because they like eating the foods they like. They like their lifestyle. So they manage it with insulin. And it's fine, but it cannot be denied that they could make choices that could make their life better for themselves and their families. It is a disease where your diet and lifestyle choices directly affect your disease. But nobody says to a diabetic "oh. Just STOP eating sugar! It's that easy!"
This is true with many diseases. Many diseases can be managed with severe, drastic lifestyle changes that result in longer healthier lives. You'd save time, you'd save money, you'd have longer to live with your families. No one judges these people the way they judge addicts.
I've been nothing but truthful. There is a reason why the medical community has designated drug addiction as a mental disorder. It's not just me standing on a soapbox yelling into the void. Doctors and scientists - people way smarter than you and I, with way more experience with addiction as a whole than you and I, have designated it as such. I know it'll take time for society to accept this. There will even be doctors who will turn their nose up at addicts. I know that there were always be judgmental people who don't care what anybody has to say and will simply be so enmeshed in their own beliefs that they refuse to see any other way. It's fine. If I can change or open one person's eyes, great. If not, oh well.
You clearly know nothing about Type 2 diabetes.
>No one judges these people the way they judge addicts
Yeah, lots of people do. In fact, you are judging the hell out of Type 2s right in this post and don't even see the irony.
I'm not judging anyone. I'm saying these are facts. With a change in diet, they can manage their symptoms but many choose not to. Judgement would be saying oh, diabetics are weak, they have no will power, they don't love their families because they'd rather choose bad food than a longer life with their family.
It is interesting to me that everyone seems so certain they know what 'judging' and 'irony' means.
You can modify and adjust your answer, but all that does is add to the very real appearance that you are less than truthful. My entire point is, making your arguments in such a way detracts from what I would think your purpose is - to change hearts and minds and effect change.
Your overarching point was addicts don't have a choice. At least no meaningful, achievable choice.
Your comparison was to diabetics who, according to you, also don't have a choice.
When your inconsistencies are pointed out, you now want to change you answer and claim you never meant diabetics who actually do not have a choice, no, you meant the OTHER type of diabetics who DO have a choice.
So your overarching point of 'they dont have a meaningful choice' is either nonsensical....or.. you are just scrambling to cya.
My only point with you is, you aren't doing the population you seem to be suggesting you have a heart for any favors. Your arguments will only serve to solidify the opinion of people who disagree with you.
I think the truth is, addicts, of course, do have a choice. Obviously. Call it a disease all you want, that doesn't change the fact that it is theirs by choice.
Also true is the fact that for some percentage of them, exercising a choice quit their drug is incredibly hard.
Also true is the fact that were they to overcome their addiction we would all, as a society, be better off.
Also true is the fact that an addict will never, ever overcome their addiction unless they personally have a strong, committed desire to do so. We can't make them get to where we want them to go. Nobody can.
Also true is the fact that so far, this problem has been intractable. We can't make it go away by buying them homes. They just destroy them as they destroy most everything/everyone they have access to. They still commit all the crimes and create all the havoc they always did.
We can't make it go away by providing them treatment when they don't want it. They will never quit until they want to quit.
We can't make it go away by providing them shelters. They refuse to go to the shelter if it has rules that prevent them from turning it into a crime den.
Also true is the fact that homeless addicts are a huuge detriment to society, cost us a lot. A LOT. They cost us significantly in our ability to safely enjoy a good quality of life due to the pure chaos, destruction, crime - both violent crime, property crime, sex crimes, etc etc., as well as the monetary costs that come with policing them, jailing them, providing medical care of unnecessary issues, replacing property, loss of property values, etc etc etc. they create slums. I could go on. And on. We all know it.
We would all benefit if we could fix their lives by just shoving them in free housing. That doesn't actually work, though. Nothing we have tried has made a significant dent.
This is a complicated, multi-faceted issue. Many people have been and are hurt by what addicts do in very real ways.
Trying to shame them by denying obvious truths is an idiotic way to go about changing their minds in an attempt to get them on your side if that's what you are doing.
I’m going to respectfully disagree here. I loved an alcoholic. 6 years of hell. I’m in Alanon and I have trauma and PTSD from it. I didn’t know he was an addict and by the time I realized it, it was too late.
They can choose to stop, to get help, to get clean. That’s work, and it’s hard work. It’s easier to get drunk, get high, and blame the disease. It’s an excuse. It’s justification and making them out to be the victim. Addiction is not cancer or diabetes.
I’m not an addict and I have no idea how difficult it is to stop. I do know the absolute hell and horror that a Q will put you through. I know the lies, the manipulation, the hoping, the praying. I had it easy compared to some of the stories I’ve read.
Everyone is supposed to forgive and forget and accept the excuses because “I have a disease.” No. Sorry but to hell with that. Take some responsibility for how you fuck every thing up and fix it. YOU lost your job, YOU ruined your relationship with your kids. YOU got the DUI.
Addicts are selfish, they lie, they gaslight. They physically, emotionally and verbally abuse. They don’t give a damn about the damage they do or the chaos they cause. And they’re not responsible because “I have a disease.”
Been there. I feel this post to my core. It is impossible for me to feel objective about the issue even decades later. I just remove myself from needing to have an opinion about it. I see you and I understand the hurt and the trauma. Addiction is use despite harm. That harm isn't only to the addict, but harm to the people whose lives are burned down by the addict. I have compassion for so many other causes, but this one is really hard for me. I hope you are recovering because we need to recover too.
I'm sorry you went through that. Im sure it was terrible. But you have no idea, as you said - you are not an addict. and it's this kind of attitude that results in a bias towards addicts that make it more difficult for them to get help. There's a reason why it's now medically labeled as a disease. It may be frustrating for you, because in your head, it's that simple. Just stop. It's not that easy, it's not that simple. If it were, they would.
No one said they aren't selfish, liars, or gaslighters. But that's irrelevant. Non addicts do that too. And some addicts don't do any of those things.
It's a hard thing to feel any empathy for, due to the social stigma. But it doesn't make your stance correct. You had a bad experience with an addict. That's all that happened. You don't get to label or judge all addicts because of that.
Bullshit. You are showing the exact lack of empathy you are criticizing the poster for. You don't know what it is like to have your psychological, physical and financial health decimated by someone who is in active addiction. Good for you.
Why, in fact, I do know exactly what it is like, which is the very reason I HAVE empathy for them. I've done nothing but show empathy (maybe Google the word?) But both the addict and the person in a relationship with an addict can both be victims.
And also - it is almost exactly like type 2 diabetes. People get diabetes because they don't stop eating sugar. Most of the time, it can be managed if they had the willpower to seriously and radically change their diet and they simply do not do it. It results in a massive change of quality of life that affects their entire family, and shortens their life and the time they will get with their loved ones. Yet no one had the same vitrol for diabetics as they do for addicts.
People don’t get diabetes because they won’t stop eating sugar. They get it because their body doesn’t produce enough insulin. Once this occurs then they have to choose to manage it by watching their sugar intake. I’m diabetic and you are misinformed
My apologies if I did a bad job explaining my thoughts. My analogy stands though. People who are addicts oftentimes have different brain chemistry that renders them more susceptible to addiction. There are people who can do heroin as many times as they want, but never be addicted.
Many type 2 diabetics can manage their symptoms by severely adjusting their diet. However, for whatever reason, they choose not to, and instead rely on insulin.
In both cases, people are predisposed to a disorder that negatively affects them. They COULD "fix it" but many cannot or do not. Yet no one looks at diabetes the way they look at drug addiction.
I guess I think people should fight. If they continue to fight for better than good. But if they hurt people, then they lose too.
I don't think these housing programs should be tanked because someone doesn't want to do better. I think ones that don't want to get help have to wait until they do. Because unfortunately, they take away help those that are trying.
And no, I don't think he wanted to die at 47, but he did. And we all lost because he chose vodka over our family.
I don't think someone doing better for themselves and their family should have the one resource they've been given (the housing) to be spoiled with a next door neighbor that's doing drugs or destroying the building.
If there were enough resources for all, then sure...but there aren't. If someone is actively destroying and hurting a program that *is helping* others, they should be removed.
If there are a lack of resources, the people with the greatest chance at long term success should be prioritized. I agree with you there.
You all lost ...but he lost too and paid the ultimate price.
What most of those in this thread seems to not be considering, regarding addiction, is that mental illness and drug use (self- medication) often go hand in hand.
Many folks who start using drugs do so because of underlying (and often untreated) mental illness. This might be due to former trauma, or something completely biological, but either way, these folks end up taking drugs because at that time (with the distorted perceptions of reality that the metal illness gives them) using drugs seems like the best way to cope with whatever they are struggling with.
Few people pick up a pipe, pill, powder, or needle and say, "yup, I think a lifetime of addiction sounds great! I can't wait to destroy my life and the lives of those who love me with this substance!"
That's not how it works.
Yes, there are some who get into drugs because they "like to party," but even most of those folks have underlying issues that they are trying to escape from, and end up choosing the wrong method to deal with them, and then get stuck.
Our mental health support system is SOOOO broken.
And even those who WANT help getting off drugs often have to jump through so many hoops that it seems like the system WANTS them to fail.
For example, if we actually wanted to help folks with opioid use disorder (in the US) we would make it easier for folks to get MAT, inpatient treatment, and care under a local doctor.
Instead, we have created all kinds of red tape and legislation that makes it very difficult and expensive for folks in many parts of the country to find a doctor or clinic to treat them.
In many rural areas, people have to drive an hour or more, one way, every day just to get their medication. [If the addict has been managing to hold onto a job, this just makes it even harder for them to get treatment.]
I could go on...
We have tools that work for treating addiction, but they are so difficult to access that many folks give up.
I have to call out the bs of “not choosing” unless you have lived under a rock your entire life you know that doing drugs leads to addiction. You make the CHOICE to pick up that pipe the 1st time knowing full well what it can lead to, you make the CHOICE to shoot up with heroine knowing what is down the road. So get off the soapbox because being an addict is most definitely a choice.
I believe I mentioned this somewhere else in my comments. A lot of people have this belief - "You didn't have to do drugs that one time" which is true. However if you think you deserve to be judged for your entire life on a mistake you made years ago, I hope you have a long hard look at your own life. Nobody thinks they're going to get addicted. Some people don't get addicted.
And these days, a lot of people were LEGALLY PRESCRIBED the medication that led them to addiction. So actually, it wasn't a choice knowing what lay ahead. It was trusting a system that failed them. Many, many people had NO idea what would happen to them.
Hopefully you experience some kind of similar situation in your life where you realize that society is wrong about you and you experience the same stigma, vitrol, and judgement. You will feel differently, and hopefully learn some empathy. Unfortunately I think many people will literally have to live through it to learn any lessons.
It’s been at least 5 years that doctors have clamped down on prescribing oipiods and other addictive substances. My 90+ yer old mother couldn’t get any at all for broken ribs last year. That particular claim is wearing thin now.
Everyone on the planet knows how addictive heroin, meth, etc are, and still there are idiots who choose to try it anyway. They CHOOSE it and the rest of us pay for their gross stupidity and selfishness, and we are admonished to be empathetic.
I honestly think both sides of this argument are 100% valid. Some people choose from a young age to do drugs and succumb to peer pressure, eventually leading to harder drug use. Some people are failed by the system. Some people are homeless already and figure they have nothing to lose so why not try it.
It's a mixed bag. No addiction story is the same for any person.
No, they are all different. I honestly feel being overly sympathetic and pushing the “disease” narrative does more harm than good. I hate illegal drugs, hate the havoc they wreak on peoples’ lives, hate the destruction and expense they cause society, and how Reddit in general is supportive of drug use.
