Homeless person sleeping in my front door vestibule

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just sleeping? I’d let him sleep there tonight, then put a bunch of stuff in the vestibule so he can’t stay tomorrow night. Hand him $20 and say “sorry man, you can’t sleep here.”

I was thinking I would put together a bag of food to hand him while the police were there...

That would have been nice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is exactly the problem. The people that run homeless shelters should help you not cops.

Yes,yes, YES!!!
If the non emergency line could instead send a social worker to bring him somewhere safe, he wouldn't relocate to another vestibule, or street resulting in him getting injured or sick.

You weren't wrong OP. I get your choice. But the system needs a better solution.

All of these people have been approached by a social worker at some time or have been referred to somewhere safe to sleep, even by the police. They are sleeping on the street because they don't prefer shelters for a variety of reasons.

The solution would be institutions for in-patient mental health/substance abuse treatment, but it would take a lot more than just a visit from a social worker to get them there.

- MSW

sad that an MSW apparently has no knowledge of the Housing First model?

The housing first model has limitations...as evidenced by this scenario.

DC embraced housing first, yet we still have people on the street. LA, Seattle, SF, NYC all embraced housing first before dc...it’s not a silver bullet.

People have rights; nobody can be forced inside.

The best approach is holistic prevention. Hindsight being 20/20, housing first should not have focused exclusively on backend housing without investing in upstream prevention. It’s really hard to persuade some people to come inside and take advantage of help after years on the street.

Given the resistance to help, specialty courts run hand in hand with community based providers are effective. Of course, you need to invest in housing, treatment and services. But the court plays a pivotal role in engagement, compliance and success.

I still don’t think you understand. Housing First is giving someone a home, not “help.” And there is still a shortage. And what’s with the nonsequitur on courts?

Um, I actually have written about and presented at National and international conferences on the topic. I’ve literally dedicated my career to homeless prevention and advocacy...which is how I know the limitations of Housing First.

Specialty treatment courts are an effective tool when properly resourced and implemented as they are equipped to coax people into housing and treatment.

DC implemented a housing first approach yet they struggle to persuade many people to participate even when offered a key to their own apartment. What then? A treatment court (mental health/behavioral health) is an effective tool to get reluctant participants inside and on meds. The data supports this.

Bottom line: there’s no easy solution...including Housing First. Just ask LA, SF, NYC, Seattle, etc. They were the innovators, early adopters, and biggest investors in HF yet...

why do you keep on mentioning courts? do you propose we sweep up homeless people and send them to jail for being homeless? it’s not illegal to be homeless, mentally ill, or drug addicted. I suggest you talk to more people at these conferences.

Have you done homeless street outreach?

As a lawyer, I understand that you cannot arrest people for being homeless. Similarly, you cannot force people into treatment and housing without the courts.

Mentally ill addicts who have been on the streets for years are highly vulnerable. Do you think the moral thing to do is leave them alone on the street to die? I do not. I think coordinated engagement is key.

Similarly, I understand that some (not all, but many) mentally ill addicts on the street come into contact with police when they steal, break into homes/cars/businesses, urinate in public and walk around half naked, act out violently, etc. I do not believe they should simply be churned through the criminal justice system. There’s a better way: it’s called a mental health court (sometimes called a behavioral health court). The goal is to stabilize the mentally ill addict and connect them to housing and case management with a social worker, psychiatrist, etc. Jail isn’t the goal. Judges are specially trained and the courtroom includes a comprehensive team of community based providers. Success means the person is housed (often their own apartment, sometimes a group home/safe haven), has the support of a team to sustain treatment and care, and ultimately no return to homelessness. Again: jail isn’t the goal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is exactly the problem. The people that run homeless shelters should help you not cops.

Yes,yes, YES!!!
If the non emergency line could instead send a social worker to bring him somewhere safe, he wouldn't relocate to another vestibule, or street resulting in him getting injured or sick.

You weren't wrong OP. I get your choice. But the system needs a better solution.

All of these people have been approached by a social worker at some time or have been referred to somewhere safe to sleep, even by the police. They are sleeping on the street because they don't prefer shelters for a variety of reasons.

The solution would be institutions for in-patient mental health/substance abuse treatment, but it would take a lot more than just a visit from a social worker to get them there.

- MSW

sad that an MSW apparently has no knowledge of the Housing First model?

The housing first model has limitations...as evidenced by this scenario.

DC embraced housing first, yet we still have people on the street. LA, Seattle, SF, NYC all embraced housing first before dc...it’s not a silver bullet.

