StemCell Therapy

Leaving aside the troubling political agenda at play in the provincial governments review of supervised consumption sites, there were still a few themes that emerged from the report warranting further thought.

In particular, the review focused on a pattern of social disorder in areas around the sites provocative words like chaos, feces, and debris figured prominently in the governments presentation along with a need for better pathways to get people into treatment.

Those are fair concerns.

But instead of sensationalizing the extent of the issues and trying to have us believe the sites are largely to blame, Id respectfully suggest that any such problems have a deeper connection to a separate and more profound concern: alack of permanent, supportive housing.

In Edmonton, the construction of 900 units over the next six years is a need verging on the desperate, and one of city councils top priorities.

In fact, the initiative has been ready to move for some time, with the federal government poised to contribute and non-profit partners lined up to build.

All thats missing is a sense of urgency from the province, whose contributions would have a farbigger impact and far less controversy than shuttering consumption sites. Instead, it has delayed funding for any new projects while it conducts another of its countless reviews.

For those unclear what this sort of housing entails, it caters to low-income residents who have challenges beyond the financial.

In many cases, such clients have experienced chronic homelessness along with issues ranging from addiction struggles and mental illness to domestic violence and other complex trauma. Some have cognitive and physical impairment. A substantial percentage are Indigenous.

Generally speaking, permanent supportive homes are offered at rents affordable to those who depend on AISH payments (about $800 monthly), and provide a variety of services depending on need. Often there are 24-7 on-site managers to respond to issues and check in on residents, but sites can also have full-time nurses and elders, counselling, home care and meal services.

Fortunately, Edmonton is blessed with community agencies that are very good at providing this kind of housing.

One is the Right at Home Housing Society, which operates 500 units of various types around the city for around 1,200 Edmontonians.

Unfortunately, wait times for a home operated by the society now average between three and four years, an awfully long delay for vulnerable people.

The organization has been developing new properties, but further progress is largely dependent on further grants. As an example, the society is ready to begin a project for 100 people in the citys northeast that would fill a need for large family accommodation, but it cant proceed anytime soon without provincial help.

To be clear, permanent supportive housing is not the silver bullet solution to ending all homelessness and addiction.

However, there is strong evidence that a safe place to live prompts a chain reaction of positive effects. Stability allows residents to focus on their treatment, make healthier choices, become less vulnerable to crime and abuse, become better parents and make more positive contributions to society, including employment schooling and volunteering.

This, in turn, has positive results for government, some of which can be measured.

For instance, a study of Ambrose Place, a permanent supportive housing facility north of Downtown, reported a big reduction in inpatient and emergency department costs per resident, per year, and that resident interactions with the police decreased by nearly half.

Other studies have found similar savings, while less-quantifiable advantages, such as reduced need to apprehend children from their parents and less social disorder in front of businesses, are also important to note.

In effect, this is a form of preventative medicine.

The citys plan calls for a $241-million investment over six years, in which Edmonton would contribute about $37 million to acquire 20-30 sites, the federal government would provide $80 million and the province $124 million.

The province would also be called upon for about $24 million in operating funds annually once all 900 units are constructed, but the savings in health and justice costs alone would more than pay for that.

Though details are thin, the review thats holding up new announcements seems to be focused on ways in which the government can reduce its responsibility, possibly through more private sector involvement.

If the province can find a way to make that work with the same outcomes, so be it, though Im skeptical thats feasible.

But regardless of where the review goes, the province owes it to at-risk Albertans to move with haste and listen to municipalities like Edmonton, where patience is wearing thin.

They dont seem interested in doing anything other than lecturing people on how these problems should be solved, says Coun. Michael Walters.

Such comments are borne of frustration and again demonstrate how the relationship breakdown between the provincial and municipal governments plays out not just in budget balance sheets, but in consequences that hurt vulnerable people.

Instead of exploiting social disorder as a political tool to discredit supervised consumption sites (which serve a necessary, though limited purpose), the province would be far better served with a big investment in housing that will actually make a difference on Edmontons streets.

kgerein@postmedia.com

twitter.com/keithgerein

See more here:
Keith Gerein: Social disorder better solved with housing investments than discrediting consumption sites - Edmonton Journal

This entry was posted on March 6, 2020 at 11:44 pm and is filed under Preventative Medicine. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed. |