Some Homeless Deserve Compassion, Others Don’t

by James A. Bacon

The U.S. Supreme Court is expected to rule this week on a case that will determine if local governments can criminalize the homeless for sleeping in public, even when shelters are unavailable, reports The Virginian-Pilot. Citing National Alliance to End Homelessness (NAEH) figures, the newspaper notes that there were nearly 6,000 homeless people in Virginia on any given night in 2018, including nearly 1,500 in Hampton Roads.

Bing image creator: homeless encampment in the style of Hogarth

Unsurprisingly, the Pilot devotes much of its story to quoting advocates of compassion for the homeless.

“We cannot arrest and punish our way out of homelessness,” said Isabel McLain, director of policy and advocacy for the Virginia Housing Alliance. “We have to provide affordable housing and support services for people to be healthy and stable. Housing someone in a jail does nothing for improving their life and it cost the state a lot of money as well.”

“I think it’s a tragedy that we have gotten to the point in this country that we want to criminalize people who are unable to pay for housing,” said Antipas Harris, chief executive director of the Urban Renewal Center in Norfolk. “It is a travesty for humanity.”

Utter nonsense. It’s worth making two points regarding indiscriminate compassion for the homeless.

First, it would be disastrous for Virginia to follow the West Coast states down the slippery slope to disease-ridden, drug-infested, crime-ridden homeless encampments. Second, some homeless people are more deserving of sympathy and succor than others.

Broadly speaking, there are two main causes of homelessness. The first is the rising cost of housing. The other is the surging number of people who are mentally ill or substance addicted, many of whom resist taking medication or seeking treatment.

Rising rents make it increasingly difficult for poor people to find a place to live. Rents consume a disproportionate share of their income. Living paycheck to paycheck, they lack the resources to survive even a modest financial setback. Whether through imprudence or bad luck, thousands of Virginians are evicted every month. Some land in dumpy one-room motel rooms, others in homeless shelters. They don’t want to be homeless and, with help, most do get re-established.

The short-term solution is to support nonprofits that specialize in sheltering the temporarily homeless. The long-term solution is to provide more affordable housing options for the poor. In either case, the temporarily homeless do not contribute to social disorder in the way that San Francisco-style encampments do with their defecation, disease, open-air drug dealing, and criminality.

It is crucial to note: To say that there are 6,000 homeless people in Virginia is not to say that 6,000 people are living on the streets. According to the NAEH, whose figures admittedly are about six years out of date, roughly 5,000 of the homeless find refuge in shelters.

In 2018, about 1,000 Virginians were chronically homeless, mostly people afflicted by mental illness and substance addiction. If they are homeless because they choose to be… because they refuse to take their medications, or seek treatment, or simply prefer the unstructured life on the streets… a different moral calculus comes into play.

A compassionate society will provide these people with medication and treatment for substance abuse. But chronically homeless people who refuse treatment do not have a right to deprive the rights of others to public order. Local governments should be allowed the means to criminalize anti-social behavior. If some recalcitrants end up in jail, well… that what jails are for.

West Coast states combine unaffordable housing with a hyper-sensitivity to the rights of “marginalized” groups. The rights of the “oppressed” trump the rights of citizens who work, pay taxes, raise families, support charities and keep society functioning. Ironically, the indiscriminate-compassion model fails even the intended beneficiaries by giving rise to cesspools of misery, ill health, and elevated mortality.

It would be a travesty if the Supreme Court deprived Virginia localities the tools needed to keep the “San Fransicko” syndrome at bay.

 


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

37 responses to “Some Homeless Deserve Compassion, Others Don’t”

  1. Lefty665 Avatar
    Lefty665

    <i>"because they refuse to take their medications, or seek treatment"</i>

    Fundamentally misunderstands the issue for people with severe mental illness but who are not dangerous to others. If they were competent to take meds reliably or seek treatment they would not have severe mental illness. That does not mean that we should abandon them to live on the streets. It is a commentary on the failures of our mental health system.

    1. Teddy007 Avatar
      Teddy007

      Conservatives who refused to get vaccinated for Covid-19 and want to end all vaccination programs in the U.S. now want a policy to force others to take medication? This makes no sense just like Trump's proposal to require school children to get vaccinated.

      1. walter smith Avatar
        walter smith

        Wow. Conservatives want to end all vaccination programs in the US? Where can I sign up?!?
        You mistake the desire not to be forced to participate in a medical experiment, in violation of the Nuremberg Code, for a man-made virus, created by power-crazed "scientists" funded by Tony Fauci, which was no more deadly than regular flu as opposition to vaccination. Add in the lies about the virus, its origin, the censorship, the counter-productive protocol, etc, and maybe people have a good reason to be suspicious of our so-called "betters."
        Armed Services have now acknowledged a link with the "vaccine" (that was, and is, not a vaccine). Lancet pulled a study based on pushback from "the elites" and it has now been peer-reviewed and published and showed a huge number of deaths from the "safe and effective" shot. I didn't cause the damage. Liars did.

