Homeless people

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Explain how it's not a choice for someone with an able body/mind.

Originally Posted by Kevin

Or perhaps we consider it rude and immoral to beg? Perhaps it offends our moral decency that someone who we know could very well choose to take advantage of the vast resources available to them and have a better life (and does not) is invading our space requesting that we subsidize their life choice?

And herein, I think, lies the problem that many of us have about this whole situation. How do we know a particular homeless person is of able mind or body or could very well choose to take advantage of the vast resources available to them and have a better life? We can assume it, but how do we know? I'll readily grant that your example at the start of this thread gave every indication of not needing the wheel chair he was using. (Although is it possible that he had become adept at using a wheel chair but for reasons not apparent he really couldn't stand or walk? I don't know.) But mental illnesses in particular may not be at all obvious, and not all phsyical limitations are obvious either.

The reality is that usually we don't really know. We can assume and guess, but we don't know for sure unless we actually take some time with the person, and even then can we know for sure? Occasionally it may be pretty obvious that someone is trying to pull one over on us, but in my experience, that is the exception rather than the rule.

So we're left to make some snap judgments -- do we show some compassion and risk enabling someone's addiction -- maybe even making things worse for them -- or rewarding a scammer? Do we refuse to enable the addict or reward the scammer and risk failing to show compassion to someone who truly needs it?

Things get even trickier when you have kids. How do I demonstrate to my kids the need to be careful and also the need to practice the values we are trying to teach them?

For me, at least, there are no easy answers.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

The reality is that usually we don't really know. We can assume and guess, but we don't know for sure unless we actually take some time with the person, and even then can we know for sure? Occasionally it may be pretty obvious that someone is trying to pull one over on us, but in my experience, that is the exception rather than the rule.

I just don't think that's the case around here. What may be true in whatever big city you live in, OKC's homeless problem is still of a manageable size. The city does a decent job of managing the problem. The fact that an individual is standing in front of me and talking to me is testimony to the fact that they know help exists (they haven't died of starvation and they're within close proximity of the homeless shelter and related services, so it's a safe bet). If they're not of able body/mind, there are government programs which will provide them with food, money and shelter. Sure, the Rehnquist court said we can't pluck them off the streets and throw them into an institution, but these people still have the ability to self-commit or apply for treatment programs which are not at capacity. If they have the ability to walk around and beg, they have the ability to ask for help from someone who is actually set up to provide real help.

So we're left to make some snap judgments -- do we show some compassion and risk enabling someone's addiction -- maybe even making things worse for them -- or rewarding a scammer? Do we refuse to enable the addict or reward the scammer and risk failing to show compassion to someone who truly needs it?

Neither act is really compassionate. Giving money to the homeless is something which ultimately harms them (as I discussed above). Also, as you pointed out, the "homeless" I discussed above probably aren't actually even homeless.

Things get even trickier when you have kids. How do I demonstrate to my kids the need to be careful and also the need to practice the values we are trying to teach them?

That's a pretty easy one. It seems the benefit of teaching a valuable lesson would outweigh the harm it does to the "homeless" person. I personally don't care about that other person. I think younger kids would benefit from the lesson, but I think older kids would benefit more from a lesson about how things (and people) aren't always what they appear to be.

[MysticCat]

Kevin, 20 years ago I probably thought more like you do. Experience over those 20 years has brought me to a different place. I'm not saying you'll end up where I am when you've "learned better" -- that would be presumptuous of me. Just saying that my experience has led me to find that there's a lot of grey out there.

And I think you are quite right that just giving someone money is not necessarily compassionate. Making sure they have food certainly can be, though.

One thought though: Is "homeless" here being used to to refer to all homeless people -- including those who are working and trying to take advantage of programs that will really help them, or is it limited just to the those who beg on the streets? If it's the latter, then "beggars" might be the more accurate term. When I hear "homeless," I think not only of the beggars; I also think of the families that my church and other churches take turns providing shelter, food and transportation for, who are trying and working or going to school but who have nowhere to live. Perhaps confusion about which homeless people are the subject of this thread is what has brought on some of the more heated responses in this thread.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

Kevin, 20 years ago I probably thought more like you do. Experience over those 20 years has brought me to a different place. I'm not saying you'll end up where I am when you've "learned better" -- that would be presumptuous of me. Just saying that my experience has led me to find that there's a lot of grey out there.

And I think you are quite right that just giving someone money is not necessarily compassionate. Making sure they have food certainly can be, though.

One thought though: Is "homeless" here being used to to refer to all homeless people -- including those who are working and trying to take advantage of programs that will really help them, or is it limited just to the those who beg on the streets? If it's the latter, then "beggars" might be the more accurate term. When I hear "homeless," I think not only of the beggars; I also think of the families that my church and other churches take turns providing shelter, food and transportation for, who are trying and working or going to school but who have nowhere to live. Perhaps confusion about which homeless people are the subject of this thread is what has brought on some of the more heated responses in this thread.

I probably should have used the word "panhandlers" It would have been a far more accurate descriptor. My apologies for the extremely imprecise language.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by Kevin

I probably should have used the word "panhandlers" It would have been a far more accurate descriptor. My apologies for the extremely imprecise language.

That's the word I couldn't think of when I came up with "beggars." Thanks.