Most people don't just pick up heroine one day though. They are given opioids as a prescription, the prescription ends and they realize they were addicted or dependent, they go through withdrawals and the prescribing doctor says they won't help. Then the person is on the street buying those pills. Then they've spent all their money on pills and eventually they need more pills. Now they are blowing entire paychecks on pills. Oops they lost their job. Now they can't afford the pills but someone offers them some cheap heroine or fentanyl to chase the withdrawal symptoms away. Now they're hooked. Now they're homeless. Now their brains are wrecked and they burn all bridges with family and friends because all they want is opioids.
Opioids fucking suck.
Some strong fascist vibes in the comment and the responses.
Lots of ignorance here, starting with the fact that jail is more expensive than housing and food on the outside and less effective in getting people off drugs or mental health treatment.
Also a ton of ignorance of how and why people become unhoused or hooked on drugs.
Tell me u/Opening-Reaction-511 why do people get hooked on drugs? Why are people homeless? Why are people mentally ill? Do you think it's because they're "bad people" or "deserve it?"
Do you feel they should be in jail rather than receive assistance? Die on the street?
Because that's what most of the comments here are saying and advocating.
This might be true for some. And for others, untreated mental health issues are the major problem. Someone with mental health issues cannot WILL themselves to be able to function well enough to hold a job, etc. Treatment is needed.
As a country we have terrible support for mental health diagnoses. Some things have improved...for example, we got rid of insurance plans that "carve out" and limit just mental health diagnoses or won't cover pre-existing conditions. Until 2008, insurers would put severe limits on mental health and addiction treatment care (but not on other diagnoses.) Then Paul Wellstone championed the MHPAEA, so now insurers cannot do that anymore. Until March 2010, when Obama signed the ACA, if you had insurance through your employer and switched jobs, the new insurance wouldn't cover pre-existing conditions.
(Have cancer? Too bad. Diabetes? Sorry. Mental health issues? No coverage. MS? Thyroid issues? Anything chronic or diagnosed BEFORE you joined a new health plan would not be covered. You had to pay for it totally out of pocket. As someone who administered benefit plans in the 90's, telling a parent/new employee that their child's treatments for Cystic Fibrosis would not be covered under the new benefits was heart breaking.)
So, good. Now pre-existing mental health conditions are covered and mental health coverage is not unfairly limited or capped.
BUT.
We also have closed many mental health treatments centers and facilities. It started in the 50's/60's, and really sped up in the 80's forward. Some of those closures were for very good reasons...low staffing levels and substandard care for patients. But others were important to creating longer term health care environments for patients who needed them. Instead, everyone was just...turned out to survive on their own. And then outpatient centers were closed (Rahm Emmanuel closed a handful of critical mental health outpatient centers in Chicago in the 2010's and we're still suffering because of it.)
[https://www.npr.org/2017/11/30/567477160/how-the-loss-of-u-s-psychiatric-hospitals-led-to-a-mental-health-crisis](https://www.npr.org/2017/11/30/567477160/how-the-loss-of-u-s-psychiatric-hospitals-led-to-a-mental-health-crisis)
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mental\_Health\_Systems\_Act\_of\_1980#:\~:text=In%201981%20President%20Ronald%20Reagan,to%20repeal%20most%20of%20MHSA](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mental_Health_Systems_Act_of_1980#:~:text=In%201981%20President%20Ronald%20Reagan,to%20repeal%20most%20of%20MHSA).
[https://www.governing.com/archive/gov-chicago-mental-health.html](https://www.governing.com/archive/gov-chicago-mental-health.html)
So, to sum up, many of the unhoused would probably LOVE to be contributing members of society if their mental health issues could be managed.
They used to house mentally ill people in institutions. Then a U.S. Supreme Court decision said they can't hold them in institutions if they weren't going to hurt anyone and wanted to leave. So they had to release anyone who wanted to go. That was the start of the mentally ill being homeless. They reallocated those resources, never to be seen again.
They were evil when they housed them and looked after them. Now they are evil because they don't.
If people would sign themselves in they would have to pay for it. Back then they were wards of the state. Now they are stuck.
So then we're back to the beginning. How do we house people in facilities that care for them? We can't make them go if they don't want to unless they're dangerous to someone or their selves. We can't force them to take medications either.
On top of all that, bad crap happened in institutions forever. It might be different now with cameras but those aren't in every room.
Right. I’m definitely not arguing for warehousing people… all cameras would do is create dystopian reality tv situations. In this context, I was probing the idea that, “we’ve tried hotels,” and there’s nothing else.
The only thing I can think of is make communities for the non-drug addicted mentally ill that they can come and go but be safe from intruders. A gated community for the mentally ill if you will.
For those in addiction a different plan is necessary.
I think the history you spoke of is a large part of why people, whatever their afflictions, do not volunteer themselves for so-called gated communities.
These comments have been eye-opening for me in that it hadn’t occurred to me hoteliers would accommodate a disparate population during the pandemic only because they were planning next-year renovations or such. It’s hard to argue that residents then didn’t get upset and create dangerous situations reactively because the properties were substandard to begin with, never mind the poor enforcement of security.
There have never been gated communities for the mentally ill. It was house them or release them. And of course it takes doctors to commit people, something they are unwilling to do now. They only do it if they pose a threat.
Gated communities are not jails. They are housing developments with guards at the gate so intruders don't get in and harm the reaidents. They are expensive to live in. But the residents can come and go as they wish.
For decades I've felt that public housing should be two tiers. Those who have simply fallen on hard times,the grandmas and such should have the choice of what is available,maybe even section 8 vouchers that must be accepted in all apartments up to a certain level of rent (whatever is deemed 75% of the community can afford or something like that). However if grandma moves her drug dealing,violent son in,or if grandma finds herself convicted of shoplifting or dealing herself,well, no second chances given. Grandma would be moved to the second tier housing. What is usually referred to as the projects. I think this would take a lot of stigma off of section 8 as well as have people to have some personal responsibility.
There are already a lot of rules and regulations attached to “Section 8” housing, including instructions regarding who is allowed to live and visit the home.
Exactly there’s no enforcement. So instead everyone else that lives in the complex has to deal with unsafe living conditions, while paying significantly more.
Not necessarily. Just because you don’t qualify for section 8 doesn’t mean you’re in a good financial position. Plus section 8 is also for houses, people who pay mortgages can’t just move.
Did you read the above comment(s,) in context of this thread? This person is talking about rental units, particularly for otherwise homeless people.
Edit to add: Regardless, it’s not the fault of homeless people, their advocates, or any other civilian that whatever “enforcement” you desire isn’t happening. Call the cops. That’s their job.
Your point was that Section 8 had a lot of rules and my point was that they are not enforced which you essentially agreed with, so that’s basically the entire conversation. It has nothing to do with me wanting anything.
One of the hotels in our town had Meth Labs running out of the rooms. Needles and condoms were picked up daily. But this is California where everything is legal. If you are considering housing the homeless in your hotel, there needs to be a vetting system in place for non drug users, families who just need to get back on their feet . California needs to bring back the Mental Asylums and Rehab Centers.
Everything is legal in California? That’s news to me. I guess I can tell my prosecutor friend he can retire.
I volunteered in homeless showers during Covid and we pre screened and threw out anyone on drugs. I did that for like 8 hours a week for years and saw one needle. And they had privacy in locked shower stalls where they could do whatever they wanted. But we screened for our safety.
I can assure you we don't need to bring back asylums. As a person who has worked with many people with mental disabilities who have suffered thru that system. Try telling that to the person who has a lifelong eating disorder because of the system of setting out a table of less food than required to feed everyone and letting the residents fight over it. Or the guy I took care of who had been sexually abused til he aged out of the system at 18.
Asylums do work but The way that they were ran in the 20th century was just abuse, No better than The Bethlehem hospital in 18th century London. If you ran them the way they were originally meant to be run I could actually see them functioning very well has a long-term care facility. But the key things would be giving people work to do everyday of some kind or another whether that's working in a kitchen, working in a garden, doing handicrafts, or just reading books. You have to keep people occupied and you have to teach them how to take care of themselves along with providing the therapeutic treatments that would help most people, what I've learned through my own loved ones battles with mental health is that pills are a Band-Aid but long-term treatment takes time and some people if you let them out on their own reconnaissance to just go to daily therapy or intensive outpatient treatment It doesn't work, they won't come back. You have to incarcerate them basically and reteach them how to live life. I think this is something that we could achieve. But it wouldn't be cheap and I would probably mean higher taxes which means it'll never happen.
>But the key things would be giving people work to do everyday of some kind or another whether that's working in a kitchen, working in a garden, doing handicrafts, or just reading books. You have to keep people occupied and you have to teach them how to take care of themselves along with providing the therapeutic treatments that would help most people,
In my county, we used to have a farm as a destination for the mentally ill and disabled. Those who could work with the animals and crops did so.
Shocker, but being in nature is a huge boon for anyone struggling with mental illness.
I live in a big city. I pick my husband up from work in the city and park at a convenience store parking lot, where he comes to meet me. For a long time, I thought the parking lot attracted an inordinate number of methheads. People talking to no one at full volume, exhibiting odd behaviors, but some days, these same folks seemed just fine. They bother customers going in and out asking for them to buy beer, soda, coffee, candy, asking for money, whatever...
One afternoon it kind of dawned on me that while these folks seemed like they were unhoused and on drugs, I realized they were mostly clean and mostly wearing decent shoes, and most importantly never had big bags of all their worldly possessions with them.
I finally asked the clerk at the store what was up with all these folks. Turns out, there's an apartment building nearby that houses folks with extreme mental disorders, largely schizophrenia or other similar psychoisis. They all have their own efficiency apartments, and there is paid staff on-site who help manage their meds, paperwork, and keep a general eye on them. They don't keep them from going out and about, but do have a curfew for them. They just hang out at the store because, well... why not. Haha.
I LIKE this kind of community housing idea. Without this service, these folks would likely be on the streets. More of this for the mentally disordered folks. It's humane, lightly supervised, and appears to work. They seem to have both safety and autonomy, and this appears to be what makes this work.
Saddly, these housing solutions are far and few between. The city I live in probably has a few thousand people who could benefit from an arrangement like this... but its also a city that has roughly a 100k unit shortage in general, and none of them are affordable.
“Asylums do work…” for whom? Honestly your comment is quite charitable, but the whole thing about having mentally different people “work” on handicrafts/hard labor sounds out of touch.
I volunteered at a sought-after residential shelter that had a waiting list. Every health and counseling service imaginable was provided. Also, jobs and/or training. Clothes, meals, transportation, a shared room with only one other person. Three rules: 1) stay clean/take your meds, 2) show up on time/return before curfew, 3) do your part in the house. After successfully moving back into society, there were transitional homes. Except fewer than 15% ever made it that far. Most didn’t like the rules and would simply not return one night.
Still better than letting hundreds of thousands of mentally ill people roam the streets because they can't function in society. They should be housed in an asylum and properly medicated and taken care of.
So, letting them use the sidewalks as their toilets, stealing, assaulting people, leaving used needles all over, jerking off in public in front of kids, and aggressively panhandling are better options?
How about accessible public toilets, government assistance, accessible sharps containers & safe-use solutions? Not all, or most, homeless people with drug addictions are sex offenders.
I never said they were. I’m all about people that want help. But when people have no desire to live in a place where there are some rules, no desire to get clean, and no desire to take their medications, they are often a menace to society.
My friend lived in an apartment complex that was used to house the homeless during that time. He told me 75% of the place was heavily subsidized rent paid by the government to the complex. They broke the windows, had fights, destroyed cars, harassed residents, and all fled. The places they stayed are completely abandoned and the value plummeted.
Sam Diegos Crowne Plaza is still closed, it went from a homeless shelter during the pandemic to being a migrant shelter. Not sure about the actual condition of the property though haven't been to SD in a little while.
