Addressing Homelessness Through Strength-Based, People-First Language
Miatta Teasley
Walden University
Social Chge Action: P, C, & A-Fall 2024
Kristin Leigh Ballard
August 28, 2024
State the Problem You Selected
Homelessness continues to be a prevalent social problem in societies and communities around the world. It is a multifaceted problem that includes unstable housing, resource availability, and society’s prejudices against the infected (Murray et al., 2024). As a human services worker, I have seen this population struggle to find and sustain housing, as well as other basic needs. This problem stems from social issues such as poverty, a lack of quality mental health care, and access to affordable housing.
Reframe the Problem
Historically, the experience of homelessness has been defined and discussed in ways that objectify the homeless. Phrases like ‘the homeless’ or ‘vagrants’ (Murray et al., 2024) generalize people and portray them as automatically belonging to another category, indicating a stagnant condition. It reinforces prejudice and erases the individuality and agency of those experiencing homelessness. Retelling the topic in a strengths-based, person-first manner can and should help to avoid further influencing the candidate’s negative perceptions. Instead of labeling people as “homeless,” we can categorize them as “experiencing housing instability.” This terminology focuses on the fact that their situation can be only a temporary thing and that they are far from hopeless cases who cannot recover (Murray et al., 2024). Transitioning to a language of this kind is critical for mobilizing the community’s and policymakers’ support.
Apply Systems Thinking to Understand the Problem
Using Stroh’s (2015) systems thinking framework, we can better understand the multifaceted nature of homelessness:
a)
Motivation: The need for that change stems from the societal and ethical imperative that everyone should have secure shelter, which is a basic human right. Combating homelessness can also have further-reaching consequential benefits, which incorporate decreased healthcare costs and increased public safety.
b)
Collaboration: Homelessness affects individuals experiencing housing insecurity, as well as communities, government institutions, non-profit organizations, and healthcare systems (Stroh, (2015). Thus, coordination between such stakeholders is crucial for creating effective solutions.
c)
Focus: Since homelessness is a multifaceted problem that does not lend itself to a single approach, we should solve it through collective efforts. The stakeholders can combine their capital, knowledge, and power to result in more substantive and lasting solutions. One should focus on the availability of affordable housing, mental and addiction treatment, and policies related to incommensurability.
d)
Learning: The public has to recognize that the issue of homelessness is not people’s flaw or fault; it is a consequence of the societal flaw (Stroh, (2015). Public awareness initiatives can inform people about the causes of homelessness and encourage them to care for and support the homeless. It is crucial to use language that avoids dehumanizing the clients and instead emphasizes their potential for recovery.
Explain the Differences Between Using a Conventional, Linear Approach Versus a Systems Approach
The traditional sequential model of responding to homelessness may involve a narrow, short-term perspective that focuses on tangible needs such as temporary shelters or relief food. However, these measures are helpful without solving the root causes, which are the main sources of homelessness. It is often a more symptomatic approach and does not address the root of the problem, so it may only provide temporary relief (Stroh, 2015). The system approach, in turn, considers multiple factors that lead to homelessness. It necessitates accounting for factors like economic agendas, housing sectors, mental health care, and social support systems. Therefore, the aim of the systems approach is to achieve sustainable changes in these interrelated factors. These can be education, environmental, affordable housing, prevention, healthy, supportive income, mental health and addiction, and poverty.
Conclusion
In conclusion, using strength-based, non-terminology with people and using the system’s thinking as a method of solving homelessness is a more effective and kind way. Rather than encouraging laziness and seeking shortcuts, we must develop a long-term strategy to address the homeless issue. It also aims to benefit the real subjects involved, strengthens the fabric of our society, and thereby develops a more deserved society.
References
Murray, C., Smith, J., & Johnson, L. (2024). Social perceptions and language in homelessness. Journal of Human Services, 45(2), 123-134.
Stroh, D. P. (2015). Systems thinking for social change: A practical guide to solving complex problems, avoiding unintended consequences, and achieving lasting results. Chelsea Green Publishing.
