[jimbomaybe]

Originally Posted by ThirdOfFive

Bingo!

In Minnesota (with similar occurrences in most other states) the push began in the early 70's with a court case, Welsch v. Noot; Patty Welsch being a young disabled woman and Noot being the Minnesota Commissioner of Public Welfare. The gist of the case was that A) persons with mental and physical handicaps deserved to receive habilitative services; and B) that such people deserved to live in the least restrictive setting possible for their needs. Hard to argue with that, but as the years went by and people were moved from the large institutions ("State hospitals" in Minnesota; "Colonies" in neighboring Wisconsin) those large edifices, many approaching a century old, no longer had any use and were gradually consolidated and closed. The irony was that persons over 18 who were NOT under State or private guardianship or in the custody of corrections had the right to live where they pleased. Also, it was recognized somewhat vaguely that such people had the right to be mentally ill and as such, if they chose NOT to take their meds, it was completely up to them.

The result was inevitable. When it was recognized that some of these people could NOT be helped other than in an institution, the institutions either no longer existed or had been transformed into prisons. In Minnesota, particularly in the Minneapolis - St. Paul metro and first-ring suburbs, dozens of homeless encampments sprouted, mainly in the public parks but one in particular that caught everyone's eye was one on a hillside close to the St. Paul Cathedral. I saw it last about two years ago. It was huge; tents, chairs, people lying on the grass, people urinating (and assumedly defecating) in the open, etc. The Minnesota-based Wilder Foundation, back in 2018, stated that "An estimated 19,600 Minnesotans experienced homelessness on any given night in 2018. 50,600 people experienced homelessness over the course of the year." That was four years ago, and as I understand it, for a variety of reasons, the estimates are far beyond that today. Remember--this is Minnesota, where living outdoors might easily mean snow for six months of the year and temperatures on the coldest nights reaching -30 f. or even lower.

The impact on the communities has been far from just financial. Before our retirement my wife worked in downtown Minneapolis, riding the bus there from a suburban park-and-ride, and what she saw sometimes were beyond shocking. The homeless would come into the city from the parks and basically take over the bus stops particularly in the winter. My wife witnessed people doing their business completely in the open. There've been numerous instances of public masturbation and people having sex, again in the open. Panhandlers have gone from asking for money with a sad song-and-dance spiel to actively and aggressively demanding money from passers-by. There've been assaults, by homeless against one another and against passers-by. Drug use is rampant. Inner-city Minneapolis is going from a bustling city to, more and more, a deserted place as people who work there either find other jobs or take advantage of working from home. I know less about the situation in St. Paul, but last I heard things are pretty much paralleling Minneapolis over there. One particularly noisome and obnoxious practice over there is the homeless using the skywalks as toilets as well as sheltering in them at night. Though I cannot remember the particulars I recall an action over there that opposed closing the skywalks at the end of the business day because the homeless would be inconvenienced.

Yes. Our short-sighted policies created this monster (or actually "monsters" because most large cities probably have similar stories to tell). And yes. I have sympathy for these people. But how it is being handled, in all too many cases with kid gloves, is NOT working. If there is a growing homeless problem here in TV, then I will make it a point to crusade for the authorities to clean it up posthaste. I have seen firsthand what it can mushroom into. And I don't want to be anywhere near it.

The “homeless” lead miserable lives, there was a time when they would be institutionalized. They would have their freedom of movement taken away. Behavioral science could not and has not been able to have much success in helping them, they were required to take whatever drugs that were available to moderate their behavior. This was an unpopular situation for them, the ACLU came to the rescue, unless they were demonstrated to be a clear and present danger to themselves or others they could not be held against their will. The “homeless” preferred the freedom of the street where their behavior was not subject to any constraints other than whatever motivated them at any one time, they could take what drugs they wanted and could obtain. For the most part they are harmless but not necessarily so, how to predict the actions of individuals so unstable? Are they sane? Sometimes yes sometimes no, debatable definition, most ride the line and not sober if given any option. They are “homeless” because they have burnt out any family or friends network support, for the same reasons shelters are just a stop gap solution.