ACLU sues city over homeless

I'm not too familiar with what panhandling is. Is it an American version of what we Brits refer to as begging? One way, to reply to your thoughts, Rob, was that I tend not to give beggers money, but a bag of chips or I'll offer them something from a nearby restaurant/cafe. I will gladly donate cash to the Salvation Army or other related charities that do good work within communities as I know my money gets spent on something appropriate.

In London there are plenty of homeless people. Commuting in to work, many Londoners will see people begging on the underground train stations and near to areas where wealthy businessmen will tend to walk. Most of them just ask for spare change without becoming pushy, however, I've noticed that some from eastern Europe are starting to become a bit more vocal and in some cases physical. I recently spent a day in Warsaw and seeing how people beg there I can see how it's transformed and found its way into British begging circles.

As for how to help the situation, being homeless is an incredibly difficult thing to work your way out of. You have no address, so you can't get a job. Without a job you can't get money. Without money, well, you get the picture. I think there are some very good projects where homeless shelters will allow people to use it as a mailing address and to use for job applications so that they can get themselves on the ladder so to speak. There has to be a solution whereby people can help themselves. Anything anti-social should be clamped down on, which is why I can see where Mayor Ballard is coming from. I believe Rudy Giuliani, like or loathe his policy, was quite successful in stopping anti social behaviour from certain homeless individuals in a manner that Ballard seems to be following.

Then again, I'm not too familiar with the Indianapolis homeless situation. I've only been downtown once to Conseco (and another time to the zoo) but tend to spend most of my time around the Avon/Brownsburg/Plainfield areas when I'm there. I haven't seen a homeless person there yet. But as for the ACLU, well, they'll stick their noses in anywhere, warranted or not.

In my research ,most of the homeless dysfunction is enabled through corruption at all levels.Many panhandlers are addicted in one form or another causing incapacitation and dysfunction. I am at this time working on a article about the City Rescue Mission shelter in Oklahoma City and How most of the over $3 million dollars in cash donations is pocketed by the paid Staff, by fraud. For example; All the clothes that the 400 or so daily residents receive through their "clothing closet"once a month is donated(used or practically new,2 pants,3 shirts,one pair of shoes) but it states on their tax form 990 that they spend $205,108 on clothing expenses.
These corporations have learned to profit greatly on the enabled suffering and complacency.It's big money . Hence the reason they run groups on tours through these missions and peak hours of capacity.To impress how badly the money is needed.But these donors never really know how little these "homeless" actually benefit,unless they are able to embed themselves there at the mission ,which I believe no one does,except me, that I'm aware of.There is much more to this story and it's coming along...Hence the reason my ...homelessokc.blogspot.com
It is not to the corporations benefit if they have 20-30 people in a mission. In does not make a profound impact.
400-600 people makes a definite visual impact!

Kim Woods who works for Catholic Charities and is affiliated with Jennifer Gooden at HomelessAlliance is a social worker who worked for awhile at the City Rescue Mission.Her job was to be an advocate to these people who found themselves there,but she took it a step further,realizing that many of these people didn't have the capacity,motivation or the power for some reason or another to find the resources that were available to them and then to use them and to get around the walls set up for their failure(She saw many that had been living there for years,75%)due to their poverty(financial,educational,spiritual..etc) and she made it a point to actively seek them out rather then wait for them to come to her office,which was the policy of the Mission,wait them out.She was succeeding in emptying this Mission by getting many housing through the section 8 program,the public housing program,foodstamps,disability,treatment for medical conditions...etc.The administration took notice of her success and decided that they would tell her that they really needed her in another position and that they would immediately fill the active seeking social worker position with somebody else.they never did. She eventually stopped working there.
In 1984 ,the Reagan Administration emptied the Mental institutions, gave these people a disability check and lots of prescriptions and basically let them fend for themselves.The system failed them for a reason.An agenda. Many at the Mission are mentally and emotionally incapacitated.They are preyed on by drug dealers,mainly Crack dealers who profit off most of their $600-2100 disability checks.Much of the mental dysfunction is drug induced. A vicious cycle. Party on the 1st and the 15th of the month for 4-5 days and then live in poverty for the rest of the month at the Mission

It's funny that the ACLU is taking this case, since they caused the homeless epidemic by forcing the govt to release thousands of mentally ill people onto the streets.

THe underlying issue here is how to address the issue of homelessness. First, we need to overturn that ACLU forced ruling. Mentally ill people who refuse to take medication are an inherent threat, both to themselves and society. We should return to our former policy of hospitalizing those people, at the same time making sure they are treated compassionately and receive treatment.

Along with the mentally-ill, the majority of long-term homeless people are alcoholics or drug addicts. It is unlikely that they will ever be able to keep jobs or housing. While we can still offer assistance and treatment, f we really want to solve the problem of homelessness, we need to recognize and accept that fact. We need to build long-term housing for the homeless. Not subsidized housing. We should empower those groups that are already working with the homeless to run permanent shelters.

Those two actions, hospitalization of the mentally ill and long term shelters for others, would resolve 75% or more of the homeless problem in America.

I agree with many of your points, it's really tragic that deinstitutionalization has had this epidemic of mentally ill homeless people. I also know that a majority of this population have schizophrenia, which basically the only solution is medication. If these people could be given the balance between medication, social activities, programming, job coaching etc. it would be ideal. Yet institutions had many flaws: terrible living conditions where patients were warehoused, treated like dogs rather than human beings.. This would definitely need to be improved upon.

75% of the homeless "are" in shelters! Go embed yourself ,dsanthony,at a mission with a backpack for three weeks and learn the truth of this "enabled dysfunction". They "are" warehoused,in pretty horrible living conditions and treated like dogs(wait,most people treat their dogs better).I know this for a fact.
As to medication,the legal drugs(many prescriptions) they are under have a definite debilitating effect.Have you never really seen someone on Thorazine?Some call it the Thorazine shuffle.For a reason.
Hospitalization and long term shelters are not the answer.Incapacitation,disempowerment and disenfranchisement ,along with the hidden agendas of incorporated Missions is where the problem lies. A "great" profit is being made off these people by arrogant men ,under their alleged auspices.
Except for the availability of treatment to those that need and want it,many resources are already in place to get these people out of "missions".60-75 % of the residents at the City Rescue Mission have been there "over" three YEARS!Enabled dysfunction and complacency.
It does not work as a result of the motive to incorporate Missions,excessive greed and profit for a very select few.
If you are going to support these institutions at least do so informedly.Then when you learn the truth of how and why they are run make these officers and trustees responsible and accountable to their Mission statement. Enabling a person to stay at a mission longer than 3 weeks due to extreme profit is detrimental to the Health of our Nation. it is not benign or cartoonish.It's not to our best interest to allow these people in these positions of supposed auspice to lie to you and me.And profit off our money,through fraud.