        1. Teddy007 Avatar
          Teddy007

          From NPR : On the campaign trail, Donald Trump again vowed to shut down the Education Department and endorsed a Louisiana law mandating the display of the Ten Commandments in public schools. He has also pledged to cut funding to schools with vaccine requirements.

          And a vaccine boosts the immune system even if it does not give full immunity (See the annual flu vaccine). And a link to the study would be nice.

          1. walter smith Avatar
            walter smith

            Why? NPR is the Gospel? (Wait, did I just trigger you?) Uri Berliner?
            Shut down the education department? All for it. Not going to go find the graph – I’ll just take judicial notice – the bigger the ED, the worse the output, just like real ED. The Ed Dept is the ED of learning. I like it!
            And the 10 Commandments…posted in school! Run! Other than Western Civ was built on the Judeo Christian worldview, is a reminder of that…dangerous? I don’t see your study for the vaccine boosts the immune system… And for the flu “vaccine” they just guess every year, and it is not a vaccine as the definition used to be known before changing it to dupe people that the Covid jabjabjab was necessary.
            I think the logical answer to the vaccines required by law is a religious, a medical, and a conscientious objection. Most people, if the true informed consent occurs, will choose to get most of the shots. Don’t you trust “the people?”

          2. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            “I think the logical answer to the vaccines required by law is a religious, a medical, and a conscientious objection.”

            Religious and medical exemptions exist already. Now “conscientious objection”? On what basis…?

      2. Lefty665 Avatar
        Lefty665

        Not what I said at all. Again I am pleased to help you grow up, but it's a big job.

        The US has done miserably at helping people with severe mental illness do things that will help them like taking meds, when they are appropriate treatment, and getting therapy. Often people with severe mental illness are unable to do those things themselves without assistance. That is part of being mentally ill. We only force the small minority of people whose severe mental illness makes them a danger to themselves or others. Others are left to their own devices, which by definition are limited and often unsuccessful.

        That's my contribution to your education and upbringing for today. Walter has added another lesson for you. Hopefully you will benefit from that too.

        Have a nice day.

        1. Stanwood Avatar
          Stanwood

          I'm not sure I'm up for forcing the mentally ill to take their meds. (Especially given the poor efficacy and high side effects of many of those meds.) But I appreciate your comment to the extent your are helping to point out the problem here. We should resist the temptation to moralize against people who are ill.

          1. Lefty665 Avatar
            Lefty665

            The only people who get forced are those who are a danger to themselves or others. That is the criteria for institutionalization. We let many of the rest rot in the streets. That's not exactly caring.

            A number of places have instituted programs that make rounds to help people stay on a routine to take their meds and help by coaching daily living skills. It's a lot cheaper than institutionalization and often enables a better quality of life. It is not force, "Good morning, have you taken your meds yet? No? How 'bout if we do it now so that it's done? Very nice, see you this evening, and don't forget your therapy session at 2 o'clock. Do you have bus fare to get there?

            You are right, moralizing against people with mental illness is not caring. It is pointless and ugly.

          2. Marty Chapman Avatar
            Marty Chapman

            I found a "hey how you doing, here is a hot cup coffee" to dudes living under an interstate overpass goes a long way. Those yellow, waterproof, emergency blankets that cops carry are also useful.

    2. Marty Chapman Avatar
      Marty Chapman

      Amen Brother!

  2. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
    Dick Hall-Sizemore

    This is one of those really tough nuts to crack. The spectre of groups of people sleeping on the streets or in encampments is obviously undesirable for many reasons. But where are these people supposed to go? Grants Pass, Oregon, the city that is a party to the Supreme Court case has no homeless shelter. Are we going to criminalize people because they cannot afford a place to live?

    1. James Wyatt Whitehead Avatar
      James Wyatt Whitehead

      I think the number reported here is too low. When you start factoring in the fringe groups such as those living in an RV, the rundown motel, or sleeping in their cars the number of those who are houseless is more than imagined. Here we find people who are just one more bad day away from having absolutely nothing.

    2. James Wyatt Whitehead Avatar
      James Wyatt Whitehead

      I think the number reported here is too low. When you start factoring in the fringe groups such as those living in an RV, the rundown motel, or sleeping in their cars the number of those who are houseless is more than imagined. Here we find people who are just one more bad day away from having absolutely nothing.

      1. Marty Chapman Avatar
        Marty Chapman

        I suspect most of us are or at least have been a couple paychecks away from being homeless.

      2. how_it_works Avatar
        how_it_works

        Not to mention the ones who are "couch surfing" and living on a friend's or relative's couch for free.

        This tends to be a more viable option for those who (1) have a lot of friends and relatives in the area and (2) aren't difficult to deal with.

      3. Marty Chapman Avatar
        Marty Chapman

        I suspect most of us are or at least have been a couple paychecks away from being homeless.

    3. If DHS can fly criminal foreigners into US cities without informing the destination, can't Virginia fly them to Californication?

      1. Teddy007 Avatar
        Teddy007

        No, Virginia cannot unless Virginia is really good as getting informed consent. And once again, playing hot potato with the homeless does not solve the problem.