People have rights; nobody can be forced inside.

The best approach is holistic prevention. Hindsight being 20/20, housing first should not have focused exclusively on backend housing without investing in upstream prevention. It’s really hard to persuade some people to come inside and take advantage of help after years on the street.

Given the resistance to help, specialty courts run hand in hand with community based providers are effective. Of course, you need to invest in housing, treatment and services. But the court plays a pivotal role in engagement, compliance and success.

I still don’t think you understand. Housing First is giving someone a home, not “help.” And there is still a shortage. And what’s with the nonsequitur on courts?

Um, I actually have written about and presented at National and international conferences on the topic. I’ve literally dedicated my career to homeless prevention and advocacy...which is how I know the limitations of Housing First.

Specialty treatment courts are an effective tool when properly resourced and implemented as they are equipped to coax people into housing and treatment.

DC implemented a housing first approach yet they struggle to persuade many people to participate even when offered a key to their own apartment. What then? A treatment court (mental health/behavioral health) is an effective tool to get reluctant participants inside and on meds. The data supports this.

Bottom line: there’s no easy solution...including Housing First. Just ask LA, SF, NYC, Seattle, etc. They were the innovators, early adopters, and biggest investors in HF yet...

why do you keep on mentioning courts? do you propose we sweep up homeless people and send them to jail for being homeless? it’s not illegal to be homeless, mentally ill, or drug addicted. I suggest you talk to more people at these conferences.

Have you done homeless street outreach?

As a lawyer, I understand that you cannot arrest people for being homeless. Similarly, you cannot force people into treatment and housing without the courts.

Mentally ill addicts who have been on the streets for years are highly vulnerable. Do you think the moral thing to do is leave them alone on the street to die? I do not. I think coordinated engagement is key.

Similarly, I understand that some (not all, but many) mentally ill addicts on the street come into contact with police when they steal, break into homes/cars/businesses, urinate in public and walk around half naked, act out violently, etc. I do not believe they should simply be churned through the criminal justice system. There’s a better way: it’s called a mental health court (sometimes called a behavioral health court). The goal is to stabilize the mentally ill addict and connect them to housing and case management with a social worker, psychiatrist, etc. Jail isn’t the goal. Judges are specially trained and the courtroom includes a comprehensive team of community based providers. Success means the person is housed (often their own apartment, sometimes a group home/safe haven), has the support of a team to sustain treatment and care, and ultimately no return to homelessness. Again: jail isn’t the goal.

how do you propose to constitutionally force people into long-term treatment for minor crimes when they aren’t a danger to themselves or others? did you skip con law? “mental health court” is for involuntary committment, not to force the chronically homeless into shelters.

what actually does work is keeping this all out of the penal system and implementing a housing first model.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did you have a basement you could have offered him for the night? Maybe given him food and water and packed up some meals for him for the week? We are all in this together. Those of us that are more privileged (yes, that’s anyone with a roof to sleep under) have the moral responsibility to help those around us.

Guest or spare bedroom would be kinder. Maybe set him up with you toiletry items and offer use of a shower and laundry facilities. Also might be nice to fix a few hot meals and offer him some cash and or gift cards. Does he need a ride anywhere? Ofer to drive him or allow use of your personal car but only if he has a DL. Maybe you could go together to go grocery shopping and/or clothing shopping.

This is a joke, right?

Jeez, I hope so. Otherwise we're going to be reading about OP in WaPo and it won't be a heartwarming feel-good story, either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is exactly the problem. The people that run homeless shelters should help you not cops.

Yes,yes, YES!!!
If the non emergency line could instead send a social worker to bring him somewhere safe, he wouldn't relocate to another vestibule, or street resulting in him getting injured or sick.

You weren't wrong OP. I get your choice. But the system needs a better solution.

All of these people have been approached by a social worker at some time or have been referred to somewhere safe to sleep, even by the police. They are sleeping on the street because they don't prefer shelters for a variety of reasons.

The solution would be institutions for in-patient mental health/substance abuse treatment, but it would take a lot more than just a visit from a social worker to get them there.

- MSW

sad that an MSW apparently has no knowledge of the Housing First model?

The housing first model has limitations...as evidenced by this scenario.

DC embraced housing first, yet we still have people on the street. LA, Seattle, SF, NYC all embraced housing first before dc...it’s not a silver bullet.

People have rights; nobody can be forced inside.

