If You Really Want To Help The Homeless

Homelessness is a people problem and a belief-system problem, not so much a money problem. Homelessness is a problem in the ideology of society, whereby people believe certain things about different classes of people. This can INCLUDE some ideas about money but money IS NOT THE SOURCE of the problem. There are a dozen other topics which link more closely to the problem of poverty than there are straight pathways between money and poverty. If I could, I'd write a whole book and fill a thousand pages with "money is not a poverty solution, money is not a poverty solution, money will not solve the problems of poverty."

Money is beside the point. Money is a resource, as are food, shelter, clothing, and human contact. (I hope you read these two short sentences a thousand times so that I don't have to write a book filled with them and only them). Money is beside the point. Money is a resource, as are food, shelter, clothing, and human contact. There, you've covered it twice now. Only 19 more readings MIGHT make this concept start to be a habit in the way you think about poverty...

It is unfortunate that in most western societies money stands above all other things as a resource needed to purchase other necessary resources like food, clothing and shelter. Not too many people use the resource of money to purchase one of our most basic human resources and needs, however, which is HUMAN CONTACT...

Luckily, if you are around a group of like-minded people or in a group considered 'absolute' then you are in a situation where (like-mindedness) your goals are the same or where your resources are the same.

Let me explain "relative" versus "absolute" poverty as best I can.

Relative Poverty: is poverty in relation to something else. It is where, for the most part, poverty can be compared with something else (wealth) and where poverty stands out in a spectrum of related topics or situations. Relative poverty is what we see in big cities all over the world and very markedly in the city where I'm at right now - Calgary, Alberta, Canada. Relative poverty is usually the kind of poverty seen in developed nations and it carries with it a certain kind of 'hurting' that is unique to relative poverty.

Absolute Poverty: is poverty in a large group that is not standing out against anything. Nothing or almost nothing is being compared here in the larger spectrum of things. Most people in the large group are experiencing around the same level of poverty and, quite frankly, it's usually a severe level of poverty. Absolute poverty is what we talk about when Westerners think of Third World poverty - just as one example. In Third World countries, tons of people are all experiencing a severe and similar level of poverty and the people immediately surrounding them are experiencing the same thing. Absolute poverty carries its own, unique 'hurting' qualities that differ significantly from relative poverty 'hurting.'

It's not that one type of poverty is worse than the other or that one type is felt more strongly than the other - but definitely, each type of poverty has DIFFERENT CHARACTERISTICS AND EFFECTS.

Sorry to blow anyone's belief system out of the water here but - ALL POVERTY IS NOT ALIKE. In fact, some poverty cannot even be alleviated with the almighty dollar, either.

For instance, with extreme absolute poverty - money is less effective...resources are usually of more use than money. (yes, I know, some of you better sit down...don't fall, now 'cos I have more "poverty truths" for you - and they're not even based on opinion - they're based on REAL RESEARCH).

With less severe and relative poverty, money often is of more use. This is partly because the effect of money might be more quickly felt by someone in less severe poverty and this money might be able to take a person right out of the 'relative' poverty situation and put him/her into the 'dominant society' (higher wealth) group. This is, of course, if the amount of money necessary to alleviate this relative poverty is small and is easily and quickly available.

Basically, in any poverty situation, only the people who can be launched forward or upward and right out of the poverty situation in a very short period of time can have their poverty alleviated by the use of money. Obviously, this won't work if a person requires a great deal of money or money for a sustained, long period of time in order to stay away from living in poverty.

IT IS A VERY TINY NUMBER OF PEOPLE from any sort of poverty situation who only require a small amount of money for a short period of time to bring them out of poverty situations.

For relative poverty situations that require quite a lot of money, money is just not very useful. For absolute poverty situations, money is almost always needed in too great an amount to be considered feasible for alleviating poverty. Again - 'money' is a poor choice as a solution here.

Anyone starting to see what I'm getting at yet?

(Yes, it's a bigger problem than money can solve, so stop assuming that money is the answer)

A lot is being done about poverty in our cities and across the globe. There are thousands of charities dedicated to alleviating homelessness and poverty.

So, why do you think all these efforts aren't causing a sizeable DENT in homeless populations?

Do you think it could be because when people act without, first, knowing theselves and the proper facts, they waste time, energy and money?

If you really, truly want to help alleviate poverty, the best way is to learn more about poverty before you start donating, volunteering, speaking out against poverty, helping with awareness campaigns about poverty.

If you really, truly want to help alleviate situations of poverty, it's also a good idea to figure out why you want to help alleviate poverty - before you start donating, volunteering, speaking out against poverty, helping with awareness campaigns concerning poverty.