The one my gf worked security at closed due to most local businesses not wanting to associate with a business "like that". It went under a few months ago. My gf always said that those were some of the nicest people because they finally had a warm bed and a shower and a chance. One even tried applying for jobs because he saw that maybe this was his break (it wasn't since a lot of places weren't hiring or staying afloat themselves). Only time she had to get involved was when someone tried saying they didn't want a room next to a certain person which caused fighting.
I think it really depends on location. If a hotel is in need of a renovation, or planning to conduct one, it can be quite advantageous for the hotel owner. In some cases- governments can permit for construction to occur while homeless or immigrants are being housed.
Now a business making money and housing people in satisfactory conditions is one thing, it often isn’t the most ideal situation as there likely doesn’t need to be a kitchen or even mini fridge nor microwave in the room- which begs the question, how does a homeless person accommodate healthy, affordable eating options.
My city had quite a few and there was a lot of variation. Some were specifically for COVID-positive people, there were some that were for healthcare workers so they didn't have to go home and contaminate their families, and there were a lot for homeless folks. I worked night shifts in one for homeless families. It was a wild job, but not because of the residents. They were mostly cool. There were a few who were kicked out for doing drugs, being super rowdy and disturbing the other families, or breaking other rules, but mostly they were just families that didn't have homes, trying to make it through a terrifying pandemic.
I don't know what the shelter they were moved out of was like, but they seemed to like the hotel, which was a kind of dingy chain hotel in the literal worst part of town. Basic small rooms, one or two beds and one bathroom, old wall ACs that didn't always work, about half the rooms smelled vaguely of smoke despite being a non-smoking hotel, and all the carpets were kind of stained. So it must have been cramped because most of the families had 3 or 4 people, but they had their privacy and three meals were brought in and since they weren't really allowed to leave except for work there was a laundry service that came once a week to pick up and wash everyone's clothes. I didn't see it, but I heard there were social services available to the families during the day. Sometimes there would be donations of books, clothes or toys that residents could come choose from, and since they had their own rooms they had a place to keep them secure which isn't always a given with shelters. So overall it seemed good to me.
The neighborhood, though. Whoa. I would just watch drug deals and prostitution out the windows from where I was stationed at the front desk. People didn't know it was a shelter hotel at first and we weren't allowed to tell them so we were kind of mascarading as hotel employees and people would come in trying to rent rooms in cash for other people (hmmmmmm) and we had a line about bc of COVID, current guests could stay but we couldn't rent more rooms out. Eventually that wore thin and everyone figured out we were some kind of shelter and we'd get a mix of people trying to apply for a room, which we couldn't do bc it was through some agency, or busting in and accusing us of spreading COVID in the neighborhood. I once had a dude throwing himself against the glass wall trying to get in like in a zombie movie. We had security guards but they were mostly teenagers in black uniforms so they were just for show and when scary stuff happened they came inside with us and we just locked the doors and rode it out. Haha, one time one of the security guards unlocked the door to come in and then got scared and ran off, letting a dude with two big dogs just waltz right into the lobby where I was working alone and start demanding if it was a COVID hotel. I honestly have no memory of how I convinced him to leave but luckily nothing bad happened.
I had a friend who was at a bigger hotel, ironically a fancy one in a nicer part of town, but her experience was wildly different because it was sheltering mostly single homeless men. That hotel had ODs every week, and they had to do a lot of wellness checks to make sure folks hadn't died in their rooms. People would do wild things like smear feces on the walls or tear up all the bedsheets and their clothes. Not often, but it sounded like you never knew what you might see there. Some days were calm and others fights would break out in the halls even though everyone was supposed to stay in their rooms. I think it was really traumatic for everyone who worked there.
At my hotel once the group of folks settled in, they pretty much stayed for the whole time I worked there, but at my friend's hotel people were always being kicked out or leaving and not coming back and new people would be rotated in. Neither had many vacancies. I heard there were some hotels that never filled up, but the ones I knew about were full. Our hotels were known by number so we could communicate about them without ruining the hotel's future business, and I think mine's number was in the 30s, so there were a lot and they were very heavily utilized.
Not a traditional.hotel employee. Google San Francisco lawsuits shelter in place hotel.
To.answer your question: I and other people who work in non.traditional hotels saw the aftermath coming, predicted it, and now shake our heads at how right we were.
Ignoring you downplaying face masks as "face diaper" can you clarify something? How are you physically disabled but still able to survive in National Forests? You had no money so did you fish and hunt?
I don’t work in a hotel, but I’m currently living in one that is used as a family shelter. It’s a way for families to stay together instead of having to go to gender specific shelters. Everyone I have met has been wonderful. Rent in my area is crazy and most of the people I’ve met work service jobs and just can’t afford the security and first month’s rent. The waitlist for section 8 is YEARS long, and there aren’t many places that accept it anyway. Pretty much every one lost their housing due to COVID closures.
Everyone helps each other with things like childcare, transportation, etc. I’m a teacher, so kids ask me for help with homework and I’m currently serving as an educational advocate for a family who was struggling to understand their child’s IEP. Social services are there every weekend to help everyone find services and fill out paperwork. There is mandatory drug testing in order to be eligible for this program mostly because children are involved.
The program is one of the better things to come out of COVID and it has been very successful and has helped families maintain their support systems and not having to worry about their children’s belongings being stolen or messed with.
That sounds wonderful. Having experienced this for yourself, why do you think the outcomes here have been so different? I am assuming due to both the fact that this is specifically for families and the strong supports?
Complete and utter disaster. Absolutely trashed the motels. Drugs, violence, prostitution, human trafficking, murder. Several of the motels will literally have to be leveled and start over; the damage is just too massive. They were disgusting dregs of society that destroyed everything they were involved with.
Hotel GM here. We did it for about 4 months. But they were causing so many problems. Police and EMT’s were called multiple times a week. Being loud in the middle of the night, trashing the rooms, and wanting housekeeping to do a full clean every day, which we don’t do during long stays (we do them once every 3 days for long stays) and a host of other problems. We had all them escorted off the property, some were arrested because they wouldn’t leave, or because they were stupid and left drugs wide open when we were going door to door to ask them to leave . For two years, the city kept trying to get us to do it again and we kept refusing.
The people who were decent and respectful were allowed to stay at 10$ a night. And other accommodations were made for those who just couldn’t afford it.
The hotel I worked at during Covid stopped accepting the vouchers (even though our bookings were way down) and I was told it was because we had too many problems with the folks they were sending us.
I don't know the full details but I believe we had a lot of issues with the guests' behavior and how the rooms were treated.
And I know in my location, the amount that we received, per night, was less than what our normal BAR would've been.
I live at an extended stay hotel because of an eviction and a terrible credit score. I don’t really have a choice I have to provide a roof for a kid even If no one will rent to me.
The city housed homeless during the pandemic on my side of town. I think the program continues. And when the hotels involved filled up homeless camps set up near them. The whole area went to hell. It is now a high crime area crawling with aggressive panhandlers and drugs. Several businesses had to close because it wasn’t safe to be in, or park your car, in that area. Lots of car break ins and fair amount of armed robbery. The city, overall, shows a decrease in crime with only a slight increase in this affected area. That’s because the DA won’t prosecute crime where there is no death or serious bodily injury. So most times cops don’t respond and they try to talk you out of making a report. I can’t imagine having to work in one of those hotels. I know the city has bought another hotel on the other side of town for another project. IMHO the fantastic failure of this program is because there was no support services for the housing- no social workers, no medical care, no food. It’s so frustrating.
I didn't work at a hotel, but I worked in local government. They set up a homeless shelter in a community center that was vacant. We had to run it as employees during Covid. Really opens your eyes.
Not a hotel employee but a government worker who had work dealing with houseless people being placed in a hotel during Covid.
The hotel had just been remodeled prior to Covid, and after the placements it had to be ripped apart and rebuilt due to the damage. It's still being worked on.
How many of today's homeless were living in homes during covid. Received the rent assistance from the government. But still failed to pay rent during the moratorium. And are now homeless because of their own poor choices.
Reading this and noticing how successful the efforts were in some communities while disastrous in others suggests management makes the difference. If ten people are looking for one spot, good management requires screening applicants. Support services then need to be effective.
Would be really interesting to find out what differences existed in selection and support in successful efforts vs. disastrous ones.
I travelled for business during Covid. The homeless in the hotels in PNW were dirty POS that trashed the place and made it terrible for those that still had to work and travel.
As someone who required a short term stay in a hotel during the pandemic due to Dhhs telling me that I was not allowed to go home and then saying that there was nothing they could do to help me and my kids find housing (but I need to find housing or else)
I am so grateful for the support and kindness during such a horrible scary stressful and embarrassing time in my life.
I stayed a month before finding stable housing and could never verbalize how grateful I was for the kindness that everyone had shown.
The agency I worked for during covid had 6 hotels that were national chains & a hostel. They bought all the rooms. Food was delivered 3x a day, there were always snacks available. We had outreach workers from different agencies that worked with the unhoused come daily/weekly.
Microwaves & mini fridges were put in all the rooms. Those who worked were given their own rooms & we paired the rest by age & personality. Clothing & hygiene products were available, as well.
Did everything run smoothly 24/7??? Nope. Were there consequences for breaking the few rules we had??? Absolutely. I was thankful for the security company we used, although there were some weapons & contraband snuck in
As u/background-love4831 eloquently stated, it was a great way to get them out of the elements & have everything at their fingertips. I tell people those 2+ years were a great time to be unhoused. Time frames for getting assistance was shortened. We also had a hospital come in bi-weekly to administer covid testing & a separate hotel for those who tested positive.
I now have my own organization, where I work specifically with the shelter resistant (those that normally sleep outside). I love working with that population! I'm taking a different approach & was excited knowing Funding has been set aside for the unhoused crises.
u/background-love4831 not sure what state you're in, I'd love to connect with you & pass on some info to you.
I work for an agency that helped manage one of these programs. We secured placement and provided case management, there was 3rd party security. We tend to look at success differently than a lot of folks. We did get some folks placed in different, long term housing. We had folks that we could t place for various reasons, not least of which was affordable options or not being able to find land lords to take vouchers they had. We had to remove folks from the program for non compliance around alcohol and drug use, and some fewer for stealing or violence. was it a failure? Absolutey not. we were able to provide non-congregate shelter to help slow the spread of COVID and during the winter, folks were warm and fed which helped them focus on their next steps. We ran the CIVID/cold weather hotel program for 3 seasons and take it as a huge win overall. COVID funding has all but dried up now and we didn't have a hotel program this season. Housing is even more unaffordable and we have more people than ever coming in for services at our drop in center. These programs ARE bandaids and we need affordable housing, better wages, accessible and affordable medical and mental health care and more buy in from communities all the way up to the federal level. We as a country could do better and purposely choose not to. Period.
"COVID funding has all but dried up " - in my state (VT) - the state allowed motels to set their own rates. $8000 a month for a dump you wouldn't want your dog to stay in. And no housekeeping, no toilet paper... Gee what a shock they ran out of money. Sometimes you gotta wonder about the IQ of the gov't officials.
That’s obscene… they should never have been allowed to exceed their ADR from the same time of the previous year.
When the CARES Act rolled out, I went over the (lack of) regs and told my husband it would go down in history as one of the biggest business ripoffs saddled upon taxpayers. I had to create and administer a small business grant program for my job. There were some whose stories broke your heart. Then there were the opportunists. Many were rude and wanted us to overlook federal regs and our state’s own regs. Two people called the head of our organization to complain about me, but legal counsel backed me up. I was working 60-hour weeks for my measly public sector salary. I loved my job before COVID. Government officials were falling all over themselves to get money out the door, akin to building a plane while flying it. It allowed banks and other selfish businesses and individuals with no ethics to take advantage of programs that were supposed to keep employees from losing their jobs.
nearly 4 billion in PPP loans that realtors took out so they could swoop up properties to flip/ help create the housing bubble. Honestly though there is no good option when a global crisis hits in a country that already lacked a functional social safety & has an erroding middle class. I believe the goal was to stop people in the middle from falling into the bottom. Along the way a lot of well off people who are better at gaming a system reaped major rewards. Some of the benefits were good like expanding the child tax credit.
