panhandling
Nearly Half of Homeless U.S. Veterans are Black
Published November 15, 2009 @ 06:05PM PT
Veterans experience homelessness at a greater rate than non-vets in the United States. But a new study finds that minority veterans - particularly African-Americans - are disproportionately represented among the homeless veteran population. Today, a whopping 45 percent of the homeless veteran population is African American, proving that race is still relevant to any discussion about poverty and homelessness in America.
These findings were revealed in a study by the Homelessness Research Institute at the National Alliance to End Homelessness. The study was released shortly after President Obama rolled out his bold-but-necessary plan of ending veteran homelessness in five years.
M. William Sermons, Director of the Homelessness Research Institute, told BlackAmericaWeb.com that the factors driving disproportionate homelessness rates among minority veterans are the same as those causing disproportionate rates of homelessness of minorities in the general homeless population. "Some of the risk factors affecting African-American men are high unemployment rates (almost double that of whites) and highly disproportionate rates of discharge from prisons and the foster care system."
In a perfect world, race would no longer be a factor when discussing issues of socio-economic equity. But clearly, this is not the case. This new data exposes the complex and continued link between poverty and race in America, even among those who have worn the uniform. To address poverty, to end homelessness, we must confront these challenging issues directly.
Image: scanned
Does Panhandling Make Homelessness Worse?
Published November 02, 2009 @ 09:12PM PT
Everyone and their mother associates panhandling with homelessness and homelessness with panhandling. But one Atlanta advocate argues it's time we treat these as separate issues, since some panhandlers are not homeless and the majority of those without a home do not panhandle. What's more, could giving money to panhandlers exacerbate a person's homelessness and provide a dis-incentive for getting off the streets?
What does treating panhandling separate from homelessness look like in practice? An op-ed piece in the Atlanta Constitution does a nice job laying this out. Simply put: homeless service providers should focus on what they do best: meeting the housing needs of homeless individuals. Referring to services. Providing job training. Case management. They should not dabble in activities related to regulating panhandlers, but rather focus on getting everyone off the streets for good.
But here's the kicker...
For regular folks like you and me, the author argues that we should refrain from giving money to panhandlers. This, he says, is not helping the homeless, but making it more difficult for homeless service providers to do their job. In other words, giving money to a panhandler exacerbates their homelessness, according to the Atlanta Constitution.
So who does the author believe should deal be the one to deal with panhandlers? Law enforcement.
This argument - though curt - does make good sense. Certainly, there are few who would argue against the goal of moving everyone off the streets and into housing. But there's no question that the means to achieving this end are a bit over-simplified in his argument.
Our country has a shortage of housing that is affordable. In addition, many of those who end up on the streets face complicated issues that require time to address. Other individuals lack access to the social service safety net for a variety of reasons, whether it be their geographic location or the inability of providers to meet demand. For these individuals, panhandling is a means for survival until our system catches up. It is wrong to suggest that giving money to panhandlers exacerbates their homelessness, especially when our safety net cannot accommodate all who are in need.
Maybe someday, when we are finally meeting the demand for affordable housing and services for those who need them, we'll all be able to stand behind this argument. But sadly, I don't think we're there yet.
Image: Martin Ujlaki
Panhandling Goes Digital
Published October 26, 2009 @ 12:09PM PT
You know that we are living in a digital world when even panhandling goes online. Thanks to homeless web forums, blogs, and social media sites - combined with the increasing criminalization of panhandling - cardboard signs could soon be a thing of the past. Is this the age of Panhandling 2.0?
Today, the Boston Globe detailed the story of Kevin Boudrou, a laid off chef who has been using Craigslist postings to find free winter camping gear. He has been using public computers in medical facilities, libraries, and shelters to try and find tents, warm clothes, and other equipment. "I've always looked on Craigslist for odd jobs," he told the Globe, "So the idea to post a classified ad was just there."
Craigslist isn't the only online forum being used to solicit donations, according to the Globe. There's the International Homeless Forum, where homeless people and advocates exchange tips and advice. There are a host of sites like DonateMoney2Me.com, which allows users to design their own page and plea for help. And then there's social media sites, like Twitter and Facebook, where homeless people and service providers alike post pleas for donations.
It's no wonder that struggling individuals are having to resort to online tools to survive. Just as shelters are filling up and struggling to meet the needs of growing numbers of homeless individuals, it's getting tougher for homeless folks to ask for money on the streets. Increasing numbers of cities are outlawing panhandling in city centers. In some cities, panhandling can even land a person with a hefty fine or a prison stay. At the same time, computers are becoming more accessible to those without a home than ever before.
No matter what your take is on this new phenomenon, e-panhandling doesn't seem to be going anywhere any time soon. It's a creative utilization of available resources. It allows individuals to avoid the humiliation of begging on the streets and hide behind the anonymity of the web.
It's survival... in the digital age.
Image: lassi.kirkijavi
"Pesky Panhandlers" are People Who Need Homes
Published October 13, 2009 @ 09:44AM PT
As cities scramble to address the growing numbers of panhandlers in city centers, many cities are turning to ordinances, hefty fines, and jail time to control aggressive panhandlers. Forget these tactics - they simply don't work. The issue of aggressive panhandling must be redefined as an issue of people without homes. In other words, the best response is compassion.
It seems every city has a plan to vamp up their economic development and downtown tourism. Yet, in many cities, the issue of aggressive panhandling stands in the way towards any real progress. How will we get people to come spend money in our businesses, they ask themselves, if those pesky panhandlers keep badgering them for money?
Atlanta has been struggling with panhandling issues since Mayor Shirley Franken took office eight years ago. It all started with an ordinance banning panhandling after dark and in an area known as the "tourist triangle." The city also added teeth - on the third offense, panhandlers face a fine of up to $1,000 and 30 days in jail. To top things off, several "donation meters" were installed throughout downtown.
Yet, anecdotal evidence published in this week's Atlanta Journal indicates that these tactics have not been successful. If anything, they've been expensive to implement. Despite over 500 panhandling arrests in the past year and nearly 2,000 panhandling interventions, nearly half of those recently surveyed in Atlanta still feel that panhandling is a major problem.
So why haven't Atlanta's anti-panhandling efforts been successful? Because city officials are framing this issue completely wrong.
Panhandlers are not nuisances. They are not money-sucking leeches. First and foremost they are people who do not have a place to live. People who are not making ends meet.
Panhandling should not be a question of regulating and controlling people. The question should be, Why are these people on the streets? and How can we get them into housing?
That's one "aggressive panhandling" strategy that's certain not to fail.
Image from Moriza's public Flickr stream.