What do you know so far about poverty? Do you know enough about poverty to make a good choice about charities you'd like to support? Do you know enough about poverty to volunteer? Do you know enough about poverty to answer a lot of complex questions you might be asked while engaged in an awareness campaign? Do you know enough about poverty to select a taks you'd like to perform as a volunteer? Do you know where to go to engage in campaigns to help the homeless and impoverished? Do you know enough about poverty to feel comfortable in suggesting better ways to help the impoverished? Do you have a good understanding about assertiveness versus aggressiveness? Are you an assertive person?

Do you know why you want to do something about poverty? Do you know what kind of poverty you'd like to help with? Do you know what kind of poverty you do NOT want to get involved with assisting or alleviating? Do you know your limits with conversation, patience, understanding, knowledge of the poverty topic? Do you know when to ask questions? Do you know when to ask for help with things you're having trouble with? Do you care about particular minority groups over certain others? Do you like certain age groups over others when in conversation? Do you pick up English out of foreign-language accented speech and understand people whose English is a second language? Do you feel comfortable around people with disabilities? Do you feel comfortable around people with physical, visible disabilities? Do you have experience with dealing with people who have non-visible disabilities or behavior-related difficulties? Do you like working primarily with or without supervision? Would you feel more comfortable around homeless, disabled or impoverished people with supervision and 'team' workers/volunteers?

Are you afraid that some homeless people are dangerous? Are you worried that some impoverished people have mental illnesses that make them violent? Are you prepared to help an impoverished person if they start crying while talking to you?

Are you prepared to help an impoverished person if they become agitated while talking to you? Will you know what to do to ensure your safety and theirs in a situation like this - will you know what to do to help a person calm down in a situation where they become agitated?

Are you prepared to see a homeless or impoverished person as someone who is of exactly the same worth as you are? Are you prepared to view a homeless or impoverished person as someone who deserves the same things in life as you deserve?

Are you willing to talk to an impoverished person who smells of alcohol? Are you willing to talk with an impoverished person who is smoking a cigarette? Are you willing to talk with an impoverished person who is in filthy clothing? Are you wiling to talk with an impoverished person who is in a business suit? Are you willing to treat each homeless person you see as a worthy person with as much worth as you consider you have as a person?

Now I know these seem like endless questions and some of the questions might even seem silly but these didn't come out of my own head. These are questions that arose from comments and questions people have asked me when I am doing public speaking on the topics of poverty, oppression, low income resources, addiction-recovery, etc.

When someone asks me, "What do I need to know to be of help?" one of the first questions I actually ask is: "What is your motive for helping the poor?"

Roughly about 6 out of 10 people say either "I don't know exactly" or "I just want to help." Both of these responses tell me that people have not yet thought all that much about poverty.

When someone asks me they would like me to suggest a place where they can start helping the impoverished right away, I ask, "Is this for you or for the impoverished," and often people admit they want to help the impoverished because they feel very guilty and ashamed that they have material things while many people are impoverished and without the material things they need for survival.

If you're really interested in helping...you'll try to answer many (pehaps not all) of the questions here before you actually decide upon any action for helping the homeless.

Are you sympathetic or empathetic? There's a difference.

Sympathetic people usually do not view the homeless or impoverished as being on the same level as themselves, in general. When sympathetic people help others, it is often with the viewpoint that they are above those they are helping and that the impoverished are going to be in worse trouble than before if they are not helped. Sympathetic people often feel pity for the impoverished. Some sympathetic people stay emotionally distant from those they help or intend to help and do not wish to feel other peoples' or share other peoples' discomforts.

Empathetic people usually view the homeless/impoverished as about the same as they are. Empathetic people are almost always able to 'walk beside' another person instead of 'ahead' of them. Some empathetic people 'feel' another's discomforts. Some are afraid of this, some are not, but usually, the ability to feel emotions is present with empathetic people. Most empathetic people don't pity the homeless/disadvantaged, and feel bad, instead, for the situations that are causing discomfort to the homeless/impoverished.

Now before you formulate conclusions about what I'm intending here, and before you exclaim that sympathetic or empathetic people are good or bad, let me just say that there are certain roles for helping the homeless/impoverished that are best done by people with different capacities.

I USED TO THINK that all people needed to be of the "empathetic" type in order to really help the homeless/impoverished. I USED TO THINK that people who pity, instead of walking 'beside' a homeless/impoverished person, weren't very helpful but I've found out in the last 2 years that I was totally WRONG in this assumption.

If you're sympathetic: you're better most of the time in planning, being objective, getting things done that don't require close interaction with homeless/impoverished people.

If you're empathetic: you're usually better than the other group with listening, being close-up and in front of the homeless/impoverished, and with pinpointing emotional changes in people so these can be kept at a safe level.