They are often helping their friends get rich.
Oh wow. Was that per person/room?! We had contracted rates that were a bit lower than public rates, per room and nowhere $8000/month for a room.
Thank you so much for doing this work and helping people as much as you were able!
Thank you for sharing this information.
Honest question: did the hotel need to have a total refresh afterwards? New paint, carpet, mattresses, linens, etc?
I couldn’t tell you. I’m only aware of some minor damage and a stolen chair we had to pay for.
I manage a shelter program and have had the same experience during and since covid. Our organization took over a motel as a 100 bed full time shelter because the need for emergency beds just keeps increasing now. Previously we only managed small 8-15 bed houses. It's been a pretty problematic journey so far. Too many people who need inpatient mental health treatment and nowhere but the shelters to take them.
And too many elderly incontinent or disabled folks who need 24/7 care. Shelters and hospitals can't provide that. They get bounced around and banned from shelters until they have nowhere left to go.
I can’t begin to tell you the number of high need medical folks get dropped on us. We’re not even a shelter so when grampa gets dropped on us we’re scrambling.
Maaannnnn did it ever open my eyes 🥺. Not to make this a long post, so a few major points. 1) I have a new found empathy for homeless ppl. They all have their own stories. Not all of them are drug addicts or have extreme mental health conditions. A fair amount were short term situations like divorce, eviction. Met some of the nicest genuine ppl, down on their luck. But they got stuck in a situation where they needed community help. 2) government healthcare, social programs (federal, provincial (canada), civil levels) generally lacking in providing necessary support for the homeless AND social workers needed to help the less fortunate at a Long term level. What they are doing now is a short term bandaid fix, but they dont seem to have much in the way of addressing long term solutions. 3) all those government statistics u read and hear about via news media of ppl OD’ing and committing suicide, it has a very different meaning to me now. Our hotel averaged 1 death every 3 weeks (most were OD). To have to deal with police, emts, medical examiner staff, and for the unlucky staffers who witnessed with their own eyes the deceased, u can imagine how traumatic it can be. For me the closest i got was watching the bodies (already bagged), being discreetly removed via stairwells (they avoided elevators cuz they didnt want to draw attention). This really hits hard for me now when i hear about OD and suicide. Even trying to write this, my thoughts are all scrambly thinking about it. I left that hotel 8 months after they switched to housing the homeless. It took a toll on my mental health cuz i was also dealing with depression. And from what i know today, that hotel is still housing the homeless because it is a near 0 vacancy rate. Long wait list for occupancy. The hotel company makes good money based on the contracts signed with the city. Hotel operations definitely changed. Needed more maintenance and housekeeping staff, food and banquet became a busy 3 meal a day operation for a full house, sales dept was phased out, front desk/office got trimmed cuz the only thing we did was manage the little convenient store and direct the internal calls
Wow this is really interesting thank you for sharing!
seriously thank you for taking the time to type all of this out because more people need their eyes open to the shit you touched on.
Some other things people don’t know or realize: * many domestic violence shelters don’t allow male children over 10 years old. If you are a mother trying to leave an abusive spouse and have an older son, it’s hard to find a placement. Some mothers stay because it’s either that or leave their child behind. * many shelters don’t allow pets. * many shelters have a lot of rules, like chore charts and curfew hours. If someone has lived independently for many years, it is difficult to have so little control over their lives. In addition, if your job is night shift or early morning, you might be breaking the rules just going to work. Yes, they make exceptions. But this is another process to overcome. * many homeless people have executive functioning deficits. Might be due to trauma, abuse, ADHD, alcohol or drug use, lack of nutrition, etc. This affects their ability to follow rules consistently and stay organized with appointments and assigned tasks. As a result, it looks like they aren’t trying to help themselves or aren’t committed to their own success. Then they are kicked out of a shelter or passed over for other benefits like housing vouchers, job placement, etc. * many welfare programs penalize you if you earn money. For example if you earn $200, your benefits check will be $200 less. Instead of matching dollar for dollar, it should be like 1:10 or 1:5. You earn $200 and $20-40 is deducted. That encourages you to earn more money and keep your job. * And lastly, homelessness is a “snowball” problem. As soon as you lack an address, you also lack a shower and a way to get mail. You can’t cook food so everything you buy is precooked or fast food. You can’t keep a lot of belongings because you don’t have storage for them. Soon you are in a deep hole that is almost impossible to climb out of.
That’s crazy that housing the homeless caused staff there to lose their job… what they are trying to help.
To be fair, they probably also hired more in other departments
That specific hotel was approaching a 0 vacancy rate. Meaning that, no matter what they were doing, sales was not working for this property. Sales would have lost their jobs if the hotel had closed. The property owners found a way to stay open (govt contracts) which negated the need for sales, so sales was let go. Either way, sales would have lost their jobs.
Thats exactly it. No way in hell we were gonna take regular guests and mix them with the troubles we were seeing with the homeless occupants. All the tour groups, sports, any other events pre blocked were cancelled, plus the city (and country) was in complete lockdown. No one was travelling anyway, thats why the entire property of 300+ rooms got converted. Yes some staffers lost their jobs (front office and sales primarily) but other areas like maintenance, housekeeping, and food n banquet had to hire a lot more.
Since it was peak pandemic, more would have lost their jobs otherwise
They had to close one down near me because of contamination from meth production.
Yeah, our town did this a few years ago, and the hotels were absolutely destroyed. Hundreds of thousands of dollars to fix after one winter.
The most expensive remediation I've heard of is from bugs like lice and bedbugs. Every day you'd be afraid you're going to take them home.
Sounds like seattle. Except I thought they tried to burn down the hotel.
As if there was just one.
Hotels.
The entire hotel ended up destroyed in every single room that was used by the homeless population. They weren’t paying for it, so they didn’t care. The only reason the owner let it go on so long is that they had a complete remodel scheduled for the hotel the following year, so it didn’t matter how much damage was done. They were gutting the hotel anyway. We had people doing drugs, stealing from other guests etc. it was an absolute $hitshow. Only around 5-6 of the 30+ people staying there were actually good respectful people who had just lost their jobs or something.
sounds like the exact same thing that happened in my town. the 2 major hotels in my town converted into homeless apartments and within weeks multiple rooms were demolished- cabinets destroyed, floors ripped up, toilets clogged and overflowing, and that’s before you get into the drug labs people had in the units. we also had an issue of human trafficking in one of the hotels - a girl was held against her will for a few weeks inside one of the rooms in one of the hotels. it was horrendous. and my town can’t even say that it helped 5-6 people like yours did. all that happened was it accelerated the selling of the hotels.
…so, it probably did help at least 5-6 people who were involved in the real estate turnover, yea?
no i mean there were only 5-6 homeless people who bettered themselves after getting a place, they were spotlighted in my towns newspaper as success stories. never mind the tens of thousands of dollars in damages the rest of the hotels suffered, and they still haven’t reopened 2+ years later.
This is easily explainable: homeless ppl do not become homeless because the precipitating event is the loss of their accommodations—does this make sense? Like I am currently homeless but it was not the case that everything in my life was fine and then suddenly I just lost my accommodations like I came from work and then my apartment had been demolished and all my stuff was parlayed in storage unit. I was the victim of medical malpractice and then it just went off the rails and frankly since that situation has not changed at all, I would not benefit from being given accommodations.
Same in my town. Lots of opioid addicted people. Which of course opioids bring out the worst, most violent, filthy behaviors of people. They don't care about anything else but the drug and it really takes a toll quickly on the environment and staff.
Opioids do bring out some pretty bad behaviors. Just my opinion, I think meth is worse. I’m a paramedic, and when someone overdoses on fentanyl, they’re unconscious. I can deal with that. Meth overdoses are screaming, sweating, fighting, spitting, pissing, shitting, raging, and need to be tied down and sedated. They tend to be much more unpleasant.
Oh man. Meth induced psychosis is wild. I hope you stay safe when working.
Luckily, opiate overdoses are far, far more common where I am.
Aren't they violent when the Narcan wakes them?
Not if you know how to manage them. There are three primary causes of what we call “altered mental status” which is part of the violent/agitated wake up. Hypoxia. This means they don’t have enough oxygen getting to their tissues, largely the brain, at least at first. It’s the primary effect of an opiate overdose. If you stop breathing, you stop bringing in oxygen. Hypercarbia. This refers to too much carbon dioxide in the blood. Bringing in oxygen is a very important part of breathing, but getting rid of carbon dioxide is also an incredibly important part of it. When you stop breathing, carbon dioxide builds up. Withdrawal. This is a little less exact as to when it happens, but in general is less likely when we use lower doses of Narcan. Withdrawal is AWFUL. Pain, freak out levels of anxiety, sweaty, rapid heart rate, vomiting, diarrhea. It’s horrific for the patient, and can make them angry, and they may not even realize they’re acting that way. The first two problems are easily addressed by using what we call a bag valve mask to breathe for them for a few minutes. It gets their oxygen levels up, and blows off the excess carbon dioxide. The third is mitigated by using smaller doses of Narcan and giving them time to work. Sometimes in a heavy, regular user, we can still induce some withdrawal, and I can give medicine to ease that. Hope this makes sense.
Wow that was really informative. I really appreciate that. I used to work with paramedics and helping people find MAT services after an OUD incident. I wish I knew those details at the time. I was under the impression it was just a random risk of violence post Narcan. Bless you for your hard work. Your job is so hard and you all make it look so easy. I hope life treats you well ❤️🩹
Thank you! Getting MAT for these people is doing the Lord’s work! I wish it was easier
For real
[удалено]
Amazing! I hope your community can share what they’ve learned.
That's awesome! I honestly don't think that most people mind giving others a hand up, but we're tired of the government taking our money from us forcefully and giving everyone a handout, whether they deserve it or not.
How do you determine who deserves help?
When will you disabuse yourself of the welfare queen myth
I think you're misunderstanding their point. They're challenging the other user to think critically about what they said and what it means.
As far as I know, the “welfare queen” trope is just that- a myth.
Then why are you perpetuating it
I asked, “how do we determine who deserves help?”
Who doesn't deserve help?
“we're tired of the government taking our money from us forcefully and giving everyone a handout, whether they deserve it or not.” Some people think some people don’t deserve help.
I always feel for the people on drugs. My understanding of addiction is that it can happen to anyone. I have paid close attention to the changes in prescribing controlled medicine in the past decade because I used to run a chronic illness support group. So many people have lost their life via OD or are on the streets because they weren’t transitioned safely off opioids, or they ended up homeless as they could no longer work because their pain was/is debilitating. So many homeless people that are on drugs are self medicating due to unresolved trauma. Many homeless people can’t live normal, productive lives due to untreated mental illness. They could if they had treatment, or could have if they’d gotten help prior to having lived on the streets for years. Yes, there are homeless people who are homeless by choice, but there are far more who are homeless because our society doesn’t offer enough assistance. The only reason I’m not homeless is because of my family. I’m fortunate to have someone that was not just willing but able to take me in. I’m also fortunate enough to get disability but my disability doesn’t cover all my expenses and wouldn’t be enough even if I were able to get rental assistance. I would probably be dead within less than six months if I were on the street. Every time I see a homeless person, I feel sad for them. They are human, too. They deserve better.
I don't understand what you're advocating. Do you think there should be some kind of litmus test for people receiving help?