The best approach is holistic prevention. Hindsight being 20/20, housing first should not have focused exclusively on backend housing without investing in upstream prevention. It’s really hard to persuade some people to come inside and take advantage of help after years on the street.

Given the resistance to help, specialty courts run hand in hand with community based providers are effective. Of course, you need to invest in housing, treatment and services. But the court plays a pivotal role in engagement, compliance and success.

I still don’t think you understand. Housing First is giving someone a home, not “help.” And there is still a shortage. And what’s with the nonsequitur on courts?

Um, I actually have written about and presented at National and international conferences on the topic. I’ve literally dedicated my career to homeless prevention and advocacy...which is how I know the limitations of Housing First.

Specialty treatment courts are an effective tool when properly resourced and implemented as they are equipped to coax people into housing and treatment.

DC implemented a housing first approach yet they struggle to persuade many people to participate even when offered a key to their own apartment. What then? A treatment court (mental health/behavioral health) is an effective tool to get reluctant participants inside and on meds. The data supports this.

Bottom line: there’s no easy solution...including Housing First. Just ask LA, SF, NYC, Seattle, etc. They were the innovators, early adopters, and biggest investors in HF yet...

why do you keep on mentioning courts? do you propose we sweep up homeless people and send them to jail for being homeless? it’s not illegal to be homeless, mentally ill, or drug addicted. I suggest you talk to more people at these conferences.

Have you done homeless street outreach?

As a lawyer, I understand that you cannot arrest people for being homeless. Similarly, you cannot force people into treatment and housing without the courts.

Mentally ill addicts who have been on the streets for years are highly vulnerable. Do you think the moral thing to do is leave them alone on the street to die? I do not. I think coordinated engagement is key.

Similarly, I understand that some (not all, but many) mentally ill addicts on the street come into contact with police when they steal, break into homes/cars/businesses, urinate in public and walk around half naked, act out violently, etc. I do not believe they should simply be churned through the criminal justice system. There’s a better way: it’s called a mental health court (sometimes called a behavioral health court). The goal is to stabilize the mentally ill addict and connect them to housing and case management with a social worker, psychiatrist, etc. Jail isn’t the goal. Judges are specially trained and the courtroom includes a comprehensive team of community based providers. Success means the person is housed (often their own apartment, sometimes a group home/safe haven), has the support of a team to sustain treatment and care, and ultimately no return to homelessness. Again: jail isn’t the goal.

how do you propose to constitutionally force people into long-term treatment for minor crimes when they aren’t a danger to themselves or others? did you skip con law? “mental health court” is for involuntary committment, not to force the chronically homeless into shelters.

what actually does work is keeping this all out of the penal system and implementing a housing first model.

Housing First works for some. But the carrot of HF doesn’t work when mentally ill people refuse to participate.

Google what is happening in LA, SF, and Seattle. They were early adopters of HF. They’ve invested heavily in HF. Yet, they have thousands of “service resistant” people suffering on the streets. Is that humane?

Nobody is proposing locking these people up or even sending them to mental health facilities (which BTW don’t really exist in the way you envision from watching movies). Rather, I’m highlighting how treatment courts have documented success in stabilizing mentally ill people and helping them sustain stable housing independently with community based support services.

You could educate yourself on the best practice. Or you can simply criticize me personally as being clueless or cruel. (I’m not bothered by your silly criticism. Decades on the frontlines fighting for systemic change helped me develop a thick skin.)

To be clear: I’m not against HF. It’s a great philosophy that prompted a sea change in homeless services. But it’s not a silver bullet. Nearly two decades later, we need to evaluate its shortcomings...starting with the need for holistic upstream intervention focused on prevention as well as the continued need for other housing options and services.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone remember the homeless man who stabbed the jogger near 14th and P?

Also recently a homeless man killed someone and stabbed another near foggy bottom.

I have been robbed by them.


All are not violent, but many are and most have mental health issues.

I guess everyone here is too young to remember the Laura Houghteling case. Not all homeless are sweet And harmless vagrants. The Houghtelings went out of their way to help the guy but he was mentally ill and their thanks was to bury their 23 year old daughter. The narrative that cops are more dangerous than random homeless people is insane.

This the first thing that crossed my mind when I read OP's post. As the PP says the family went way out of their way to help the man who later killed their daughter. Her killer was a homeless paranoid schizophrenic who now also is/was suspected in the death of another child. It was truly a story of good people trying to do the right thing and they paid the ultimate price in the horrific murder of their daughter. Very sad.