Sympathetic people who protect themselves by not getting close are able to focus on different aspects of helping people than are empathetic people whose emotions are wrapped up in what they're doing.

Sympathetic people often choose to help, at a distance, and often donate money to charities while empathetic people often chose to help, up close, and with work tasks and activities that require interaction with the homeless/impoverished.

Sympathetic people, in my experience, tend more to misunderstand complex variables about homelessness until they gain some experience with whatever they've choosen as an activity for helping the impoverished. Empathetic people, in my experience, tend more to become overwhelmed with the variables surrounding homelessness and poverty, and find it hard to focus in certain job tasks - until they gain a lot of experience with their choosen activity for helping the impoverished.

All kinds of people are needed for helping the homeless/impoverished and any kind of person can learn what is true or false, learn to sort the myths about poverty from the reality of poverty, but the most important thing is to understand whether you're sympathetic or empathetic about or around other people. More particularly, it's good to really understand your biases and feelings about homeless/impoverished people, whether this means you're sympathetic or empathetic - because your role in assisting people will be different.

It does little good for a sympathetic person to be placed in a role where they don't feel comfortable. It is for little benefit if an empathetic person is placed in a role where they feel they know or feel what a person is going through but are not able to interact enough to make this person aware of this 'same-ness.'

It is disaster for a person of any kind to not know exactly where they stand as sympathetic or empathetic when they are working with people who are suffering from want, need and various aspects of oppression.

Sympathetic types usually require more explanations about how to connect with marginalized people so that they can help make good decisions. Empathetic types usually require more help with disconnecting from emotions involved when working with people so that, in the end, they can make good decisions.

I thought, in the recent past, that sympathetic people were less effective in dealing with homeless and marginalized individuals but this was due to my own personal experiences with some sympathetic people who were actually abusive and controlling with their assistance. I've since learned that empathetic and sympathetic people each have different capabilities and that is that. Empathetic people can abuse people or harm people, too. It was just my bad situations that involved sympathetic people that caused my misunderstandings on these topics for a while.

Empathetic people can be abusive and harmful by not taking care of themselves, getting too close and wrapped up in other people. This is a sign of unhealthiness and unmanageability in general and not an indication that empathy is bad. If an empathetic person doesn't GROUND his or herself often and take steps for objective evaluation often enough, the very aspect that usually helps them 'walk with' people can turn into emotional strain for everyone.

If a sympathetic person doesn't take steps to do a different kind of self-checking, their assistance with people can end up being harmful. They can be harmed, too, if they believe themselves separate in worth from people and the person they're helping does not show gratitude or thankfulness when receiving assistance. This, by the way, isn't a character flaw at all in most people who have taken steps to actually help the homeless/impoverished. It's more about understanding roles and the variables that accompany homeless/impoverished lifestyles.

If a person expects gratitude and doesn't get any when they are doing things for other people, this can hurt a lot. If gratitude becomes an issue, it helps a lot for a person to go back over their role and understand that the variables present with homelessness are such that they impair the impoverished from responding well to people sometimes. It's almost never a personal thing if words of gratitude don't immediately follow the help received by volunteers and helpers. Exhaustion, discomforts, fear, nervousness and many other things can quickly and significantly impair peoples' social skills and awareness of others. A lot of homeless people are so stressed that they do not respond politely to workers, volunteers, etc, every single time they are in contact with them. That's not to say that homeless people are just impolite - it's just hard to be polite all the time - it's a social skill, not a natural and automatic response for most people.

Know yourself.

Learn what your personality is like, what your biases are. If you have biases that you don't think are a good fit for working with disadvantaged, poor people, don't put yourself in a position that is wrong for you. If you think you should change your biases or if you find out about likes or dislikes that you wish were different, work on changing these BEFORE you start working with other people.

Homeless and low income individuals are actually in need of experienced people who can help them with a variety of aspects. They did not become homeless just for one reason. They are not of a low-income classification just because one thing is wrong in their lives.

In my experience, homeless and low income people have access to some of the worst services, resources and workers on the planet.

I am going to say something a lot of people aren't going to like now:

I believe most people in North American society actually believe that low income resource workers are highly skilled and trained to work with the homeless and low income people.

YOU ARE UNINFORMED AND MISTAKEN.

A high percentage of workers I have personally spoken to or observed in their work routine are almost totally untrained in a professional capacity. Most shelter workers are people with sympathy and empathy who feel they've almost been DRAWN to this type of work out of frustration with seeing homeless people on the streets repeatedly for several years.

Many shelter workers I have personally spoken to over the past 5 years have a short training duration from one week to a month and this involves a LOT of training on issues not even related to dealing with people. The training is about paperwork, policies of the workplace, and on 'rules,' of the establishment they're working for.