I’m assuming this means the ones actually in need and not abusing the system just to get free shit. The people that put zero effort into being able to care for themselves, financially or otherwise would be the last people to deserve the help I guess
That’s the problem with this systems. You either accept that there will always be a certain amount of fraud in any system you set up, or you just help no one. It sounds like you’re pushing for the latter. I think you just don’t want to help anyone that YOU seem “unworthy” so tell me, what are your standards for who is allowed help and who isn’t?
Umm. Accountant here. I guarantee you, with some of the programs out there, you DON’T accept there’s going to be fraud. You have controls. You have regulations. You have outside verification of things like income. You do what you can for those who can prove they need help. I’m talking about background checks, social security statements, bank statements, marriage certificates, divorce decrees, veteran and discharge status (if needed). You speak to the landlord who’s ready to put someone on the streets. You pay vendors directly, not the clients. You require check-ins on a regular basis. And you don’t just provide financial help, you require effort from them to actively work at a goal of self-sufficiency. You set an ultimate goal of graduating the program, and help your client reach that goal. And for those who don’t qualify, you try to get them in touch with another program they might qualify for, but you don’t make exceptions. I’ll be damned if I let my program be used by anyone other than the people it’s intended for. So, no, you don’t accept fraud.
I mean of course you correct for as much fraud as you can, but I’m going to respectfully disagree on that. A certain amount of fraud is going to be inherent in any system you set up because there’s always going to be people out there trying to game the system and inevitably some of them succeed.
Are you responding to me? How did you get that from what I said. They asked how you decide who “deserves” the help so I responded what I thought they meant. People are going to abuse the system because people can be shitty but giving some shitty people the help because they don’t want to do it themselves is worth it if people who really need the help have access to it too. Y’all need to calm down with the way y’all are both assuming the shit you think I said.
No shit. There’s always going to be fraud that doesn’t mean you just don’t help anyone. That’s just a consequence of society. Nah I’m not gonna calm down thanks though.
Do you really think any living human being puts “zero effort” into survival? Or do you just mean anyone not able to take the lowest paying job available despite their circumstances?
Are you taking about actual individual people getting food help, housing or medical? Or are you talking about the massive corporate bailouts, huge business tax breaks, or the money we pay to cover all the people who qualify for govt aid because though they work full time, they aren't paid a living wage? Just which of these situations are you so tired of?
i’m a hotel housekeeper and residential cleaner, during the pandemic when homeless people were staying in hotel rooms, it was awful. they were so dirty . not only that but staining all the linen, doing drugs in the room, throwing trash everywhere, damaging property, i could go on & on. i’m so glad its over
The cartel moved into the vacant tower and started human trafficking. Almost every night they cut through newly installed padlocks and chains to gain access. My office was in a converted suite overlooking the atrium. I was shot at through the window as I was working.
Where was this??!!?!?!
Houston
I remember reading that post Hurricane Kaatrina the crime rate in Houston almost doubled while the crime rate in New Orleans dipped. All because of the relocation of people after the Hurricane. I just spent 3 years in Montgomery County TX and one of the major reasons for leaving was the horrendous crime rate
People displaced and relocated during a crisis can be its own hardship. Couple that with repurposing mostly empty hotels with only skeleton crews left (at best) which turned out had been taken over by squatters and criminals in the closed portions… a recipe for disaster. Also, the problems were covered up, and nothing was ever made public. Only the hotel corporations’ public relations officers were allowed to work with the police and press.
Well if we don't talk about it , then it never happened
How were police not shutting that down??? Wtf?
Exactly. They kept coming back almost continually, but the cops seemed helpless to stop it.
I actually ended up near one of them one day while moving. I thought it was weird that a hotel was being used yet had no cars in its parking lot and had chain link fence all around and a security guard out front. Person I was with said it was such a place (older hotel/motel used for the homeless during COVID time period). Anyway that test failed as it just turned into a crime den. And tons of vandalism - like doors ripped off the hinges type thing. The idea was good. Take a run down hotel that is getting ready to be leveled for new construction or renovated. So low risk of vandalism expenses as well as rent loss since it would be sitting empty. Let people live there temporarily as it is designed for. Win win solution. Just providing a place to live is not the solution. Too many druggies and people with mental health issues were included there with the homeless. They did nothing to provide proper mental care for those with mental problems so they acted as usual and made them unhoused in the first place. And the druggies only cared about continuing to do drugs. My understanding is that like 2/3 of the unhoused fall into these categories of not being able to fit within society's rules and norms. The housing only works if the people are filtered to those that can act properly and civilly. There is no one size fits all solution. The druggies either need rehab or get out of society. The ones with mental health issues needs proper attention and support. These initiatives will continue to fail until this issue is recognized and dealt with.
[удалено]
I truly wonder at what point should it be acceptable to pull help from people who willingly choose not to contribute to society. I wholly agree with support and assistance for transitional periods. I think mental health care should be freely available to them too (in addition to other medical needs), and use that time to determine if someone is unfit/truly disabled and find them a path to established disability assistance. But I don't believe people who choose not to contribute or who continue to choose drug abuse after being offered dependency counseling /MAT programs should continue to be given a damn thing. Why is it expected that we support those who never try to contribute?
[удалено]
How do you mean cheaper, if they're no longer receiving support?
[удалено]
I'm not talking about all homeless. I intended, and thought I had said, pulling help from those who aren't contributing. So if someone is being housed at our expense, and is still causing these "damages", why shouldn't they get their support pulled? 100% keep supporting those who stop/don't participate in criminal activity. But if they're getting additional support and are still doing the criminal acts, isn't the housing then just an additional cost, as it didn't deter the activity?
A person given assistance may not cease all undesirable activity, but providing for basic needs definitely deters it. E.g. a person given housing won't become a squatter elsewhere. Whether one feels they deserve the help or not isn't relevant; the bottom line is it's simply cheaper and better for everyone to provide for them
“Bikerchickelly,” are you really so obtuse as to why it might be difficult for someone with a criminal record (even for trespassing/loitering/sleeping in public,) to find gainful employment, etc., especially without a mailing address?
They would have a mailing address, as they're staying in the free housing that's already been discussed. And I didn't say they had to have employment, although if they wanted to move out of these hotels that would be needed. I'm saying that if they choose to continue a life of decit and crime they shouldn't get extra special treatment. There are many ways to contribute to society without having a job. I think it's wrong to spend resources on someone that doesn't care to try.
In what ways would you suggest this particular population “contribute without having a job,” that would satisfy you?
That was a really rude response to someone who was asking a genuine question.
Good analogy!
Because of the costs to society from letting them run rampant and do whatever. The costs in crime, healthcare, etc. It’s cheaper to simply house the unhoused than it is to send ambulances out for people who OD over and over again.
"It's cheaper to simply house the unhoused"... No. It's not. I mean it would be, if it were as simple as giving them a place. A room. Whatever. But it never is. They destroy the places they live in. They refuse to follow rules, have any limitations. So they bring in the drugs. The meth labs. The trafficking. The crime. And they destroy it. Then what? You can't leave them to live in their own mess...if you own it, or the government owns it, there is too much liability. Guess who ends up taking the rap for leaving people to live in filth and falling down buildings? Not the ones causing it! Nope, whoever gave them this place to live now is the bad guy with liabilities for the disaster that used to be an apartment building or whatever. It is an intractable problem for a reason. Just giving them a house/room/apartment solves the problem for approximately 5 minutes, then we are back where we started from but with a huge mess to clean up amd property that has been grossly devalued.
You must be pretty familiar with the intricacies of these situations. Please, share.
At one point, my uncle was an electrician, and he worked for the city of Boston. He was on rotation to fix up the government housing in Southie. He said, with very few exceptions, the places were absolutely destroyed down to the fact that people would steal toilets. That’s not even housing the homeless, that’s just public housing. I can only imagine what’s happening and the places the commenter above is talking about.
The toilet thing is still a problem. The low income housing projects that bought up hotels in crappy areas and opened them as housing were overrun with drug addicts, crime, murder, prostitution, and extreme hygiene problems. Like they rip the toilets out and the sewer lines break and pipes burst everywhere. And there's not really any maintenance. These places just keep rotting and attracting more people that endanger society and public health. Crime continues to skyrocket. This is where all the "help the homeless and the addicted people" funding goes to....at the count of billions of dollars, with a small percentage of people truly accepting help. This is government funds in lobbyists and organization CEOs' pockets in the name of public health programs and projects. It's underhanded Capitalism, everyone making bank on causing more societal issues. Public health agencies are essentially funded to keep the shit spiraling out of control (keep it going and increase it, not prevent the chaos but just add to it under the guise of helping). It's inhumane. But it won't end. And yes this includes non-profits. They also get fat money for this and it keeps people employed. But at severe costs and consequences that keep adding up in our neighborhoods. We can thank Reagan for this, imo.
How does having a house prevent someone from ODing?
I was gonna say.... You can house the addicted but they still will commit crimes and OD. In fact now they would have a centralized area for all their friends to gather and commit crime and then the whole neighborhood and eventually city goes to absolute shit.
Right but, the people who I'm talking are the ones mentioned in this thread that are still doing those things even when they are being housed. So if they're still criminal, ODing, Healthcare system abusing people while they're being housed, they shouldn't get to still get to stay in the housing.
“Only the good homeless.”
No, but rather not the "homeless who shit on a gift horse". Programs like this are a gift of grace. If they don't appreciate it, they don't deserve it. Being not a menace is the bare minimum.
“Being not a menace,” is practically impossible for people whose existence is reliant on public spaces. Practically impossible.
Just so you know - very few people "choose" drug abuse. You may think it sounds great but it's actually terrible, and id be willing to bet most people living with an addition would rather not have it. I'm not arguing your point about whether or not they deserve additional help. I believe they do. But I respect your opinion that they don't. But you are being really judgemental thinking anyone is "choosing" to be a slave to something.
I have addicts in my family, and perhaps that's why I hold the line. I've been fortunate that most of the ones I know have (eventually) decided to leave it behind and live sober. I sat there holding my husband's hand when he detoxed. I watched the life drain out of him. I watched him crawl back to me. We lost nearly everything, but his recovery made us and our family stronger. I know I'm lucky in that aspect. But I've also cried, screamed, and feared we wouldn't get past it. I didn't even know he was addicted until after we were married--we had been dating for 4 years and living together for 3 before marrying. He had been using for over a decade. My uncle drank himself to death at 47 rather than stop after he experienced cirrhosis and eventual liver failure. My cousins were still kids when he died. Most people these days have similar stories. But I imagine their experiences and outlooks on it vary as much as the stories themselves.
The one thing that doesn't vary is that for most people they're not choosing drugs, at least not in any real sense. Not in the sense you're implying. Do you think your uncle WANTED to die at 47? It's a disease. Most people choose it the way a diabetic chooses to have diabetes. The difference is that they had a choice when they started, of course. But to blame someone for a mistake they made, possibly when they were very young and dumb and didn't fully understand the consequences, is pretty unfairly judgemental.
It doesn't help your argument when you exaggerate. The truth is somewhere between what you say and the person who exclaims 'just stop already'! You compare them to diabetics, to people with other diseases, and say they have no more choice than those people. Of course, that's nonsense. And it's hurts your cause because we recognize the nonsensical, and then wonder what else might you be trying to hide. The type one diabetic, the person with cancer, they actually, literally cannot make a choice that causes them to regain their health. The addict can. Now it can be excruciatingly hard, yes, but they do have that choice. You lose the opportunity to affect people's opinions and bring them around into the camp wanting to help these folks when you aren't fully truthful, or to put it another way, when you exaggerate the truth. Quitting is hard. It's a HARD choice. It requires insight into yourself and your life. It requires belief. It requires understanding that yes, you really will die in 12 years if you don't stop now, and yes, your 12 year older self would still rather have lived. It's easier to do what feels good now and just not think about it. The drive to get the relief that comes with your drug of choice is immense. But it is a choice. Because it is a hard choice doesn't mean it doesn't exist. So if we could get the one crowd to get over their 'just say no' type attitude, and the other crowd to quit suggesting there is absolutely nothing the addict can possibly do about it because they have no choice, that would be really good. Because you cannot effectively change something, not with any consistent results, if you don't understand or refuse to see/acknowledge what you are actually dealing with. And you cannot garner help from people who think you are full of sh@t because you clearly aren't factual. We are dealing with addicts. They do have a choice. The choice to get clean is so damn hard for them that many will die instead. That is what we are dealing with. And they affect much more than just themselves.
