Homelessness - Is it really a "Life Choice"?

[Dutto]

I attended a local Council Meeting last night and asked what my Local Council was doing about the people who were homeless in our area. I asked the question after the local Salvation Army refuge manager had told me that we had up to 5o people in our small town who were homeless.

The response from the members at the meeting was both disturbing and hopeful.

The person asked to answer my question was a local Police Representative who assured me that in most cases sleeping rough was a "life choice" and that most of the people sleeping rough were refusing to accept the help of the local services. He proudly announced that he had arrested one of these people just a few days earlier.

I found his response disturbing because A) He seemed to think that all people who were homeless slept rough. and B) They chose to sleep rough for their own reasons. I was disturbed because I had never thought that homelessness was seen as a criminal offence in modern times.

One of the Councillors then pointed out that homelessness did not always mean that the person was sleeping out on the street, He brought up the situation of "sofa surfing" where homeless people had to live with family and friends and sleep on their sofas to avoid sleeping on the streets. He also pointed out that in our small town the waiting list for council accommodation is standing at 5,000 people.

I found his response to be quite hopeful and recognised that, for many people, the situation of being homeless was very far from being a "life choice".

Today I did a bit more research and discovered that the Vagrancy Act 1824, from which the Policeman's powers of arrest was originally taken, was enacted by George IV's parliament after the end of the Napoleonic Wars. The ending of the war had resulted in thousands of men being demobilised from the Army and the Navy with no jobs and no homes to go to. To give an illustration of these times, in the same year, the offences of Forgery, Horse Stealing and Sheep Stealing were all offences that warranted the Death Sentence.

I honestly thought that we had moved on from those times but apparently the law is still as stated in 1894 by the French novelist Anatole France when he noted:

"The Law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges."

I couldn't have said it better myself, so 'Is homelessness a 'Life Choice' in today's UK society?

 

[Chippy_Tea]

The person asked to answer my question was a local Police Representative who assured me that in most cases sleeping rough was a "life choice" and that most of the people sleeping rough were refusing to accept the help of the local services. He proudly announced that he had arrested one of these people just a few days earlier.

I think he is talking out of his **** why would anyone turn down help from the local services and choose to sleep on the street in the middle of winter.

 

[AdeDunn]

The 2 reason people turn down help are usually 1) Mental health issues - Hard to accept help when you think they're out to get you, and 2) Knowledge of how dangerous etc hostels often are. Nobody chooses to be mentally ill, which many homeless people are!

Back when I was a Staff nurse on an acute mental health ward, we weren't allowed to discharge to the street (many of our patients came from there though), so would go to great lengths, along with other services, to find homes for patients ready to re-enter the world. All to often it'd come crashing down though when their mental illness came a knocking once more, and they'd end up back on the streets. All for the simple lack of housing units geared up for housing people with complex mental health needs. Those that do exist are usually funded by charities, with very limited space.

Then there are the victims of things like benefit caps etc, who just can't afford their rent any more. Then once you're on the street, you have to have an address to claim any benefits... Vicious circle.

Is it a life choice? Maybe for about 1 in every 1,000,000 or so..... The traditional "tramps", who just like living out in the open world. Even they end up victims though when the police take away their tents, bedding etc, leaving them with just the clothes on their backs. Maybe that policeman thought that, just as an example, young people running away from abuse should have stayed and lived with the abuse? Or maybe he thinks they should chose no life at all instead of making HIS town look untidy....

 

[Chippy_Tea]

Knowledge of how dangerous etc hostels often are.

I may be a little naive when it comes to this subject but would have thought you would be safer in a hostel especially if you had mental issues..

 

[AdeDunn]

I may be a little naive when it comes to this subject but would have thought you would be safer in a hostel especially if you had mental issues..

You would, if all of the other "guests" in there were nice, law abiding, people who didn't also have mental health issues. I actually spent time talking about hostels with a few younger patients back in the day, the picture they painted was on of thefts and beatings as a normal occurrence in them! One young person chose to land himself in our forensic unit rather than risk been in a hostel again, which given the high risk of rape in these units says a lot about how bad hostels must be....

 

[BeerCat]

They want to criminalise it because it embarrassed them. There is a large amount of homeless veterans in the USA and apparently here too and i don't think they signed up to end up homeless. I see a large amount of people in the city obviously sleeping rough and more and more younger people. Clearly not right in 2018.

 

[Saisonator]

I think some mentally ill people make the unenviable choice to be around people and even have some camaraderie of fellow homeless than sat in a grubby little room looking at the wall, even though it must be cold uncomfortable and dangerous.
Imagine if someone has terrible things going through their mind, sat in a room alone would probably be unbearable.

