P1. We don’t know much about homeless people, but what we do know is that we feel sympathy for them, wanting to help but not knowing how to. In order to help the homeless like we wish, we need to become more educated on these citizens. For example, not a lot of us were aware that a vast amount of homeless people are “five times more likely than ordinary Americans to have suffered a traumatic brain injury” (A Plan to Make Homeless History, p.1). And that it would be far costlier to the tax payer for the homeless the not be getting the assistance they need. We need to step up and make a change, such a the organization Common Ground, and get more homeless people back on their feet in the US. First though, to do that, we have to understand how their minds work.
P2. People who do not have stable homes and who live on the streets go through cycles of emergency room visits, psychiatric facilities, addiction treatment, and prison. The costs of these visits are far costlier than providing them with stable housing and care. With this in people’s mind, it has given them more ambition to create housing for the homeless, though only if they are deemed “housing ready” (A Plan to Make Homeless History, p. 7). This means that they have to be drug and alcohol free, which is a contradiction because the shelters are supposed to be helping them get back on their feet, but they cannot do that if they are not getting help out on the street. Again, this falls into people not understanding homeless people, so they cannot get their proper help. They need their medicine, they need their insulin, they need all they can to help them survive but many citizens fail to realize that being homeless is a life or death situation, and the homeless person is most likely not at fault for their situation, it’s their mental health.
P3. In another article, The Street-Level Solution, Bornstein goes on to talk about how most readers “were skeptical, and a few downright dismissive, about the chances of long-term homeless people adapting well to housing” (The Street Solution, p. 3). He says that this is expected, because it takes people a while to adapt to a new environment after being in a different one for so long. That would be like throwing a wild dog into a house and domesticating it. It takes time. This is a reason why people are so skeptical to fund shelters for homeless people because they think their money is going to waste to people who won’t really use it to their advantage. The similar thing goes with even giving a homeless person ten dollars on the street. People’s mind goes straight to drugs or alcohol, when we really have no idea what they are going to use it for.
P4. A head injury can make it even harder for those to adapt to a new environment. The person might not understand what is happening, or they will be afraid of something going wrong, because that’s all they are used to: everything going wrong. Though with proper help and medicine, they can learn to cope with their injury and illness. In “Head Injury and Mortality in the Homeless” the statistics show that homeless people from the ages of 0-34 have suffered a head injury without hospitalization. After that, the numbers are not as intense, but that is due to the fact that they have suffered some kind of mentality issue, which is still a brain injury.
P5. The arguments here are convincing that money is being wasted on the homeless who get housing but do not have the proper tools to dwindle in society. Though just because they are convincing does not mean they are valid. In order to get homeless people, the help they need more research needs to be done to understand why they have become homeless, and grind down to the root problem of homelessness in the United States. Also Trump fucking sucks.
Bornstein, David. “A Plan to Make Homelessness History.” Blog post.
Opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com. New York Times, 20 Dec. 2010. Web. 28 Jan. 2017.
Bornstein, David. “The Street-Level Solution.” Blog post. Opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com. New York Times, 24 Dec. 2010. Web. 28 Jan. 2017.
Mcmillian, Thomas M., Marie Laurie, Michael Oddy, Mark Mezies, Elaine Stewart, and Jessica Wainman-Lefley. “Head Injury and Mortality in the Homeless.” Journal of Neurotrauma 32.2 (2015) 116-19. Web. 28 Jan. 2017.
Can’t believe you said that! 🙂
Back later for more substantive comments.
Your Essay Needs A Title.
I’m delighted to see an early post, NoBinary, and you are already demonstrating strong command of your authorial voice in this first draft. (You’ve also made yourself available for early Notes. I hope that’s OK.)
P1. Couple things here. First, I admire how quickly you get to the point. Introductions are only valuable if they provide a necessary perspective to prepare readers. Too often, they’re extraneous or even counterproductive.
—Your first sentence contains an oddity: ” the main reason of the reason .”
—These essays are Arguments in the best academic sense, NoBinary. They should not pick fights. I don’t doubt that the homeless are poorly served, but there’s no need to blame your readers (“Many US citizens are completely clueless”) for the problem. Enlist them in your cause. Don’t alienate them.
—Find a way to incorporate the title of Mr. Bornstein’s article into your text, NoB. We don’t use the parenthetical citation technique you’ve employed here: (A Plan to Make Homeless History, p.1).
—Your use of the conditional is confusing: Either IT IS costlier for society to poorly assist the homeless. Or IT WOULD BE costlier if they WERE NOT being well served. You say it WOULD BE if they AREN’T, which defies interpretation.
—In the next sentence, the confusion persists. Both THEY MIGHT NOT get back on their feet and WHETHER THEY HAVE good support create logical confusion.
—Once you’ve said “Organizations LIKE Common Ground” you’ve indicated Common Ground AND OTHERS, so it’s redundant to say AND MORE.
Work on P1, and make any other changes you like. Then add your work to the Feedback Please category if you want more notes.
You put this post back in the Feedback Please category, but you owe me revisions on P1 before I will provide more Notes on this essay. Would you like to swap it for something else?
So would you like me to edit it in the original or add the revision to the original?
Always simply revise the original, NBN. The early drafts are scrap paper. (But WordPress will let you retrieve them if you value them. I will show you how. I apologize that you don’t know the technique yet.)
Nice work, NBN. You’ve taken to heart the advice to create a bond with readers. It’s clumsy business, as you discovered, especially when there’s an actual difference between yourself and your readers (such as that you just learned something they don’t know yet). It’s best to leave people out of those situations by saying, for example
The blue notes are places that could benefit from technical corrections. One is to eliminate the MLA-style parenthetical notation. Another is to fix the number/amount problem.
—We need to reduce the AMOUNT of homelessness (because it can’t be counted).
—We need to reduce the NUMBER of homeless people in town (because they can be counted).
Thanks for jumping on this and getting class started early! 🙂
Thank you for the feedback! Definitely noted for revisions.