OP, you did the right thing by calling the nonemergency line and eliciting their help in getting the homeless man to leave their property. Perhaps you also want to get one of those camera doorbells so that you can always see who is in front of your door? Your family's safety comes first.

OP here - we have a ring doorbell! That’s how we found out he was there.

Ah, good! Always use it. Hopefully this is a one-off and you never see the guy again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is exactly the problem. The people that run homeless shelters should help you not cops.

Yes,yes, YES!!!
If the non emergency line could instead send a social worker to bring him somewhere safe, he wouldn't relocate to another vestibule, or street resulting in him getting injured or sick.

You weren't wrong OP. I get your choice. But the system needs a better solution.

All of these people have been approached by a social worker at some time or have been referred to somewhere safe to sleep, even by the police. They are sleeping on the street because they don't prefer shelters for a variety of reasons.

The solution would be institutions for in-patient mental health/substance abuse treatment, but it would take a lot more than just a visit from a social worker to get them there.

- MSW

sad that an MSW apparently has no knowledge of the Housing First model?

The housing first model has limitations...as evidenced by this scenario.

DC embraced housing first, yet we still have people on the street. LA, Seattle, SF, NYC all embraced housing first before dc...it’s not a silver bullet.

People have rights; nobody can be forced inside.

The best approach is holistic prevention. Hindsight being 20/20, housing first should not have focused exclusively on backend housing without investing in upstream prevention. It’s really hard to persuade some people to come inside and take advantage of help after years on the street.

Given the resistance to help, specialty courts run hand in hand with community based providers are effective. Of course, you need to invest in housing, treatment and services. But the court plays a pivotal role in engagement, compliance and success.

I still don’t think you understand. Housing First is giving someone a home, not “help.” And there is still a shortage. And what’s with the nonsequitur on courts?

Um, I actually have written about and presented at National and international conferences on the topic. I’ve literally dedicated my career to homeless prevention and advocacy...which is how I know the limitations of Housing First.

Specialty treatment courts are an effective tool when properly resourced and implemented as they are equipped to coax people into housing and treatment.

DC implemented a housing first approach yet they struggle to persuade many people to participate even when offered a key to their own apartment. What then? A treatment court (mental health/behavioral health) is an effective tool to get reluctant participants inside and on meds. The data supports this.

Bottom line: there’s no easy solution...including Housing First. Just ask LA, SF, NYC, Seattle, etc. They were the innovators, early adopters, and biggest investors in HF yet...

why do you keep on mentioning courts? do you propose we sweep up homeless people and send them to jail for being homeless? it’s not illegal to be homeless, mentally ill, or drug addicted. I suggest you talk to more people at these conferences.

Have you done homeless street outreach?

As a lawyer, I understand that you cannot arrest people for being homeless. Similarly, you cannot force people into treatment and housing without the courts.

Mentally ill addicts who have been on the streets for years are highly vulnerable. Do you think the moral thing to do is leave them alone on the street to die? I do not. I think coordinated engagement is key.

Similarly, I understand that some (not all, but many) mentally ill addicts on the street come into contact with police when they steal, break into homes/cars/businesses, urinate in public and walk around half naked, act out violently, etc. I do not believe they should simply be churned through the criminal justice system. There’s a better way: it’s called a mental health court (sometimes called a behavioral health court). The goal is to stabilize the mentally ill addict and connect them to housing and case management with a social worker, psychiatrist, etc. Jail isn’t the goal. Judges are specially trained and the courtroom includes a comprehensive team of community based providers. Success means the person is housed (often their own apartment, sometimes a group home/safe haven), has the support of a team to sustain treatment and care, and ultimately no return to homelessness. Again: jail isn’t the goal.

how do you propose to constitutionally force people into long-term treatment for minor crimes when they aren’t a danger to themselves or others? did you skip con law? “mental health court” is for involuntary committment, not to force the chronically homeless into shelters.

what actually does work is keeping this all out of the penal system and implementing a housing first model.

Housing First works for some. But the carrot of HF doesn’t work when mentally ill people refuse to participate.

Google what is happening in LA, SF, and Seattle. They were early adopters of HF. They’ve invested heavily in HF. Yet, they have thousands of “service resistant” people suffering on the streets. Is that humane?

Nobody is proposing locking these people up or even sending them to mental health facilities (which BTW don’t really exist in the way you envision from watching movies). Rather, I’m highlighting how treatment courts have documented success in stabilizing mentally ill people and helping them sustain stable housing independently with community based support services.

