Dire Straits

The human impact of the recession has shed light on those in the shadows: Canadians living on the street.

It's at the tail end of a recession that human impact is felt most acutely – jobs are scarce; emergency savings and credit dry up; charities are stretched to the limit; and hardship grips many Canadians. This impact reminds us that recessions are not just about GDP and stock prices – they are about human beings, many of whom are in dire straits.

The casualties of economic cycles emphasize a social issue that is often dehumanized: Canadians living on the street. Some are runaways who have fled abusive homes, some are suffering from mental illness, heartache, or addiction and some are families that just couldn't make ends meet. Every person you see dumpster-diving, sleeping in a park, lining up for food in a church basement, or forced into the sex trade has a story worth hearing.

Sadly, these people comprise the most marginalized group of citizens in Canada. They are the forgotten, the nameless, or worse, “a problem to be solved.” For every smile from a passerby, every dollar given to support a shelter, and every non-profit worker staying late to help the homeless, there are a dozen looks of disgust, a dozen complaints about wasting tax dollars, and a dozen calls for crackdowns to "clean up" the streets.

As a society, we are much more concerned about how white our teeth are than figuring out how to repair holes in the social safety net. This is not because Canadians are heartless, but because we make two false assumptions: that everything is being taken care of by someone else, and that people on the street deserve to be there.

We don't want to see the holes in the safety net because this would mean that we would have to give something up to mend them. However, social justice is not free.

We don't want to hear stories that end with people on the street because they would melt our hearts and force us to abandon the stereotypes that define these people as lazy screw-ups who don't want to work. But put yourself in the shoes of someone on the street and you will see things very differently.

This does not mean that everyone on the street is an angel in disguise who just needs a chance. This kind of idealism won’t get us far because the reality is far more complicated. You can't reverse the effects of abuse, mental illness, addiction, low self-esteem and poverty with a sandwich, a hug, or a job sweeping up out back.

So what can we do?

The many people and organizations dedicated to those who find themselves on the street have learned a great deal over the years about what works and what doesn't.

In addition to dumping the two false beliefs noted above, four approaches are emerging as promising social practices.

The first is harm reduction, which attempts to reduce self-harm activities without requiring the cessation of that activity. Common examples of harm reduction include needle exchange programs, medical prescriptions for heroin, and methadone treatment.

The second is called “Housing First,” an approach that focuses on providing stable housing as a prerequisite to assisting individuals who live on the streets. “Housing First” programs move individuals into stable and healthy housing directly from the streets or shelters. The newly housed resident is then offered a range of services such as those for mental health, income support, or addictions.

The third is community justice. Rather than simply sending an offender to jail, this approach demands that both legal counsel and judges examine the circumstances underlying a specific crime, how these underlying causes might be addressed, how reparation can be made to the victim and community, and how a reintegration of the offender into the community can be successfully achieved.

The fourth approach is community ownership. This is more than the practice of consulting the community and including a broad range of professionals, service providers, businesses, and government representatives in planning solutions to social challenges. Rather, it reflects the fact that community participation requires a commitment to putting clients at the centre of planning, prioritizing their full participation in decision-making, and supporting their ability to make choices in their own lives.

These approaches are not pie-in-the-sky ideals – they are difficult to execute and their effects will not be immediate. But above all, they require the recognition of people on the streets as citizens, rather than seeing them as problems or pretending they don't exist.