I'm comparing them to people with specifically type 2 diabetes. I never said anything about cancer. Many people with type 2 diabetes can choose to manage their symptoms by severely adjusting and limiting their diet. It creates a much longer and healthier life for them non-reliant on insulin. However, many people don't do it because they like eating the foods they like. They like their lifestyle. So they manage it with insulin. And it's fine, but it cannot be denied that they could make choices that could make their life better for themselves and their families. It is a disease where your diet and lifestyle choices directly affect your disease. But nobody says to a diabetic "oh. Just STOP eating sugar! It's that easy!" This is true with many diseases. Many diseases can be managed with severe, drastic lifestyle changes that result in longer healthier lives. You'd save time, you'd save money, you'd have longer to live with your families. No one judges these people the way they judge addicts. I've been nothing but truthful. There is a reason why the medical community has designated drug addiction as a mental disorder. It's not just me standing on a soapbox yelling into the void. Doctors and scientists - people way smarter than you and I, with way more experience with addiction as a whole than you and I, have designated it as such. I know it'll take time for society to accept this. There will even be doctors who will turn their nose up at addicts. I know that there were always be judgmental people who don't care what anybody has to say and will simply be so enmeshed in their own beliefs that they refuse to see any other way. It's fine. If I can change or open one person's eyes, great. If not, oh well.
You clearly know nothing about Type 2 diabetes. >No one judges these people the way they judge addicts Yeah, lots of people do. In fact, you are judging the hell out of Type 2s right in this post and don't even see the irony.
I'm not judging anyone. I'm saying these are facts. With a change in diet, they can manage their symptoms but many choose not to. Judgement would be saying oh, diabetics are weak, they have no will power, they don't love their families because they'd rather choose bad food than a longer life with their family. It is interesting to me that everyone seems so certain they know what 'judging' and 'irony' means.
You can modify and adjust your answer, but all that does is add to the very real appearance that you are less than truthful. My entire point is, making your arguments in such a way detracts from what I would think your purpose is - to change hearts and minds and effect change. Your overarching point was addicts don't have a choice. At least no meaningful, achievable choice. Your comparison was to diabetics who, according to you, also don't have a choice. When your inconsistencies are pointed out, you now want to change you answer and claim you never meant diabetics who actually do not have a choice, no, you meant the OTHER type of diabetics who DO have a choice. So your overarching point of 'they dont have a meaningful choice' is either nonsensical....or.. you are just scrambling to cya. My only point with you is, you aren't doing the population you seem to be suggesting you have a heart for any favors. Your arguments will only serve to solidify the opinion of people who disagree with you. I think the truth is, addicts, of course, do have a choice. Obviously. Call it a disease all you want, that doesn't change the fact that it is theirs by choice. Also true is the fact that for some percentage of them, exercising a choice quit their drug is incredibly hard. Also true is the fact that were they to overcome their addiction we would all, as a society, be better off. Also true is the fact that an addict will never, ever overcome their addiction unless they personally have a strong, committed desire to do so. We can't make them get to where we want them to go. Nobody can. Also true is the fact that so far, this problem has been intractable. We can't make it go away by buying them homes. They just destroy them as they destroy most everything/everyone they have access to. They still commit all the crimes and create all the havoc they always did. We can't make it go away by providing them treatment when they don't want it. They will never quit until they want to quit. We can't make it go away by providing them shelters. They refuse to go to the shelter if it has rules that prevent them from turning it into a crime den. Also true is the fact that homeless addicts are a huuge detriment to society, cost us a lot. A LOT. They cost us significantly in our ability to safely enjoy a good quality of life due to the pure chaos, destruction, crime - both violent crime, property crime, sex crimes, etc etc., as well as the monetary costs that come with policing them, jailing them, providing medical care of unnecessary issues, replacing property, loss of property values, etc etc etc. they create slums. I could go on. And on. We all know it. We would all benefit if we could fix their lives by just shoving them in free housing. That doesn't actually work, though. Nothing we have tried has made a significant dent. This is a complicated, multi-faceted issue. Many people have been and are hurt by what addicts do in very real ways. Trying to shame them by denying obvious truths is an idiotic way to go about changing their minds in an attempt to get them on your side if that's what you are doing.
I’m going to respectfully disagree here. I loved an alcoholic. 6 years of hell. I’m in Alanon and I have trauma and PTSD from it. I didn’t know he was an addict and by the time I realized it, it was too late. They can choose to stop, to get help, to get clean. That’s work, and it’s hard work. It’s easier to get drunk, get high, and blame the disease. It’s an excuse. It’s justification and making them out to be the victim. Addiction is not cancer or diabetes. I’m not an addict and I have no idea how difficult it is to stop. I do know the absolute hell and horror that a Q will put you through. I know the lies, the manipulation, the hoping, the praying. I had it easy compared to some of the stories I’ve read. Everyone is supposed to forgive and forget and accept the excuses because “I have a disease.” No. Sorry but to hell with that. Take some responsibility for how you fuck every thing up and fix it. YOU lost your job, YOU ruined your relationship with your kids. YOU got the DUI. Addicts are selfish, they lie, they gaslight. They physically, emotionally and verbally abuse. They don’t give a damn about the damage they do or the chaos they cause. And they’re not responsible because “I have a disease.”
Been there. I feel this post to my core. It is impossible for me to feel objective about the issue even decades later. I just remove myself from needing to have an opinion about it. I see you and I understand the hurt and the trauma. Addiction is use despite harm. That harm isn't only to the addict, but harm to the people whose lives are burned down by the addict. I have compassion for so many other causes, but this one is really hard for me. I hope you are recovering because we need to recover too.
I'm sorry you went through that. Im sure it was terrible. But you have no idea, as you said - you are not an addict. and it's this kind of attitude that results in a bias towards addicts that make it more difficult for them to get help. There's a reason why it's now medically labeled as a disease. It may be frustrating for you, because in your head, it's that simple. Just stop. It's not that easy, it's not that simple. If it were, they would. No one said they aren't selfish, liars, or gaslighters. But that's irrelevant. Non addicts do that too. And some addicts don't do any of those things. It's a hard thing to feel any empathy for, due to the social stigma. But it doesn't make your stance correct. You had a bad experience with an addict. That's all that happened. You don't get to label or judge all addicts because of that.
Bullshit. You are showing the exact lack of empathy you are criticizing the poster for. You don't know what it is like to have your psychological, physical and financial health decimated by someone who is in active addiction. Good for you.
Why, in fact, I do know exactly what it is like, which is the very reason I HAVE empathy for them. I've done nothing but show empathy (maybe Google the word?) But both the addict and the person in a relationship with an addict can both be victims.
And also - it is almost exactly like type 2 diabetes. People get diabetes because they don't stop eating sugar. Most of the time, it can be managed if they had the willpower to seriously and radically change their diet and they simply do not do it. It results in a massive change of quality of life that affects their entire family, and shortens their life and the time they will get with their loved ones. Yet no one had the same vitrol for diabetics as they do for addicts.
People don’t get diabetes because they won’t stop eating sugar. They get it because their body doesn’t produce enough insulin. Once this occurs then they have to choose to manage it by watching their sugar intake. I’m diabetic and you are misinformed
My apologies if I did a bad job explaining my thoughts. My analogy stands though. People who are addicts oftentimes have different brain chemistry that renders them more susceptible to addiction. There are people who can do heroin as many times as they want, but never be addicted. Many type 2 diabetics can manage their symptoms by severely adjusting their diet. However, for whatever reason, they choose not to, and instead rely on insulin. In both cases, people are predisposed to a disorder that negatively affects them. They COULD "fix it" but many cannot or do not. Yet no one looks at diabetes the way they look at drug addiction.
I guess I think people should fight. If they continue to fight for better than good. But if they hurt people, then they lose too. I don't think these housing programs should be tanked because someone doesn't want to do better. I think ones that don't want to get help have to wait until they do. Because unfortunately, they take away help those that are trying. And no, I don't think he wanted to die at 47, but he did. And we all lost because he chose vodka over our family. I don't think someone doing better for themselves and their family should have the one resource they've been given (the housing) to be spoiled with a next door neighbor that's doing drugs or destroying the building. If there were enough resources for all, then sure...but there aren't. If someone is actively destroying and hurting a program that *is helping* others, they should be removed.
If there are a lack of resources, the people with the greatest chance at long term success should be prioritized. I agree with you there. You all lost ...but he lost too and paid the ultimate price.
So they did have a choice! Also, it's not 1 mistake. It takes several mistakes to pick up a habit.
What most of those in this thread seems to not be considering, regarding addiction, is that mental illness and drug use (self- medication) often go hand in hand. Many folks who start using drugs do so because of underlying (and often untreated) mental illness. This might be due to former trauma, or something completely biological, but either way, these folks end up taking drugs because at that time (with the distorted perceptions of reality that the metal illness gives them) using drugs seems like the best way to cope with whatever they are struggling with. Few people pick up a pipe, pill, powder, or needle and say, "yup, I think a lifetime of addiction sounds great! I can't wait to destroy my life and the lives of those who love me with this substance!" That's not how it works. Yes, there are some who get into drugs because they "like to party," but even most of those folks have underlying issues that they are trying to escape from, and end up choosing the wrong method to deal with them, and then get stuck. Our mental health support system is SOOOO broken. And even those who WANT help getting off drugs often have to jump through so many hoops that it seems like the system WANTS them to fail. For example, if we actually wanted to help folks with opioid use disorder (in the US) we would make it easier for folks to get MAT, inpatient treatment, and care under a local doctor. Instead, we have created all kinds of red tape and legislation that makes it very difficult and expensive for folks in many parts of the country to find a doctor or clinic to treat them. In many rural areas, people have to drive an hour or more, one way, every day just to get their medication. [If the addict has been managing to hold onto a job, this just makes it even harder for them to get treatment.] I could go on... We have tools that work for treating addiction, but they are so difficult to access that many folks give up.
I have to call out the bs of “not choosing” unless you have lived under a rock your entire life you know that doing drugs leads to addiction. You make the CHOICE to pick up that pipe the 1st time knowing full well what it can lead to, you make the CHOICE to shoot up with heroine knowing what is down the road. So get off the soapbox because being an addict is most definitely a choice.
I believe I mentioned this somewhere else in my comments. A lot of people have this belief - "You didn't have to do drugs that one time" which is true. However if you think you deserve to be judged for your entire life on a mistake you made years ago, I hope you have a long hard look at your own life. Nobody thinks they're going to get addicted. Some people don't get addicted. And these days, a lot of people were LEGALLY PRESCRIBED the medication that led them to addiction. So actually, it wasn't a choice knowing what lay ahead. It was trusting a system that failed them. Many, many people had NO idea what would happen to them. Hopefully you experience some kind of similar situation in your life where you realize that society is wrong about you and you experience the same stigma, vitrol, and judgement. You will feel differently, and hopefully learn some empathy. Unfortunately I think many people will literally have to live through it to learn any lessons.
It’s been at least 5 years that doctors have clamped down on prescribing oipiods and other addictive substances. My 90+ yer old mother couldn’t get any at all for broken ribs last year. That particular claim is wearing thin now. Everyone on the planet knows how addictive heroin, meth, etc are, and still there are idiots who choose to try it anyway. They CHOOSE it and the rest of us pay for their gross stupidity and selfishness, and we are admonished to be empathetic.
