Thanks so much to Mr. Norman C. Granvold’s guest column and to the Journal for printing it – “Revamp shelters and pantries.”
It was so refreshing finally to read about a meaningful, realistic, and very practical solution to the problem of homelessness in our community. Granvold proposes that we directly address the individual problems that prevent homeless people from participating fully in our community. He presents a viable framework for addressing this shameful problem rather than continuing with our present highly fragmented and piece meal approaches. His solution calls for a central evaluation and case management system which customizes the help for each homeless person making use of existing facilities and programs.
Granvold correctly identifies seven problem categories that produce homelessness. Not surprisingly to many of us, none of them have to do with laziness, indolence, lack of morals, or worthlessness. They include substance abuse, mental problems, post-traumatic stress syndrome, medical problems, job training, lack of money and low cost housing, and job training. His outcomes are the same as we all desire. The goal is to return the homeless person to society as productive and self-sufficient citizens. His proposed solutions are surprisingly simple, practical and affordable. For example, he proposes that homeless people be provided with vouchers or coupons versus cans and packages so that they can buy what they really need – nutritious food and other daily living essentials.
The writer correctly chose the best time of year to submit this kind of column He knows that many citizens associate homelessness and hunger only with the Christmas season. He knows that it’s only during this narrow window that what he has to say will receive much traction. He needs to be commended for his objectivity, for avoiding blaming his reader, and for dealing with a problem that many of us just don’t want to hear about. He avoided, however, talking about the attitudes and values which affect our lens and allows this tragic social blight to continue to grow in our otherwise caring and humane community.
Reading his column prompted me to ask, not what problems the homeless bring with them, but rather, what attitudes and values do many Americans have that make this social issue so intractable and controversial?
Fortunately Talcott Parsons, (1902-1979) a prominent American sociologist, was able to identify five dichotomous and alternative value-oriented questions which I believe can shed some light on this insidious social problem.
Most briefly these include: 1.) Affectivity versus Affectivity Neutrality, 2.) Particularism versus Universalism, 3.) Self-interest versus Collectivity, 4.) Specificity versus Diffuseness, and 5.) Ascribed versus Achieved. Again, most generally, and only for our purposes here, the first four choices have to do with deciding to perceive and act on strictly a personal or special group basis versus based on broader universal value considerations. On each of these five variables all of us lie somewhere on a continuum.
The last or fifth value choice, “ascribed versus achieved,” is perhaps the most relevant choice that we as citizens should ponder in regard to our attitudes and values as they have to do with homelessness and poverty in general. This question has to do whether we are going to respond to the homeless person in terms of specific given personal attributes, i.e., human being, father, mother, child, age, sex or based on his or her achievements or performance alone? With regard to the most basic human needs such as food, clothing, housing, and health care, whether the person “earns it” or is “successful” or “better than” should not separate him or her from our community. On this issue the values of interdependence, integration, and inclusiveness should be paramount.
In the context of deciding upon basic human needs there should be no place for separating us into “us” and “them” or “winners” or “losers.” Obviously, in many other contexts in our very competitive national culture such as at work, school, and in sports, the primacy of an achievement-performance value orientation has clearly proven to be very appropriate and effective.
In summary, with regard to the homeless issue, we're not talking about employees, students or athletes, we are talking about, all of us – human beings.
