Opinion | Poverty policing needs to end

Atty McLellan, 2018 alumna

I have seen images floating around on Facebook and Instagram of various donation boxes that have been put up in major cities with slogans like, “Give your change to make a change for the homeless”, or “meaningful change, not spare change.” These slogans sound kind, empowering and impactful.

But these meters and boxes have been put up in an effort to prevent panhandling and begging, encouraging passersby to donate to something trustworthy instead. Panhandling is a term that refers to the act of asking for money from people walking by. And while this money is often given to charities intended to support the homeless, there is something disingenuous about how these boxes play into how we view poverty.

It is common for people to feel they know what’s best for the people they are helping, and this is often about an issue in service work and discussions on poverty.
In debates about poverty, there is a level of policing involved: It takes literal form in the criminalization of acts associated with homelessness and a more figurative one in the entitlement that many people feel they have to control homeless people’s lives.

Policing involves monitoring daily functional behaviors – like preventing someone who is homeless from sitting on a bench for too long, sleeping in public, sleeping in their car or receiving food. Most of the time, sitting outside a restaurant or on a park bench would not be seen as a crime, but if a person looks homeless, they are often ticketed, arrested or fined.

Necessary acts like sleeping, when done outside of a home, are criminalized. Even publicly defecating or urinating, which are illegal, become complicated when you realize that many homeless individuals lack access to a bathroom, giving them no other alternative.

Criminalizing homelessness has been shown to be costly and ineffective, according to a study by Orange County United Way. It has proven to be unlawful both in theory and in the courtroom. Since Orange County shelters are at capacity, some homeless people have no alternative but to break the law. Policing basic needs violates people’s rights.

A less tangible form of policing occurs when discussing poverty and how homeless or low-income individuals spend their money. There is often an innate assumption that those who are homeless make irresponsible decisions with money, or, when given money, they will spend it on drugs or alcohol. But what makes these people more likely to mishandle money than anyone else?

It has been shown that when money is directly given to impoverished communities all over the world, the majority of people spend most of that money on necessities or activities that increase long term financial stability. These programs are shown to increase success levels. The international success of donating directly to the poor may seem difficult to implement in the U.S., but it’s not. Reports of large-scale programs giving direct cash transfers to homeless families in New York have proven to help reduce poverty-related hunger.

What these examples point to is that the inherent distrust and suspicion that people have toward the homeless are unfounded and unwarranted. While the distrust is due to a long history of criminalizing the poor, it’s time for society to move on, grow up and realize that people are people regardless of their economic standing. Whether they have a home or live on the street, people are deserving of respect and control over their lives and the ability to make their own decisions.