    4. Marty Chapman Avatar
      Marty Chapman

      We are not going to "criminalize people". In some cases we may need to criminalize their behavior. For example, many parks and other public places close at sunset, this would preclude people spending the night on benches and picnic shelters. Public urination and defecation are generally frowned upon. I agree jail is not a good solution, and I know from experience how hard it can be to find a spot in a shelter. However, compassion has to be paired with some willingness to seek and accept help.

  3. Teddy007 Avatar
    Teddy007

    The county jail is a very expensive way to shelter the homeless. And playing hot potato (pushing the homeless into the politically weakest neighborhoods) always results in disaster.

    1. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      Just a dumb question here. Can the homeless "problem" be solved by just giving them a basic income to live on? Not advocating it or opposing it, just asking if some of the homeless issue is simply money needed to live on?

      1. how_it_works Avatar
        how_it_works

        Assuming that they have the life skills to manage money, sure.

        I think you'd have to give some, if not most, of them a free rent subsidized apartment AND a basic income, though.

      2. how_it_works Avatar
        how_it_works

        Assuming that they have the life skills to manage money, sure.

        I think you'd have to give some, if not most, of them a free rent subsidized apartment AND a basic income, though.

        1. LarrytheG Avatar
          LarrytheG

          and if cheaper than putting in prison? no money, just vouchers.. BTW… What about “little house” subdivisions with a food pantry on the corner?

      3. Teddy007 Avatar
        Teddy007

        The UBI idea would probably be a great boom for liquor stores, the lottery, and the local weed dispensary.

        1. how_it_works Avatar
          how_it_works

          Always wonder who the convenience stores are trying to market to when they have signs saying "BEER CIGS LOTTO"

          Speaking of weed dispensary, there's one in Manassas (not in the city limits, but has a Manassas address). Did they know where their target market lives or what?

        2. how_it_works Avatar
          how_it_works

          Always wonder who the convenience stores are trying to market to when they have signs saying "BEER CIGS LOTTO"

          Speaking of weed dispensary, there's one in Manassas (not in the city limits, but has a Manassas address). Did they know where their target market lives or what?

          1. Teddy007 Avatar
            Teddy007

            As far as weed dispensaries, the most ironic one is the one across the street from the Whole Foods in Arlington and down the block from the gun store.

          2. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            UBI should only be vouchers that don't work for things other than needs.

      4. Not Today Avatar
        Not Today

        Housing first systems generally work best with wraparound services too. Most homeless people aren’t addicts or abusers. The most intractable tend to be addicts w/mental health challenges but that does not reflect the majority of unhoused folks.

  4. LarrytheG Avatar
    LarrytheG

    This is one of those issues where neither "do-gooders" nor the "hard-noses" have really figured out what to do, yet.

    I thought the SCOTUS thing was about whether the govt can kick them out of public spaces and if so, by what means.

    We give special status to parents with kids but in reality, sometimes the parents are little better than if they did not have the kids, the kids are essentially in the wrong place and wrong time but we tend to have more sympathy than we might if there were no kids.

    I sorta wonder about the demographics in general. Does the percentage demographics of the homeless mirror the overall population? Does it matter if they do or not in terms of what we might do or not, in response?

    We talk about California which does indeed have a major homeless problem but is it possible they may come up with things that might work?

    Gov. Newsome has stepped into the issue, so to speak as has this lady:
    She's a mayor that used to be a Congressman:

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/9c1333b93ec7169ef27bfca7048090ed0c3750ef8577f60d216ad639371bc415.png and to put some perspective on the task at hand.. this is LA compared to the rest of the US:

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/13953f0c4d9077fa8a8fa113c4682992365c1abe980f97462f966d8e804f5b8f.png

    1. Stanwood Avatar
      Stanwood

      That's a cool map! I found this one (the inverse) useful since it gives some numbers. I didn't realize Virginia was smaller than LA county.
      https://www.laalmanac.com/images4/map-2023-states-with-larger-populations-than-LA.jpg

      1. LarrytheG Avatar
        LarrytheG

        not sure of your link… browser did not like.

        Yes, LA is BIG! The Mayor of LA seems to be not
        unlike a Governor.

        here's another map LA Congressional districts:
        https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/77f9fce569fe8a9cd0b888c885998008c4bbdc8bc51aab36ec6c506e3336be42.png

  5. Eric the half a troll Avatar
    Eric the half a troll

    “Second, some homeless people are more deserving of sympathy and succor than others.

    Broadly speaking, there are two main causes of homelessness. The first is the rising cost of housing. The other is the surging number of people who are mentally ill or substance addicted, many of whom resist taking medication or seeking treatment.”

    First, “many”?… in your thorough research you performed in developing your published opinion on this subject, what stats do you uncover to support this claim.

    Second, your position appears to be that all unmedicated mentally ill or addicted homeless individuals deserve no sympathy and should be justifiably jailed for camping. Is that the mainstream Republican position these days? You do tend to paint yourself as a middle of the Right sort of fellow. To me that position smacks of fascism-lite.

Leave a Reply