You could educate yourself on the best practice. Or you can simply criticize me personally as being clueless or cruel. (I’m not bothered by your silly criticism. Decades on the frontlines fighting for systemic change helped me develop a thick skin.)

To be clear: I’m not against HF. It’s a great philosophy that prompted a sea change in homeless services. But it’s not a silver bullet. Nearly two decades later, we need to evaluate its shortcomings...starting with the need for holistic upstream intervention focused on prevention as well as the continued need for other housing options and services.

show me where all those cities have an immediate supply of housing first housing for all their chronic homeless people.

[Anonymous]

DP. Homelessness is a complex issue with multiple facets. Housing First -is- a model having some success but let's not delude ourselves. It -isn't- always successful or even successful 3/4ths of the time. I understand that one of the PPs is very enthusiastic but it is wrong to suggest that Housing First is the only or even the best option for all situations. It is, however, an option in the arsenal along with other options.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sad. I understand your discomfort with this OP. You did the right thing.

PP is right that this is a good example of why only having armed and dangerous police officers able to cope with non-violent situations is a sad circumstance.

You did read OP’s post that “armed and dangerous” police officers kindly escorted the homeless person from OP’s vestibule.
Dial down your hysteria about police officers.

[Anonymous]

OP, I think you did the right thing by calling the shelter first and then calling the police.

I only wish that the shelter could have been able to provide him somewhere to sleep. Homeless people deserve our compassion. Many of them have experienced challenging times in life, have mental health challenges, or both.

They can also be sick or become physically violent, even in cases when it isn't their fault for reasons like mental illness. OP shouldn't be expected to allow him to sleep in their home, especially now during COVID. Your husband is very kind for considering the safety of the homeless person. However, simply allowing the man to sleep in your vestibule isn't a long-term solution.

Those of us who are able to should donate more to shelters and programs for homeless people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DP. Homelessness is a complex issue with multiple facets. Housing First -is- a model having some success but let's not delude ourselves. It -isn't- always successful or even successful 3/4ths of the time. I understand that one of the PPs is very enthusiastic but it is wrong to suggest that Housing First is the only or even the best option for all situations. It is, however, an option in the arsenal along with other options.

Intense psychiatric treatment with mandatory compliance is the answer but it will never occur. You can have housing available but many homeless people will not accept it. I have been supporting a homeless woman who lives in the bus shelter near my suburban office for over a year. She sets up coverings around 9 pm and decamps around 8 am. She leaves her gear in a shopping cart that she ticks in an alcove. I give her money for food and buy her thyroid medication. I have had a number of social workers and homeless outreach people talk to her with no progress.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just sleeping? I’d let him sleep there tonight, then put a bunch of stuff in the vestibule so he can’t stay tomorrow night. Hand him $20 and say “sorry man, you can’t sleep here.”

I was thinking I would put together a bag of food to hand him while the police were there...

That would have been nice.

And been an open invitation for him to return every night.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. I ended up calling the non emergency line and stressed that he was not harming anyone. The police came out, woke him up, nicely explained that he couldn’t sleep in front of someone’s door, and then left after he walked away.

Thank you for insisting that he wasn't harming anyone. Some police cannot be trusted.

But these police could be trusted. Let’s hope the next time you ate attacked by a criminal, Yiu can explain to the police that the criminal wasn’t harming you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Did you have a basement you could have offered him for the night? Maybe given him food and water and packed up some meals for him for the week? We are all in this together. Those of us that are more privileged (yes, that’s anyone with a roof to sleep under) have the moral responsibility to help those around us.

Perhaps OP can give you her contact number so that you can pick up the next homeless person at her door and take him to your home to do what you suggest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. I ended up calling the non emergency line and stressed that he was not harming anyone. The police came out, woke him up, nicely explained that he couldn’t sleep in front of someone’s door, and then left after he walked away.

So where do you stand on defunding the police OP?

DP. I dislike the phrase "defunding the police" because it is misinterpreted all the time. I agree that some funding should be redirected from the police to social services so that police don't have to come out because of a homeless person who isn't being violent or threatening. Or out to deal with a mentally ill person. That should be handled by people specifically trained in those areas. We really need to have better resources for mentally ill people and homeless people (there's often an overlap) in this country. Having police handling those situations is a terrible idea. We still need to appropriately fund the police for the areas that they actually have expertise.

Yet police have been doing this successfully for decades. Why stop now?