Another issue is the lack of resources allocated to the shelter system. It is often assumed that people are homeless because they choose to be. This is statistically not the case as very rarely does anyone choose to subject themselves to the violence, mental anguish and physical struggle for survival that poverty entails. The reality is that most often poverty, and homelessness in particular, is simply an economic issue due to lack of job opportunities or decent wages. Thus, poverty exists and all that comes from poverty, whether drug abuse, crime or untreated mental health issues, is the product of poverty itself and not it's cause.
It is the scapegoating, labeling, and assertions otherwise that allow for society as a whole to ignore the problems associated with poverty and thus perpetuate it.
Does this mean that I think we need to dump more money into the shelter system? The answer is emphatically no. Instead, housing first models need to be nationalized. We have been testing these models for years, and the experts are large in part in agreement that they work.
One of the organization that shows this, though it is largely underfunded and lack the resources to do more, is Pathways to Housing. They have had a 90% success rate in keeping their clients in housing once they get them into a place. In addition, their clients become far more active in the community in which they reside, are able to receive treatment for drug abuse and illnesses, both mental and physical, as they are in a stable environment, one they otherwise would not have been able to be a part of. Utah is on the track of ending homelessness entirely in it's state and is expected to do so within the next two years using a housing first/for all model.
In cases where the individual was convicted of a crime, it is shown that the stability provided by being in housing after their release and lowers the rate of recidivism. This stability allows for better monitoring in all cases, thus, lowering the rate of poverty related crimes in particular and all crimes in general. The stability that comes from housing security makes the community safer without the need to close schools in order to afford to build more prisons, as is done in many parts of the country, most notably Pennsylvania.
Housing for all helps in the health arena in another way. Homeless people are often forced to eat fast food if they aren't particular to risking eating food that may be spoiled. This is because homeless people able to cook their own food have no place to do so, nor do they have a place to store food for themselves.
If housed, these individuals would be able to purchase or acquire healthier food for themselves, thereby improving their health and stretching their monthly allottment for food.
An economic advantage would come to the companies that would be needed to refurbish abandoned houses or build low income complexes. In addition, there would need to be an increase in social workers, mental health care professionals, and many other service related jobs.
In short politicians need to grow the political will to make real changes or be called out for their poverty perpetuating policies. We do not need more laws and restrictions against the poor. We don't need bandaids. We need smart, effective policies which promote and build communities, empower families and builds a brighter future for later generations.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).