Day one of the APA's "59th Institute On Psychiatric Services" conference has been completed
and what great lectures and events were to be had at every turn. Will and I started the day together listening to a wonderful panel discussion on "Recovery in a Community Setting- The Philadelphia Model", but split up afterwards to attend a dizzying array of lectures, symposiums and workshops. We finally exited out of the Marriot around 6pm, then spent a little time wandering the French Quarter again to take in the increasingly weirder sites and sounds as the weekend neared.
We will be spending this morning back at the conference hall but will leave at noon to head over to what NAMI New Orleans describes as "the mental health facility most in need of help right now," the West Bank Friendship Club, to assist them in some of their renovation efforts. Not exactly sure what that means at this point, but I have the feeling it may mean helping rip out old carpet and work on their kitchen facilities a bit. Ought to be a very interesting experience, indeed.
After that, Will and I will take off in the rental car and do the self guided tour of the disaster area. Not sure what that will bring us, but we've simply got to head into the devastation areas in order to fully grasp what happened here and how it is that we might be able to help others when future disasters occur. Having lived for so many years in California, and having spent another significant number of years on an ambulance, I have a pretty good grasp of the impact of disaster on my fellow human. I also devoted most of my elective coursework in the health admin portion of my graduate work toward disaster planning and preparedness, so there is a sense of duty and need to see what actually transpired here, and lets be honest; a sense of morbid curiosity's as well. Who wouldn't want to see the remnants of what may well be considered the worst disaster ever in the US, at least in terms of government response? And who knows what might come out of a trip through the city's most hard-hit areas?
RE the piece below, there was something that bothered me about the LA "Sidewalk Sleeper" victory yesterday but I never did put my finger on it. As I read the following article, it finally crystalized. Don't misunderstand me here; I'm extremely pleased that advocates were able to push through such a huge victory for the Homeless, but frankly, all that effort in reaching an agreement to ensure the maintenance of the "status quo" for the Homeless seemed....well, wasted. A real victory for LA's homeless might include converting old hotels into drop-in centers for the Homeless, where rules and regs were limited and restrictions few, other than the standard "no drugs, no weapons, no parties in the room" kind of thing. This is of course a dreamscene here and there would undoubtedly be much more planning involved, but the notion that a victory was had that continues with the current miserable conditions for the Homeless seems a hollow victory, at best.....
Settling on the homeless status quo?
An agreement to allow sleeping on the sidewalk during certain hours is good, but the city should commit to housing them, too.
October 12, 2007
It is natural to want to put the most positive spin possible on this week's homeless settlement, which allows people to spend their nights on public sidewalks almost anywhere in the city of Los Angeles without being rousted by police. Frustrated advocates, policymakers and observers grasp at any hint of forward momentum after years of official ping-ponging between approaches to the problem. Treat the homeless with dignity and let them get help at their own pace -- by allowing them to camp out near food service businesses and residences? Crack down on crime -- by sweeping the streets and compelling the mentally ill, the drug-addicted and the destitute to move to some other part of town?
So there is some appeal to the agreement, under which the Los Angeles Police Department agrees to stop enforcing, from 9 p.m. to 6 a.m., the city law against sleeping on sidewalks. All bets are off once the city opens 1,250 units of permanent supportive housing -- units that put roofs over the heads of a few of the city's most desperate people while providing the drug treatment, mental health services and job counseling meant to keep them from drifting back to the street. Unlike earlier settlement proposals, it avoids unfairly placing the responsibility for putting up the homeless on the eastern part of downtown that has become known as skid row.
Still, the settlement carries a very distinct whiff of status quo. An agreement that puts an end to legal wrangling is fine, as far as it goes. But there is little here that actually moves the city toward getting homeless people housed.
The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals struck down the city's policing of the homeless in the first place because it is both cruel and preposterous to arrest someone for sleeping outside when that person has nowhere else to sleep. The settlement provides no deadline for completing those 1,250 units, and city officials have the option of simply accepting the long-term non-enforcement of the sidewalk ban if supportive housing falls off the city's priority list.
It's not part of the agreement, but City Council President Eric Garcetti stuck his neck out and said those units will be completed within three years. That's an important commitment because it keeps the city on track toward housing its homeless as a long-term solution.
Los Angeles cannot tolerate hundreds and thousands of people living on its streets -- for the welfare of the homeless and that of the rest of the city.