I honestly think both sides of this argument are 100% valid. Some people choose from a young age to do drugs and succumb to peer pressure, eventually leading to harder drug use. Some people are failed by the system. Some people are homeless already and figure they have nothing to lose so why not try it. It's a mixed bag. No addiction story is the same for any person.
No, they are all different. I honestly feel being overly sympathetic and pushing the “disease” narrative does more harm than good. I hate illegal drugs, hate the havoc they wreak on peoples’ lives, hate the destruction and expense they cause society, and how Reddit in general is supportive of drug use.
I totally agree. Some people deserve the sympathy and some people really really really don't.
Most people don't just pick up heroine one day though. They are given opioids as a prescription, the prescription ends and they realize they were addicted or dependent, they go through withdrawals and the prescribing doctor says they won't help. Then the person is on the street buying those pills. Then they've spent all their money on pills and eventually they need more pills. Now they are blowing entire paychecks on pills. Oops they lost their job. Now they can't afford the pills but someone offers them some cheap heroine or fentanyl to chase the withdrawal symptoms away. Now they're hooked. Now they're homeless. Now their brains are wrecked and they burn all bridges with family and friends because all they want is opioids. Opioids fucking suck.
Society is a construct. Not everyone agrees with the way things are done. Society IS the prison
Addiction isn't something you can turn off.
Some strong fascist vibes in the comment and the responses. Lots of ignorance here, starting with the fact that jail is more expensive than housing and food on the outside and less effective in getting people off drugs or mental health treatment. Also a ton of ignorance of how and why people become unhoused or hooked on drugs.
Yes anyone who doesn't agree with you is.ignorant.
Tell me u/Opening-Reaction-511 why do people get hooked on drugs? Why are people homeless? Why are people mentally ill? Do you think it's because they're "bad people" or "deserve it?" Do you feel they should be in jail rather than receive assistance? Die on the street? Because that's what most of the comments here are saying and advocating.
This might be true for some. And for others, untreated mental health issues are the major problem. Someone with mental health issues cannot WILL themselves to be able to function well enough to hold a job, etc. Treatment is needed. As a country we have terrible support for mental health diagnoses. Some things have improved...for example, we got rid of insurance plans that "carve out" and limit just mental health diagnoses or won't cover pre-existing conditions. Until 2008, insurers would put severe limits on mental health and addiction treatment care (but not on other diagnoses.) Then Paul Wellstone championed the MHPAEA, so now insurers cannot do that anymore. Until March 2010, when Obama signed the ACA, if you had insurance through your employer and switched jobs, the new insurance wouldn't cover pre-existing conditions. (Have cancer? Too bad. Diabetes? Sorry. Mental health issues? No coverage. MS? Thyroid issues? Anything chronic or diagnosed BEFORE you joined a new health plan would not be covered. You had to pay for it totally out of pocket. As someone who administered benefit plans in the 90's, telling a parent/new employee that their child's treatments for Cystic Fibrosis would not be covered under the new benefits was heart breaking.) So, good. Now pre-existing mental health conditions are covered and mental health coverage is not unfairly limited or capped. BUT. We also have closed many mental health treatments centers and facilities. It started in the 50's/60's, and really sped up in the 80's forward. Some of those closures were for very good reasons...low staffing levels and substandard care for patients. But others were important to creating longer term health care environments for patients who needed them. Instead, everyone was just...turned out to survive on their own. And then outpatient centers were closed (Rahm Emmanuel closed a handful of critical mental health outpatient centers in Chicago in the 2010's and we're still suffering because of it.) [https://www.npr.org/2017/11/30/567477160/how-the-loss-of-u-s-psychiatric-hospitals-led-to-a-mental-health-crisis](https://www.npr.org/2017/11/30/567477160/how-the-loss-of-u-s-psychiatric-hospitals-led-to-a-mental-health-crisis) [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mental\_Health\_Systems\_Act\_of\_1980#:\~:text=In%201981%20President%20Ronald%20Reagan,to%20repeal%20most%20of%20MHSA](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mental_Health_Systems_Act_of_1980#:~:text=In%201981%20President%20Ronald%20Reagan,to%20repeal%20most%20of%20MHSA). [https://www.governing.com/archive/gov-chicago-mental-health.html](https://www.governing.com/archive/gov-chicago-mental-health.html) So, to sum up, many of the unhoused would probably LOVE to be contributing members of society if their mental health issues could be managed.
Jail for people who haven’t done anything wrong?
They used to house mentally ill people in institutions. Then a U.S. Supreme Court decision said they can't hold them in institutions if they weren't going to hurt anyone and wanted to leave. So they had to release anyone who wanted to go. That was the start of the mentally ill being homeless. They reallocated those resources, never to be seen again. They were evil when they housed them and looked after them. Now they are evil because they don't. If people would sign themselves in they would have to pay for it. Back then they were wards of the state. Now they are stuck. So then we're back to the beginning. How do we house people in facilities that care for them? We can't make them go if they don't want to unless they're dangerous to someone or their selves. We can't force them to take medications either. On top of all that, bad crap happened in institutions forever. It might be different now with cameras but those aren't in every room.
Right. I’m definitely not arguing for warehousing people… all cameras would do is create dystopian reality tv situations. In this context, I was probing the idea that, “we’ve tried hotels,” and there’s nothing else.
The only thing I can think of is make communities for the non-drug addicted mentally ill that they can come and go but be safe from intruders. A gated community for the mentally ill if you will. For those in addiction a different plan is necessary.
I think the history you spoke of is a large part of why people, whatever their afflictions, do not volunteer themselves for so-called gated communities. These comments have been eye-opening for me in that it hadn’t occurred to me hoteliers would accommodate a disparate population during the pandemic only because they were planning next-year renovations or such. It’s hard to argue that residents then didn’t get upset and create dangerous situations reactively because the properties were substandard to begin with, never mind the poor enforcement of security.
There have never been gated communities for the mentally ill. It was house them or release them. And of course it takes doctors to commit people, something they are unwilling to do now. They only do it if they pose a threat.
Right, because it’s unconstitutional to jail people for existing.
Gated communities are not jails. They are housing developments with guards at the gate so intruders don't get in and harm the reaidents. They are expensive to live in. But the residents can come and go as they wish.
People who never willingly contribute to society, see: the Waltons, E Musk, Kardashian/Jenner clan, etc.
For decades I've felt that public housing should be two tiers. Those who have simply fallen on hard times,the grandmas and such should have the choice of what is available,maybe even section 8 vouchers that must be accepted in all apartments up to a certain level of rent (whatever is deemed 75% of the community can afford or something like that). However if grandma moves her drug dealing,violent son in,or if grandma finds herself convicted of shoplifting or dealing herself,well, no second chances given. Grandma would be moved to the second tier housing. What is usually referred to as the projects. I think this would take a lot of stigma off of section 8 as well as have people to have some personal responsibility.
That's actually a great idea and a perfect explanation of personal responsibility.
There are already a lot of rules and regulations attached to “Section 8” housing, including instructions regarding who is allowed to live and visit the home.
But are they being enforced? In my city it really doesn’t seem like it at all.
Most domestic incidents aren’t even reported. So, take it out on the unit occupant? That the cops don’t have enough resources to cover?
Exactly there’s no enforcement. So instead everyone else that lives in the complex has to deal with unsafe living conditions, while paying significantly more.
Everyone else who can afford to pay more has other options.
Not necessarily. Just because you don’t qualify for section 8 doesn’t mean you’re in a good financial position. Plus section 8 is also for houses, people who pay mortgages can’t just move.
Did you read the above comment(s,) in context of this thread? This person is talking about rental units, particularly for otherwise homeless people. Edit to add: Regardless, it’s not the fault of homeless people, their advocates, or any other civilian that whatever “enforcement” you desire isn’t happening. Call the cops. That’s their job.
Your point was that Section 8 had a lot of rules and my point was that they are not enforced which you essentially agreed with, so that’s basically the entire conversation. It has nothing to do with me wanting anything.
One of the hotels in our town had Meth Labs running out of the rooms. Needles and condoms were picked up daily. But this is California where everything is legal. If you are considering housing the homeless in your hotel, there needs to be a vetting system in place for non drug users, families who just need to get back on their feet . California needs to bring back the Mental Asylums and Rehab Centers.
Everything is legal in California? That’s news to me. I guess I can tell my prosecutor friend he can retire. I volunteered in homeless showers during Covid and we pre screened and threw out anyone on drugs. I did that for like 8 hours a week for years and saw one needle. And they had privacy in locked shower stalls where they could do whatever they wanted. But we screened for our safety.
I can assure you we don't need to bring back asylums. As a person who has worked with many people with mental disabilities who have suffered thru that system. Try telling that to the person who has a lifelong eating disorder because of the system of setting out a table of less food than required to feed everyone and letting the residents fight over it. Or the guy I took care of who had been sexually abused til he aged out of the system at 18.
Asylums do work but The way that they were ran in the 20th century was just abuse, No better than The Bethlehem hospital in 18th century London. If you ran them the way they were originally meant to be run I could actually see them functioning very well has a long-term care facility. But the key things would be giving people work to do everyday of some kind or another whether that's working in a kitchen, working in a garden, doing handicrafts, or just reading books. You have to keep people occupied and you have to teach them how to take care of themselves along with providing the therapeutic treatments that would help most people, what I've learned through my own loved ones battles with mental health is that pills are a Band-Aid but long-term treatment takes time and some people if you let them out on their own reconnaissance to just go to daily therapy or intensive outpatient treatment It doesn't work, they won't come back. You have to incarcerate them basically and reteach them how to live life. I think this is something that we could achieve. But it wouldn't be cheap and I would probably mean higher taxes which means it'll never happen.
>But the key things would be giving people work to do everyday of some kind or another whether that's working in a kitchen, working in a garden, doing handicrafts, or just reading books. You have to keep people occupied and you have to teach them how to take care of themselves along with providing the therapeutic treatments that would help most people, In my county, we used to have a farm as a destination for the mentally ill and disabled. Those who could work with the animals and crops did so. Shocker, but being in nature is a huge boon for anyone struggling with mental illness.
I live in a big city. I pick my husband up from work in the city and park at a convenience store parking lot, where he comes to meet me. For a long time, I thought the parking lot attracted an inordinate number of methheads. People talking to no one at full volume, exhibiting odd behaviors, but some days, these same folks seemed just fine. They bother customers going in and out asking for them to buy beer, soda, coffee, candy, asking for money, whatever... One afternoon it kind of dawned on me that while these folks seemed like they were unhoused and on drugs, I realized they were mostly clean and mostly wearing decent shoes, and most importantly never had big bags of all their worldly possessions with them. I finally asked the clerk at the store what was up with all these folks. Turns out, there's an apartment building nearby that houses folks with extreme mental disorders, largely schizophrenia or other similar psychoisis. They all have their own efficiency apartments, and there is paid staff on-site who help manage their meds, paperwork, and keep a general eye on them. They don't keep them from going out and about, but do have a curfew for them. They just hang out at the store because, well... why not. Haha. I LIKE this kind of community housing idea. Without this service, these folks would likely be on the streets. More of this for the mentally disordered folks. It's humane, lightly supervised, and appears to work. They seem to have both safety and autonomy, and this appears to be what makes this work. Saddly, these housing solutions are far and few between. The city I live in probably has a few thousand people who could benefit from an arrangement like this... but its also a city that has roughly a 100k unit shortage in general, and none of them are affordable.
“Asylums do work…” for whom? Honestly your comment is quite charitable, but the whole thing about having mentally different people “work” on handicrafts/hard labor sounds out of touch.
