With the new year comes a big deal from congress, but soon new leaders who may have different understandings of the at-risk populations. This blog focuses specifically on those who do not have a voice to speak out, who do not have the same possibilities to fight for the American dream like the rest of us. In this free-market society, we have placed a heavy emphasis on self-reliance and self-determination. Congress in Washington, Springfield, and capitals across the country are making cuts to social services not just because it is an easy place to trim the fat or very few people will speak out, but because they see this as a handout and want to do less to support these individuals.
Biggest example from the last year came in the form of multiple lawsuits. I will focus on the mental health community and the William's Consent Decree that targets the problem of warehousing individuals in facilities. Looking through research (sorry I do not have the article at hand at this moment but will try to find and post) we see the numbers of individuals in facilities has changed over the past few decades. While the 1970s and 80s saw big numbers, their was a drop off in the 90s. This idea of warehousing the mentally ill is an old concept that society should lock away the "crazies." First off, this is a very inaccurate term. Secondly, mental illness can be defined as a change in perception of reality. Now, we learn in client centered theory that every person has their own perception of reality and it is impossible to comprehend another's view. To become diagnosed with a mental illness, this perception varies greatly from reality, even in their own surrounding. There are also many other criteria, but from the social work perspective taken here, we help all individuals who have a need.
Back to the lawsuit. Advocacy groups sued the state of Illinois saying there are not adequate housing options offered to help individuals move back into the community. Let's look at this more closely. The concept of inadequate housing options means individuals on Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) do not receive enough money to afford housing outside of drug and crime ridden neighborhoods. On this, I agree. Most social workers and mental health professionals I have talked with agree. However, the government still saw it necessary to cut the Medicaid and Medicare budget, which all of these individuals rely on for services. So, first cut services, then provide better housing options to move individuals to the community, where many services provided by residential facilities, will not be covered and will now be unavailable.
This is only part of the problem. The inability to afford proper housing is addressed, but not the surrounding environment. The William's Consent Decree places individuals in housing they could not afford by having the government fit the bill after the individual pays 30% of their income, just like many other housing options offered by the government. But this is limited and still places individuals in poor neighborhoods with limited resources.