 

[terrym]

Local Authorities have a basic legal duty of care to house homeless people. They might wish to avoid it if possible, but it is there. However there are some instances where they are under no obligation to find accommodation, like when someone has made themselves intentionally homeless. There are agencies out there, like Shelter, who provide free advice for homeless people and will negotiate or liaise with the local council to find accommodation for them. I know this because someone I know very well worked for a homeless charity.
Although I have no evidence, but based on the fact that there is help out there for those who seek it, I suspect that they are those who do live on the streets as a life choice.

 

[simon12]

I have volunteered at a winter only night shelter for about 7 years and for the last year cooked most weeks at the day time drop in centre run all year by the same charity, what I am saying from here is based on the impression I get and may not be 100% accurate. The council does have a duty to house everyone buy they have to prove a connection to that area and unless they count as vulnerable this duty in practice means they get put on a list they may never get to the top of. The only time they have to house everyone (even if they deem them to be intentionally homeless) is if they would be on the streets and the forecast is to drop below freezing for the next 3 nights. This is the main maybe only reason the council let the shelter run as any talk of permanent shelters no council round here will admit theres a need for it. The people we get staying varies hugely as does the reason they became homeless but the main reason they are homeless for more than a month is the cap they will pay in benefits is below anything you can find privately even if they had the deposit, so without finding a job and getting a good few pay cheques while homeless they will only be housed when a housing association has a place. Many of them are not mentally ill but seem below average in intelligence so can deal with all the organisations they need to to get anywhere, which is one thing they help with at the drop in.
Back to the point I don't think any one ever staying at the night shelter was homeless as a life choice, the nearest is a guy who recently left as he didn't want to deal with the rules. I did know a guy who was homeless by choice when I was a teenager, he was alcohol dependant but worked full time building conservatories and frequently carried thousands of pounds round as he didn't trust banks. Don't really know his history but he was ex military and I guess couldn't adjust to a normal life.

 

[Thumper]

Speaking as someone who works within the drug and alcohol treatment industry, which for obvious reasons has a rather strong crossover with the homelessness charity sector, I really have to wonder exactly what sort of morons your local police force are hiring.

 

[Leon103]

@Dutto did the police representative say he arrested the person for being homeless? your post didn't mention that.

from what I have heard and seen on the documentaries is that for some it is a life style choice. safety in numbers on the street and don' being able to follow rules/normality of life often being stated as the reasons

 

[Gunge]

I can't understand why the homeless don't acquire a tent to sleep in. Gotta be better than a park bench or shop doorway.

 

[Dutto]

@Dutto did the police representative say he arrested the person for being homeless? your post didn't mention that.

........

From memory, bis actual description was that he had arrested "... one of the people who sleep outside the HSBC bank."

I've done a bit of research over today and I pray to God that I am never homeless! (*) I was fully aware of the Vagrancy Act of 1824 but I actually thought that in this day and age the local council had to provide the homeless with at least a roof over their head. Then I read the attached link and realised a homeless person can have more hurdles to jump than a Grand National Horse!

This paragraph brought back to me the memory that the Police Representative had also pointed out that a number of "these people" had been convicted of unsocial behaviour and ....

"Even if a person is unintentionally homeless and of priority need, the local authority has a discretion to refuse to re-house them if they or a member of their household have been guilty of 'unacceptable behaviour'. "

So even if they jump over all of the hurdles, the decision whether to provide accommodation or not is dependent on not only their own previous behaviour, but on the behaviour of a member of their household!

https://www.compactlaw.co.uk/free-legal-information/public-housing/homeless-people.html

I actually did the "Emergency Housing Rights Checker" on the Shelter Page linked below and fed in the details of what happened to me as a young man.(*) The result was:

"From the answers you have given, it sounds like you're probably not in priority need. If the council decides that this is the case, it still has to give you help and advice about finding a place to live.

However, the council does not have a legal duty to house you. In theory, it is allowed to do so, but the council is very unlikely to offer you anything unless you live in an area where there is a lot of housing available."

All I know is that an "area where there is a lot of housing available" is nowhere near here!

http://england.shelter.org.uk/get_advice/downloads_and_tools/emergency_housing_rights_checker

Thanks for your input. I think I will keep looking into this situation locally.


(*)

I was living with my parents at the time and just back from a month away from home on a work related course.

I swanned into the house and received a very frosty reception from my Mum who said "Don't bother unpacking, I want award with you." I lowered by suitcase to the floor as Mum continued "I had a visit from your girlfriend last week and she reckons that you haven't written to her or been to see her for over a month now." I nodded.