In shelters with a high percentage of stressed out people who have multiple needs, there are very few certified counsellors with even a bare certification in anything. Completing the basic training details ends up being some staff members' only qualifying measure for working with emotionally traumatized homeless and low income people.

Did most of you know this?

Well, if you didn't - now you do. Perhaps if you're reading this now and you have training and certification in counselling and other services that might be helpful in dealing with homeless and low income people, you'll think about becoming one of the various workers who helps people back on track.

If you're currently already helping the homeless and impoverished, maybe you'll consider doing some extra training so that you can bring more experience and knowledge to the job and tasks you're already involved with.

 

There are diabetics in the shelters. Residents are sent out for doctor care at all shelters I am familiar with in the city I live in. I have, however, heard that in many US cities and in some cities in Ontario, doctors make rounds to shelters in other places.

There are people afflicated with mental illness in shelters. In no shelter in my city am I aware of a psychologist working in any shelter in the city. I am only aware of a few people in a city with three major shelters and a dozen minor facilities, whereby a staff member actually has some sort of certificate in the field of counselling. Many staff members at most of the shelters, however, are called 'counsellors.'

There are a TON of 'counsellors' working at the shelters in my city who cannot possibly have a large store of life experience, much less a degree or certificate in any particular field, for there are many who are under the age of 25. These staff members deal with people IN CRISIS. These staff members are dealing with people who have children who are as old as the staff members are. Now, I'm not saying that young adults are not capable workers - I'm just highlighting the fact that there are almost exclusively minimally trained workers in shelters where people require a great deal of help in order to just survive.

MY FRIEND is workiing and saving up money so he can move out of a shelter in my city. HE PAYS RENT at the shelter (but most people think all the shelters are all free housing - it's not true - 2 of the 3 major shelters have paid rooms and the bulk of their population are paying RENT - it's not free to stay in the shelters).

My same friend 'lives with' people who are active drug addicts and the staff available for him to go to for help when the addicts act out - are NOT TRAINED ENOUGH TO DEAL WITH the addicts. Almost all of the non-addicts or people in recovery are totally aware of the active addicts and have seen many snort 'dust' right inside the shared living area - and the staff are either unprepared to do anything, too inexperienced to deal with these issues, or are just not able to understand what is happening in the shelter where they work on a daily basis. This isn't a new 'phenomenon' - and it's not just the current batch of 'bad apples' staying in the shelter for the past month or two...it's been happening in the same shelter when I stayed there over 6 years ago.

There are stressed out 'shelter residents' trying to deal with mental illness behaviors of their peers at the same shelter in question...and the 'healther' residents can in no way overcompensate for the less healthy addicts and mentally ill members in their midst. The residents working on stabilizing themselves are affected on a daily basis by the ones who are incapable of getting stabilized without more help.

There are senior citizens, relapsed addicts and those with mental illness relapses in the shelters and they deserve much better living assistance than is available at the shelters. Some of the behaviors of people who really need medical care for their mental illness behaviors are affecting the stability and mental health of the others.

I hope a lot of people don't like what I say here but it needs to be said:

During many hours, moments and days, each one of the shelters in this city LOOKS LIKE A PEOPLE FARM WITH MISSING OWNERS OR CITY FARMERS.

That's right...and poverty where I'm at has become an actual 'Business' in this city.

There are a number of people in each shelter who need help to get out of the shelter and into medical facilities...

In Alberta, most people know that a couple of decades ago, a lot of mental health facilities and mental health housing facilities were shut down/closed. Now, where do you think all the people from these facilities went?

In Alberta, large businesses campaigned all through the late 80's and 90's to bring 'workers' to the BIG BOOMTOWN...that boom has ended...now where do you think all the people went when the jobs dwindled?

How long do you, as a general public, expect it would take for a strong working man of average health to recover from job loss if that man were existing in the following way:

* an average of 1/3 or less of the nutritional vitamins and minerals, fiber, etc per day than is necessary for a man

* an average of about 4h sleep per day

How long do you think it would be until the man started feeling the effects of poor nutrition and irregular sleep?

How many days in a row can YOU go on 4 hours of sleep before friends, family and co-workers start telling you that you're not your usual cheery self - perhaps you're not making decisions as quickly as usual, perhaps you're not as patient with people as you usually are, etc.?

The bottom line is that there are a ton of people in need of BETTER HELP than they're getting.

There are a ton of assumptions the public makes about the care homeless people and low income people are getting in the shelters.

I don't have a bunch of answers and solutions but I know that people out there might - if they actually understand, first, what is really going on in shelters and what the variables involved with homelessness really are.