3 ms·

> For drug issues, jails solve that already by restricting freedom. However, the drug addict with socially provided housing is still free to continue using If

by shkkmo 4y ago

> For drug issues, jails solve that already by restricting freedom. However, the drug addict with socially provided housing is still free to continue using If you think drugs aren't available in jails, I have a bridge to sell you. The effectiveness of jail time on drug cessation is marginal at best. We need better options. > Economically speaking, most of these people will never be productive members of society again no matter how many resources we throw at them. This is an incredibly strong statement for which I know no evidence exists because we have never tried. Additionally, the bar for productive member of society is fairly low and is not the only goal. Simply getting some people into a stable, semi-functional state can improve their lives and reduce the long term state costs. > Fentanyl destroys your mind fairly quickly. I know an individual with significant brain damage resulting in severely impaired mental functioning who is a productive member of society. He does require ongoing support from the state and can't live independently, but does have a job and does contribute some back to society. I doubt we will see 100% recovery rates in our lifetimes, but don't be so quick to write people off before we even try. Practically speaking, drug use and living on the street form a vicious cycle. Each increases the likelihood and severity of the other.

seanmcdirmid 4y ago
> If you think drugs aren't available in jails, I have a bridge to sell you. They are available, just much harder to get. > This is an incredibly strong statement for which I know no evidence exists because we have never tried. This is from my own heartbreaking experiences. Once you get down that path, your chances of coming back are very slim even with lots of help. "Productive" means able to get a job at McDonalds or a grocery store, both of which are desperate for people but neither of which would consider the guy at the homeless encampment next door. It just isn't going to end well. > I know an individual with significant brain damage resulting in severely impaired mental functioning who is a productive member of society. He does require ongoing support from the state and can't live independently, but does have a job and does contribute some back to society. Not the same thing at all. If the individual you know is coasting down Highway 99 on a shopping cart while having a very bad Fentanyl trip, then I guess they are similar? These people are gone in a way that someone with brain damage isn't. > I doubt we will see 100% recovery rates in our lifetimes, but don't be so quick to write people off before we even try. We are trying it right now. We have a whole homelessness industrial complex that has sprung up to collect and spend massive amounts of resources on trying to help these people ($100k/year/person is actually an underestimate). They aren't making progress, perhaps intentionally (so they can continue collecting the money) but probably because progress can't be had here. It might be better just to cut our losses and focus on making sure people don't fall into the homeless/drug abuse trap at all, because once there coming back is really really hard. > Practically speaking, drug use and living on the street form a vicious cycle. Each increases the likelihood and severity of the other. Yes.
- shkkmo 4y ago
  > "Productive" means able to get a job at McDonalds or a grocery store, both of which are desperate for people but neither of which would consider the guy at the homeless encampment next door. It just isn't going to end well. Which seems like a huge part of the problem to me. We need better reintegration paths that make the climb back easier. > These people are gone in a way that someone with brain damage isn't. I don't know what you mean. It's harder to be gone than severe brain damage. It took several dedicated foster families and ongoing support from social workers to get him to the point he is at. He has a job, but he can't function independently and didn't find it on his own. Severe drug addiction does have different challenges, but the possibility of reaching a stable, productive place is always possible. > It might be better just to cut our losses and focus on making sure people don't fall into the homeless/drug abuse trap at all, because once there coming back is really really hard. You are absolutely correct about the second part. Providing support for those on the edge is the most effective way to reduce homelessness. The longer you are on the street and the worse conditions you are living in, the harder it is to climb back out. However, I think that writing off people is a mistake in the long run. If you let the problem fester, it gets worse and costs more to deal with. > We have a whole homelessness industrial complex that has sprung up to collect and spend massive amounts of resources on trying to help these people ($100k/year/person is actually an underestimate). They aren't making progress, perhaps intentionally (so they can continue collecting the money) There is a problem here, but I'd also be cautious to paint the whole industry with such broad a strokes as there are some very dedicated, selfless people working in that field. Unfortunately, I think those are the people who are more likely to burn out and leave when they see poor results (I've known a several who have gone this route.) This leaves the less scrupulous / caring to lead the industry. I think those poor results there are due to structural problems around housing access, affordability, the path back to employability and the mental health system that we need to solve on a much larger scale. Only the can we start seeing significant progress at the smaller scales that these organizations work at.

by shkkmo 4y ago

seanmcdirmid 4y ago

> If you think drugs aren't available in jails, I have a bridge to sell you. They are available, just much harder to get. > This is an incredibly strong statement for which I know no evidence exists because we have never tried. This is from my own heartbreaking experiences. Once you get down that path, your chances of coming back are very slim even with lots of help. "Productive" means able to get a job at McDonalds or a grocery store, both of which are desperate for people but neither of which would consider the guy at the homeless encampment next door. It just isn't going to end well. > I know an individual with significant brain damage resulting in severely impaired mental functioning who is a productive member of society. He does require ongoing support from the state and can't live independently, but does have a job and does contribute some back to society. Not the same thing at all. If the individual you know is coasting down Highway 99 on a shopping cart while having a very bad Fentanyl trip, then I guess they are similar? These people are gone in a way that someone with brain damage isn't. > I doubt we will see 100% recovery rates in our lifetimes, but don't be so quick to write people off before we even try. We are trying it right now. We have a whole homelessness industrial complex that has sprung up to collect and spend massive amounts of resources on trying to help these people ($100k/year/person is actually an underestimate). They aren't making progress, perhaps intentionally (so they can continue collecting the money) but probably because progress can't be had here. It might be better just to cut our losses and focus on making sure people don't fall into the homeless/drug abuse trap at all, because once there coming back is really really hard. > Practically speaking, drug use and living on the street form a vicious cycle. Each increases the likelihood and severity of the other. Yes.

shkkmo 4y ago
> "Productive" means able to get a job at McDonalds or a grocery store, both of which are desperate for people but neither of which would consider the guy at the homeless encampment next door. It just isn't going to end well. Which seems like a huge part of the problem to me. We need better reintegration paths that make the climb back easier. > These people are gone in a way that someone with brain damage isn't. I don't know what you mean. It's harder to be gone than severe brain damage. It took several dedicated foster families and ongoing support from social workers to get him to the point he is at. He has a job, but he can't function independently and didn't find it on his own. Severe drug addiction does have different challenges, but the possibility of reaching a stable, productive place is always possible. > It might be better just to cut our losses and focus on making sure people don't fall into the homeless/drug abuse trap at all, because once there coming back is really really hard. You are absolutely correct about the second part. Providing support for those on the edge is the most effective way to reduce homelessness. The longer you are on the street and the worse conditions you are living in, the harder it is to climb back out. However, I think that writing off people is a mistake in the long run. If you let the problem fester, it gets worse and costs more to deal with. > We have a whole homelessness industrial complex that has sprung up to collect and spend massive amounts of resources on trying to help these people ($100k/year/person is actually an underestimate). They aren't making progress, perhaps intentionally (so they can continue collecting the money) There is a problem here, but I'd also be cautious to paint the whole industry with such broad a strokes as there are some very dedicated, selfless people working in that field. Unfortunately, I think those are the people who are more likely to burn out and leave when they see poor results (I've known a several who have gone this route.) This leaves the less scrupulous / caring to lead the industry. I think those poor results there are due to structural problems around housing access, affordability, the path back to employability and the mental health system that we need to solve on a much larger scale. Only the can we start seeing significant progress at the smaller scales that these organizations work at.