"She told me that before she met you she was a virgin and she isn't one now." Mum continued. I swallowed hard and the nod became a bit less noticeable.

"Did you really promise to marry her?" by this time the nodding had stopped but I did emit a very small squeak of agreement; and two seconds later I was homeless and on the street with my suitcase.

I spent the weekend in the Salvation Army Seaman's Hostel in Hull before getting digs in a town about 20 miles away from here. Luckily for me, Mum forgave me after a few months; and so did the ex-girlfriend eventually.

 

[Chippy_Tea]

I can't understand why the homeless don't acquire a tent to sleep in. Gotta be better than a park bench or shop doorway.

It's not easy to get the tent pegs into the ground outside the shops.:wink:

 

[Leon103]

I believe this comes into force in England soon


http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2017/13/contents/enacted

 

[Thumper]

I can't understand why the homeless don't acquire a tent to sleep in. Gotta be better than a park bench or shop doorway.

Difficult to carry about, and a lot of cities have laws against erecting tents. Stoke on Trent recently I produced a 100 quid on the spot fine (increased to £1000 and a court appearence if they can't pay) for erecting tents or semi-permanent structures within the city, and at the same time cut funding to all non-statutory homelessness provisions.

In other words, they shut all the shelters and said they'd fine people for trying to keep the rain off.

 

[jceg316]

He proudly announced that he had arrested one of these people just a few days earlier.

This reminds me of a scene in the second Naked Gun film, where Frank Drebin is being awarded for killing his 600th drug dealer. He stands up and says "the last 3 I backed down with my car. Luckily they turned out to be drug dealers." The parodies are never too far from the truth.

 

[Gunge]

Difficult to carry about, and a lot of cities have laws against erecting tents. Stoke on Trent recently I produced a 100 quid on the spot fine (increased to £1000 and a court appearence if they can't pay) for erecting tents or semi-permanent structures within the city, and at the same time cut funding to all non-statutory homelessness provisions.

In other words, they shut all the shelters and said they'd fine people for trying to keep the rain off.

Fair enough... it was a serious question as I thought that even a tent would be preferable to shop doorways, park benches and the horrors of hostels etc, but evidently not.

 

[Dutto]

I believe this comes into force in England soon


http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2017/13/contents/enacted

Thanks for that heads-up. I will give it a good read later today.

We used to call people "mealy mouthed" when they hedged their bets and made semi-sincere offers; and this looks like mealy mouthed legislation.

I've already clocked that the phrase "The authority must take reasonable steps to help the applicant to secure that accommodation does not cease to be available for the applicant’s occupation." If our politicians had written the The Ten Commandments, Moses would have required a lot more tablets of stone and the 6th Commandment would have read something like "Thou shalt take reasonable steps not to commit murder." (See Tablet 23 for what will be deemed "murder" and "reasonable".)

Fair enough... it was a serious question as I thought that even a tent would be preferable to shop doorways, park benches and the horrors of hostels etc, but evidently not.

They are a lot warmer and much more secure. However, they are also illegal and the Police can confiscate them without reimbursing the owner. Apparently, the Police aren't committing theft 'cos they are allowed to do it under the existing legislation. Check out ...

https://www.vice.com/en_uk/article/...-cops-are-confiscating-homeless-peoples-tents

We still have legislation with an 1824 mentality even though it has been amended!

Also, check this out for what some of the Councillors that were voted into power think of your idea.

https://www.theguardian.com/society...ses-1000-fines-for-homeless-sleeping-in-tents

I have to wonder at the mentality of a Councillor who actually thinks that a homeless person living in a tent has £1,000 spare to pay a fine. The mind boggles!

Surely things have to change!

 

[Thumper]

Fair enough... it was a serious question as I thought that even a tent would be preferable to shop doorways, park benches and the horrors of hostels etc, but evidently not.

I assumed it was serious; I hope I didn't imply otherwise.

But yes. There's little point carrying something big, heavy, expensive, and bulky around that you can't put up without being fined and having it confiscated.

They also tend to be brightly coloured and difficult to hide. People tend to forget how dangerous it is to be homeless. I met a homeless bloke in Reading as a teenager- had a chat with him and his mate and gave them both a rollup. One of them had a face swollen up like a balloon and the colour of a stormcloud, and was having trouble speaking. It turned out two security guards had found him asleep in a multistorey. They kicked the crap out of him before throwing him out. One of them kicked him so hard in the face they'd pushed his teeth in, and he couldn't eat from that side of his mouth.

Anything that draws attention and makes you a target is a bad idea.