3 ms·

I don't think housing will help the people with mental health issues and addiction problems. Honestly I think sometimes building (compassionate, 21st century)

I don't think housing will help the people with mental health issues and addiction problems. Honestly I think sometimes building (compassionate, 21st century) mental health "asylums" and treatment centres would do more to end homelessness.

Cthulhu_ 1y ago
For some people, a kind of assisted living is available - independent apartments, but with a social worker visiting once a week or a few times a week if necessary. Of course, who will pay for it? There's plenty of money but it's all in corporations and shareholders.
watwut 1y ago
Being homeless makes peoples mental health issues massively worst then whatever there was before. So yes, housing actually helps people with mental health issues. And yes, as housing becomes less available, people with mental health issues are among the worst affected.
TimPC 1y ago
This is a scapegoat at best in areas with high homelessness. The mentally ill and drug abusers are the most visible part of the homeless population not all the homeless population. There are also complex relations to cause vs effect where mental illness may be at manageable levels until a crisis like homelessness exacerbates it or drug use may be a result of being homeless instead of a cause.
- jvanderbot 1y ago
  The mentally ill and drug abusers are also the ones who need to be dealt with in a way totally separate from those who are struggling but trying to get back on their feet and need a place to shower and sleep safely. They cause disproportionate damage to cities and the cause of aiding homeless itself. It's asinine to conflate the two issues and waffle back and forth between "more houses" and nimby name-calling. Neither will help. We should have 21st century asylums and more houses. I won't accept a false choice, we can do both. (I'd argue we also need subsidized job relocation programs so people don't get stuck in high CoL areas looking for minimum wage jobs. There are very affordable areas to live in USA that want workers, let's make this market more efficient).
  - bmicraft 1y ago
    And yet it works almost flawlessly everywhere it's been tried. But sure, the US is different, special. That's always the argument, right?
    - queenkjuul 1y ago
      Americans love being exceptional, especially when it excuses their mistreatment of the poor
      - jvanderbot 1y ago
        I don't think it's fair to equate this problem with just "the poor", and it's certainly not fair to equate "the poor" with homeless, mentally ill, drug abusers, or serial offenders. Those are the folks I'm referring to, not "the poor" as a general economic class. That should be obvious.
        queenkjuul 1y ago
        It's most certainly not fair to equate the homeless with "serial offenders". Most homeless people are simply poor. Most of the middle class are "drug abusers". But whatever you gotta tell yourself to excuse the mistreatment.
        jvanderbot 1y ago
        I believe you have never been to or around the situation I'm talking about. That's ok, but let me assure you it's a very very small minority of drug users and homeless. Nobody is proposing anything for those two large groups. Just a few very bad locations that get overlooked because of these kinds of misunderstandings which absolutely do need something different.
    - jvanderbot 1y ago
      You're stuck in a false dichotomy. There's nothing wrong with adopting all the housing reform you want. But we also (additionally not instead of) need something immediate to treat the acute, highly localized problem of mentally ill and drug abuse in encampments. If in fact you have not been to one (e.g. Venice Beach a few years ago) and seen the enormous encampments and destruction they inflict on nearby property, it's hard to understand. Maybe you have? This isn't about American exceptionalism, because either A) other countries don't have this problem (great!) or B) they do and all the "do it like they do" was just proven wrong as a solution to both the problems or C) they did have this problem and it was solved by these policies - great! The immediate intervention of getting the worst offenders off the street is a temporary solution and housing policy wins long term. But no matter what there's no reason to push back on two heterogenous solutions because it includes more than just your favorite one.
Notatheist 1y ago
Kind of a pointless stance when trying to build that support infrastructure walks you into the same NIMBY-wall.
beAbU 1y ago
Not every homeless person has mental health issues. And most probably those with mental health issues _because_ they are homeless. Rounding all the homeless up into an asylum is just sweeping the problem under the carpet.
- colejohnson66 1y ago
  Asylums, historically, were just a way to jail more "undesirables" in a way that isn't legally a jail. Some definitely started with good intentions, but they all tend to morph into jails.
ndsipa_pomu 1y ago
I don't think housing will hurt the people with mental health issues and addiction problems.
codingdave 1y ago
We need something in the middle. The ability to be a functional adult is forced into being a binary thing. You either succeed, or you crash and burn down into being homeless, institutionalized, etc. There really aren't many ways to meet halfway - to have living spaces where you can live up to your abilities and have safety nets for the areas where you struggle. We have "halfway houses" to help people re-enter society after crashing, but not much to catch people before they fall. (We do have some programs that try to help, but they are swamped, or inefficient, either expensive or under-funded, or some combination of those things. )
scoofy 1y ago
West Virginia is literally the demonstration that this sentiment is completely wrong. They have a higher drug abuse rate than California, but effectively do not have homelessness at any rate that we do… because you can get a place to live for very, very little money. It is very obvious that the housing availability is a major factor.

