Thursday, October 13, 2005

where's the "chronic"?

where’s the “CHRONIC”?

HSU professor Jane Holschuh and president Rollin Richmond at a task force meeting.Humboldt State University’s president, Rollin Richmond, has been attending Arcata City Council meetings with the purpose of blaming homeless people for declining enrollment at the university. In spite of his flimsy story, the HSU consultant team to Arcata’s Homeless Task Force has devised a plan for labeling people “chronically homeless” based on questionable and vague standards, and forcing mis-treatment on them, based on the presumption that they are “mentally ill,” have a “disabling condition,” and are a danger to themselves or others.

The definition of “chronic homeless”: http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/homelessness/strategies03/ch.htm#ch2
HHS, HUD, and VA have agreed on the characteristics of persons experiencing chronic homelessness and use the following definition in their collaborations:
An unaccompanied homeless individual with a disabling condition who has either been continuously homeless for a year or has had at least four (4) episodes of homelessness in the past three (3) years.

The Homeless Services Plan (available at http://cdc.humboldt.edu/ahtf/), written by HSU representatives, to be enforced on the Arcata population, refers a number of times to “chronically homeless” people, but keeps the definition vague and broadly applicable. In fact, the federal definition, which includes having a “disabling condition” as a qualifier to fit the label, was REMOVED from the plan.

This definition was available in the 7/21/05 version of the plan (available at http://cdc.humboldt.edu/ahtf/), but is absent from later versions of the draft. After concern about the vagueness of the definition and broadness of its application (and seriousness of its implications) was brought up several times at task force meetings, HSU professor Jane Holschuh said that she would include the federal definition in the plan, but it is still not in the most recent version. Why not? Why was it removed in the first place?

The implication of the vague and broad use of the term “chronic homeless” is that every unhoused person could be labeled as being in need of involuntarily receiving the heavy-handed help of the State, including forced drugging and confinement in a mental “health” facility.

2 comments:

starbender said...

This is Horriffic! :(

Anonymous said...

I hope you homeless bums are enjoying the rain right now!