In light of our first Public Policy Class, I have been glued
to coverage of the current housing crisis in Portland. The fresh evacuation of
Pine Street Tent City (officially yesterday, I believe) has filled the Portland
Press Herald with the latest news and case studies of the 24+ individuals who
were forced out of their makeshift homes and relocated god only knows where.
I have a loving appreciation for the Portland Press Herald,
and their dedication to covering the day to day occurrences in tent city;
however, the language used in reference to the residents was really
disappointing.
Descriptions,
photo captions, and police comments were a far cry from “people first”
language. Note the caption for the image below. Instead of, “Tent City inhabitants
play board games during final days of residency,” the descriptor is reduced to,
“Homeless people play a board game Monday under a turnpike overpass where they
have set up tents and hope to remain.”
Tangent-ing slightly, something similar occurred during the
spring of 2016 when the series of assaults against women occurred in Portland’s
west end. Instead of electing to describe the crimes against women in
non-specific terms, the author’s purposefully inserted the identifier of “homeless”
(“a 29-year-old homeless woman”) to somehow make distinct this particular
victim from her female peers, and possibly discredit.
Insensitive labeling of the homeless isn’t confined to the
newspaper; but, it is one indicator of the way in which we caste homeless
people as “other,” and less credible in some way, to peers.
During our first class meeting, when Jon Jennings posed the
question to our group of how to improve the city’s shelter system/ways to
address the homeless crisis, my mind immediately jumped to the value of the
voice of the city’s homeless population on this matter. Sure, as social workers
with working relationships with those experiencing homeless in the city, our
perspective is absolutely valuable from a policy standpoint. However, our word
is only worth so much, given our privilege, and the fact that every night we go
home – however meager the dwellings.
In lieu of our community practice projects, my brain
immediately jumped to the notion of how we can gather the voices of those
utilizing shelter services (and just as important - those utilizing public spaces instead of the
shelter) to hear from the service users what possible solutions to the current
debacle exist.
As we discussed in class , policy inevitably feels like an
imposition for those who are not adamantly supporting a given initiative.
However, the conversation leaned toward the sentiments of those who are housed.
This is a great place to start, however, we really need the inside voice, too
before we can feel confidence that this issue is in any way being re-solved.
I recognize though, that this is our policy course… the time
for artistically gathering narratives and beliefs may have come and gone with
our multicultural/community practice classes. However, I’m not totally certain
how the city can move forward without at least hearing the voice of some of
those who are directly impacted by decisions made in this realm.
I’m curious if my classmates have thought similarly about this,
and if this sort of data gathering would be of any use to the city and/or could
be integrated into our portion of this community work.
References:
Bouchard, S. (2016, September 1). Portland police issue
warning to lone remaining homeless camper. The
Portland Press Herald. Retrieved from: http://www.portlandpressherald.com.
Byrne, M. (2016, June 1). Police looking for suspect in
three assaults on women. The Portland Press
Herald. Retrieved from: http://www.portlandpressherald.com.
Hey Ellen,
ReplyDeleteI'm glad you brought this up. Throughout our time here at USM we've learned about the power of language to reinforce cultural values and frame discussions, perspectives, and policies. Our society considers access to a home as a given baseline (just like whiteness) and so anything that deviates is named. Therefore, newspapers talk about "homeless" women being assaulted, but would never say that a woman with a fixed place of residence was assaulted. Journalists are trained to state facts, but in doing so, they often reveal their assumptions of what is a noteworthy difference that needs to be stated. This in turn reinforces our differences and reduces empathy for the other.
Looking at the city's interest in reconceptualizing homeless shelters in Portland, I agree with your impulse to make sure the people who are most affected have their voices heard. No matter how well meaning people are, assumptions and implicit values always exist, and the best way to counter those is to hear from individuals with lived experience. As the city starts working towards this goal, they should be speaking with Homeless Voices for Justice (http://www.preblestreet.org/what-we-do/advocacy-programs/homeless-voices-for-justice/), and do some outreach/surveys with those who would be utilizing the revised services.
MSW students are the perfect interlocutors for helping gather data and foster communication between groups like HVJ and city hall. Doing grounded theory research could be extremely effective in highlighting shelter users' major concerns and desires regarding a new shelter system. This data could then inform city hall as they start the planning stages, versus city hall coming up with a plan and then surveying whether individuals respond positively to it (which could be perceived by the interviewees as just another imposition on them from the city).
Ellen,
ReplyDeleteYou bring up some interesting thoughts about policy and best-practices is procedure. I think you are right to lean towards emphasizing the voice of the people most impacted by a potential new policy. A large part of policy making is doing appropriate research on measures to address the issue of focus. It's easy to lean on more defined research about what programs/practices have been proven effective, and I think city employees are most comfortable with this. However, I believe it to be so important to pair with qualitative information from the community. Although programs backed by research are what make it into the final policy document, I imagine stories are what sells the policy makers to put those programs in place. This also ties to the other point you had made about increasing stigma through media messages. Telling more stories can also be an effective way to combat that. There might be a good way to get those out into the media to counteract some of the other portrayals of individuals in vulnerable situations. I hope in future classes there's the opportunity to hear more about ways you have thought of to gather information from community members. I'd be interested in joining you on such a mission!
Jana
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHey Ellen,
ReplyDeleteMy blog is similar, I talk about storytelling as a way to get our community talking about the issue of homelessness in Portland. I added a site that a non profit organization made thats called "Invisible PEOPLE" and it is based around individuals who are homeless telling their own and struggles and stories. Maybe we could brainstorm a cool idea for this semester around the area of homelessness? Great post, the power of language is very important and often can be a oversight..