Cthulhu_ 1y ago

For some people, a kind of assisted living is available - independent apartments, but with a social worker visiting once a week or a few times a week if necessary. Of course, who will pay for it? There's plenty of money but it's all in corporations and shareholders.

watwut 1y ago

Being homeless makes peoples mental health issues massively worst then whatever there was before. So yes, housing actually helps people with mental health issues. And yes, as housing becomes less available, people with mental health issues are among the worst affected.

TimPC 1y ago

This is a scapegoat at best in areas with high homelessness. The mentally ill and drug abusers are the most visible part of the homeless population not all the homeless population. There are also complex relations to cause vs effect where mental illness may be at manageable levels until a crisis like homelessness exacerbates it or drug use may be a result of being homeless instead of a cause.

jvanderbot 1y ago
The mentally ill and drug abusers are also the ones who need to be dealt with in a way totally separate from those who are struggling but trying to get back on their feet and need a place to shower and sleep safely. They cause disproportionate damage to cities and the cause of aiding homeless itself. It's asinine to conflate the two issues and waffle back and forth between "more houses" and nimby name-calling. Neither will help. We should have 21st century asylums and more houses. I won't accept a false choice, we can do both. (I'd argue we also need subsidized job relocation programs so people don't get stuck in high CoL areas looking for minimum wage jobs. There are very affordable areas to live in USA that want workers, let's make this market more efficient).
- bmicraft 1y ago
  And yet it works almost flawlessly everywhere it's been tried. But sure, the US is different, special. That's always the argument, right?
  - queenkjuul 1y ago
    Americans love being exceptional, especially when it excuses their mistreatment of the poor
    - jvanderbot 1y ago
      I don't think it's fair to equate this problem with just "the poor", and it's certainly not fair to equate "the poor" with homeless, mentally ill, drug abusers, or serial offenders. Those are the folks I'm referring to, not "the poor" as a general economic class. That should be obvious.
      - queenkjuul 1y ago
        It's most certainly not fair to equate the homeless with "serial offenders". Most homeless people are simply poor. Most of the middle class are "drug abusers". But whatever you gotta tell yourself to excuse the mistreatment.
        jvanderbot 1y ago
        I believe you have never been to or around the situation I'm talking about. That's ok, but let me assure you it's a very very small minority of drug users and homeless. Nobody is proposing anything for those two large groups. Just a few very bad locations that get overlooked because of these kinds of misunderstandings which absolutely do need something different.
  - jvanderbot 1y ago
    You're stuck in a false dichotomy. There's nothing wrong with adopting all the housing reform you want. But we also (additionally not instead of) need something immediate to treat the acute, highly localized problem of mentally ill and drug abuse in encampments. If in fact you have not been to one (e.g. Venice Beach a few years ago) and seen the enormous encampments and destruction they inflict on nearby property, it's hard to understand. Maybe you have? This isn't about American exceptionalism, because either A) other countries don't have this problem (great!) or B) they do and all the "do it like they do" was just proven wrong as a solution to both the problems or C) they did have this problem and it was solved by these policies - great! The immediate intervention of getting the worst offenders off the street is a temporary solution and housing policy wins long term. But no matter what there's no reason to push back on two heterogenous solutions because it includes more than just your favorite one.

Notatheist 1y ago

Kind of a pointless stance when trying to build that support infrastructure walks you into the same NIMBY-wall.

beAbU 1y ago

Not every homeless person has mental health issues. And most probably those with mental health issues _because_ they are homeless. Rounding all the homeless up into an asylum is just sweeping the problem under the carpet.

colejohnson66 1y ago
Asylums, historically, were just a way to jail more "undesirables" in a way that isn't legally a jail. Some definitely started with good intentions, but they all tend to morph into jails.

ndsipa_pomu 1y ago

I don't think housing will hurt the people with mental health issues and addiction problems.

codingdave 1y ago

We need something in the middle. The ability to be a functional adult is forced into being a binary thing. You either succeed, or you crash and burn down into being homeless, institutionalized, etc. There really aren't many ways to meet halfway - to have living spaces where you can live up to your abilities and have safety nets for the areas where you struggle. We have "halfway houses" to help people re-enter society after crashing, but not much to catch people before they fall. (We do have some programs that try to help, but they are swamped, or inefficient, either expensive or under-funded, or some combination of those things. )

scoofy 1y ago

West Virginia is literally the demonstration that this sentiment is completely wrong. They have a higher drug abuse rate than California, but effectively do not have homelessness at any rate that we do… because you can get a place to live for very, very little money. It is very obvious that the housing availability is a major factor.