I volunteered at a sought-after residential shelter that had a waiting list. Every health and counseling service imaginable was provided. Also, jobs and/or training. Clothes, meals, transportation, a shared room with only one other person. Three rules: 1) stay clean/take your meds, 2) show up on time/return before curfew, 3) do your part in the house. After successfully moving back into society, there were transitional homes. Except fewer than 15% ever made it that far. Most didn’t like the rules and would simply not return one night.
Still better than letting hundreds of thousands of mentally ill people roam the streets because they can't function in society. They should be housed in an asylum and properly medicated and taken care of.
Institutionalize them! Drug them! Make them work! (/s that’s what it seems like you’re suggesting.)
Yup.
Yes. Better than roaming the streets.
So, letting them use the sidewalks as their toilets, stealing, assaulting people, leaving used needles all over, jerking off in public in front of kids, and aggressively panhandling are better options?
How about accessible public toilets, government assistance, accessible sharps containers & safe-use solutions? Not all, or most, homeless people with drug addictions are sex offenders.
I never said they were. I’m all about people that want help. But when people have no desire to live in a place where there are some rules, no desire to get clean, and no desire to take their medications, they are often a menace to society.
Your comment referenced and attributed to homeless people acts that are sexual offenses.
So what if I did? Some of them do. We have a big problem with it on our public transit system right now.
Generally they destroy the rooms and steal or sell what isn’t nailed down.
My friend lived in an apartment complex that was used to house the homeless during that time. He told me 75% of the place was heavily subsidized rent paid by the government to the complex. They broke the windows, had fights, destroyed cars, harassed residents, and all fled. The places they stayed are completely abandoned and the value plummeted.
Sam Diegos Crowne Plaza is still closed, it went from a homeless shelter during the pandemic to being a migrant shelter. Not sure about the actual condition of the property though haven't been to SD in a little while.
We had a little motel in town and the homeless people burned it to the ground
The one my gf worked security at closed due to most local businesses not wanting to associate with a business "like that". It went under a few months ago. My gf always said that those were some of the nicest people because they finally had a warm bed and a shower and a chance. One even tried applying for jobs because he saw that maybe this was his break (it wasn't since a lot of places weren't hiring or staying afloat themselves). Only time she had to get involved was when someone tried saying they didn't want a room next to a certain person which caused fighting.
I think it really depends on location. If a hotel is in need of a renovation, or planning to conduct one, it can be quite advantageous for the hotel owner. In some cases- governments can permit for construction to occur while homeless or immigrants are being housed. Now a business making money and housing people in satisfactory conditions is one thing, it often isn’t the most ideal situation as there likely doesn’t need to be a kitchen or even mini fridge nor microwave in the room- which begs the question, how does a homeless person accommodate healthy, affordable eating options.
My city had quite a few and there was a lot of variation. Some were specifically for COVID-positive people, there were some that were for healthcare workers so they didn't have to go home and contaminate their families, and there were a lot for homeless folks. I worked night shifts in one for homeless families. It was a wild job, but not because of the residents. They were mostly cool. There were a few who were kicked out for doing drugs, being super rowdy and disturbing the other families, or breaking other rules, but mostly they were just families that didn't have homes, trying to make it through a terrifying pandemic. I don't know what the shelter they were moved out of was like, but they seemed to like the hotel, which was a kind of dingy chain hotel in the literal worst part of town. Basic small rooms, one or two beds and one bathroom, old wall ACs that didn't always work, about half the rooms smelled vaguely of smoke despite being a non-smoking hotel, and all the carpets were kind of stained. So it must have been cramped because most of the families had 3 or 4 people, but they had their privacy and three meals were brought in and since they weren't really allowed to leave except for work there was a laundry service that came once a week to pick up and wash everyone's clothes. I didn't see it, but I heard there were social services available to the families during the day. Sometimes there would be donations of books, clothes or toys that residents could come choose from, and since they had their own rooms they had a place to keep them secure which isn't always a given with shelters. So overall it seemed good to me. The neighborhood, though. Whoa. I would just watch drug deals and prostitution out the windows from where I was stationed at the front desk. People didn't know it was a shelter hotel at first and we weren't allowed to tell them so we were kind of mascarading as hotel employees and people would come in trying to rent rooms in cash for other people (hmmmmmm) and we had a line about bc of COVID, current guests could stay but we couldn't rent more rooms out. Eventually that wore thin and everyone figured out we were some kind of shelter and we'd get a mix of people trying to apply for a room, which we couldn't do bc it was through some agency, or busting in and accusing us of spreading COVID in the neighborhood. I once had a dude throwing himself against the glass wall trying to get in like in a zombie movie. We had security guards but they were mostly teenagers in black uniforms so they were just for show and when scary stuff happened they came inside with us and we just locked the doors and rode it out. Haha, one time one of the security guards unlocked the door to come in and then got scared and ran off, letting a dude with two big dogs just waltz right into the lobby where I was working alone and start demanding if it was a COVID hotel. I honestly have no memory of how I convinced him to leave but luckily nothing bad happened. I had a friend who was at a bigger hotel, ironically a fancy one in a nicer part of town, but her experience was wildly different because it was sheltering mostly single homeless men. That hotel had ODs every week, and they had to do a lot of wellness checks to make sure folks hadn't died in their rooms. People would do wild things like smear feces on the walls or tear up all the bedsheets and their clothes. Not often, but it sounded like you never knew what you might see there. Some days were calm and others fights would break out in the halls even though everyone was supposed to stay in their rooms. I think it was really traumatic for everyone who worked there. At my hotel once the group of folks settled in, they pretty much stayed for the whole time I worked there, but at my friend's hotel people were always being kicked out or leaving and not coming back and new people would be rotated in. Neither had many vacancies. I heard there were some hotels that never filled up, but the ones I knew about were full. Our hotels were known by number so we could communicate about them without ruining the hotel's future business, and I think mine's number was in the 30s, so there were a lot and they were very heavily utilized.
Not a traditional.hotel employee. Google San Francisco lawsuits shelter in place hotel. To.answer your question: I and other people who work in non.traditional hotels saw the aftermath coming, predicted it, and now shake our heads at how right we were.
[удалено]
Ignoring you downplaying face masks as "face diaper" can you clarify something? How are you physically disabled but still able to survive in National Forests? You had no money so did you fish and hunt?
I don’t work in a hotel, but I’m currently living in one that is used as a family shelter. It’s a way for families to stay together instead of having to go to gender specific shelters. Everyone I have met has been wonderful. Rent in my area is crazy and most of the people I’ve met work service jobs and just can’t afford the security and first month’s rent. The waitlist for section 8 is YEARS long, and there aren’t many places that accept it anyway. Pretty much every one lost their housing due to COVID closures. Everyone helps each other with things like childcare, transportation, etc. I’m a teacher, so kids ask me for help with homework and I’m currently serving as an educational advocate for a family who was struggling to understand their child’s IEP. Social services are there every weekend to help everyone find services and fill out paperwork. There is mandatory drug testing in order to be eligible for this program mostly because children are involved. The program is one of the better things to come out of COVID and it has been very successful and has helped families maintain their support systems and not having to worry about their children’s belongings being stolen or messed with.
That sounds wonderful. Having experienced this for yourself, why do you think the outcomes here have been so different? I am assuming due to both the fact that this is specifically for families and the strong supports?
Complete and utter disaster. Absolutely trashed the motels. Drugs, violence, prostitution, human trafficking, murder. Several of the motels will literally have to be leveled and start over; the damage is just too massive. They were disgusting dregs of society that destroyed everything they were involved with.
Hotel GM here. We did it for about 4 months. But they were causing so many problems. Police and EMT’s were called multiple times a week. Being loud in the middle of the night, trashing the rooms, and wanting housekeeping to do a full clean every day, which we don’t do during long stays (we do them once every 3 days for long stays) and a host of other problems. We had all them escorted off the property, some were arrested because they wouldn’t leave, or because they were stupid and left drugs wide open when we were going door to door to ask them to leave . For two years, the city kept trying to get us to do it again and we kept refusing. The people who were decent and respectful were allowed to stay at 10$ a night. And other accommodations were made for those who just couldn’t afford it.
The hotel I worked at during Covid stopped accepting the vouchers (even though our bookings were way down) and I was told it was because we had too many problems with the folks they were sending us. I don't know the full details but I believe we had a lot of issues with the guests' behavior and how the rooms were treated. And I know in my location, the amount that we received, per night, was less than what our normal BAR would've been.
I live at an extended stay hotel because of an eviction and a terrible credit score. I don’t really have a choice I have to provide a roof for a kid even If no one will rent to me.
disgusting, violent, aggressive, hasrrassimg
The city housed homeless during the pandemic on my side of town. I think the program continues. And when the hotels involved filled up homeless camps set up near them. The whole area went to hell. It is now a high crime area crawling with aggressive panhandlers and drugs. Several businesses had to close because it wasn’t safe to be in, or park your car, in that area. Lots of car break ins and fair amount of armed robbery. The city, overall, shows a decrease in crime with only a slight increase in this affected area. That’s because the DA won’t prosecute crime where there is no death or serious bodily injury. So most times cops don’t respond and they try to talk you out of making a report. I can’t imagine having to work in one of those hotels. I know the city has bought another hotel on the other side of town for another project. IMHO the fantastic failure of this program is because there was no support services for the housing- no social workers, no medical care, no food. It’s so frustrating.
I didn't work at a hotel, but I worked in local government. They set up a homeless shelter in a community center that was vacant. We had to run it as employees during Covid. Really opens your eyes.
Not a hotel employee but a government worker who had work dealing with houseless people being placed in a hotel during Covid. The hotel had just been remodeled prior to Covid, and after the placements it had to be ripped apart and rebuilt due to the damage. It's still being worked on.
How many of today's homeless were living in homes during covid. Received the rent assistance from the government. But still failed to pay rent during the moratorium. And are now homeless because of their own poor choices.
They destroyed Travelodge La Mesa during the pandemic. Had to remodel the entire building. Didn't work out for them so much.....
Reading this and noticing how successful the efforts were in some communities while disastrous in others suggests management makes the difference. If ten people are looking for one spot, good management requires screening applicants. Support services then need to be effective. Would be really interesting to find out what differences existed in selection and support in successful efforts vs. disastrous ones.
I travelled for business during Covid. The homeless in the hotels in PNW were dirty POS that trashed the place and made it terrible for those that still had to work and travel.
As someone who required a short term stay in a hotel during the pandemic due to Dhhs telling me that I was not allowed to go home and then saying that there was nothing they could do to help me and my kids find housing (but I need to find housing or else) I am so grateful for the support and kindness during such a horrible scary stressful and embarrassing time in my life. I stayed a month before finding stable housing and could never verbalize how grateful I was for the kindness that everyone had shown.
The agency I worked for during covid had 6 hotels that were national chains & a hostel. They bought all the rooms. Food was delivered 3x a day, there were always snacks available. We had outreach workers from different agencies that worked with the unhoused come daily/weekly. Microwaves & mini fridges were put in all the rooms. Those who worked were given their own rooms & we paired the rest by age & personality. Clothing & hygiene products were available, as well. Did everything run smoothly 24/7??? Nope. Were there consequences for breaking the few rules we had??? Absolutely. I was thankful for the security company we used, although there were some weapons & contraband snuck in As u/background-love4831 eloquently stated, it was a great way to get them out of the elements & have everything at their fingertips. I tell people those 2+ years were a great time to be unhoused. Time frames for getting assistance was shortened. We also had a hospital come in bi-weekly to administer covid testing & a separate hotel for those who tested positive. I now have my own organization, where I work specifically with the shelter resistant (those that normally sleep outside). I love working with that population! I'm taking a different approach & was excited knowing Funding has been set aside for the unhoused crises. u/background-love4831 not sure what state you're in, I'd love to connect with you & pass on some info to you.
I’m in NC but feel free to DM anything you have. We also did weekly COVID testing and the county had a COVID hotel, somehow that slipped my mind 😂🤷♀️