Is it a good idea for homeless people who are also chronic alcoholics to be given permanent accommodation by the government but still be allowed to drink as much as they want?
Officials from King County and the City of Seattle, Washington certainly think so after they gave the go ahead for the controversial “1811 Eastlake Project” that was finally opened in December 2005. According to the Downtown Emergency Service Center (DESC), which manages the apartment block housing 75 formerly homeless men and women, services also provided include:
* State-licensed mental health and chemical dependency treatment
* On-site health care services
* Daily meals and weekly outings to food banks
* Case management and payee services
* Medication monitoring
* Weekly community building activities
Not only does the DESC think this is a good way of getting off the streets the “unsympathetic homeless” who “beg, drink, urinate and vomit in public”, as executive director Bill Hobson described them in a profile of the project in The New York Times, it will also save taxpayers money.
King County’s division of mental health and chemical abuse reckoned that in 2003 it cost taxpayers an average of $50,000 per homeless person to be variously rushed to hospital, thrown in jail and/or put up at a sobering centre.
Under this scheme, so the theory goes, with a nurse on hand and a roof over their heads, fewer trips to the hospital and the drunk-tank will be required compared to conditions in the unprotected open. The DESC estimated the annual cost for each resident of 1811 Eastlake Avenue to be $13,000, although Margaret King, the social worker who manages the building, says it will probably be more due to the worse than expected health problems of the residents. There have thus far been 120 visits to the apartments this year by ambulances. It also cost $11.2 million dollars to build the apartments, which was funded by all tiers of government up to the Federal level.
But it is the issue over the lack of a requirement for those admitted to quit or even cut down on their drinking that has caused the most controversy, which this excerpt from the Times‘ story encapsulates well:
Homeless since 1999, Mr. Hunt said he drank a daily bottle of whiskey before he came to 1811 Eastlake. He has epilepsy and walks with crutches because he fractured his hip.
He shrugged when asked about the policy allowing him to drink in his new home. “We’re going to drink somewhere,” Mr. Hunt said.
For supporters this would just reflect reality. Each resident has failed in at least six attempts at going dry. No matter what is done for them they will still drink, so at least they can do it in a safer environment.
For critics, the apathy and hint of entitlement coming from Mr Hunt is just being allowed to continue and will do so until he completely self-destructs. By condoning his drinking, people are giving up on himself giving up.