[InSteady]

Kind of valid. In Portland "housing first" has been all the rage, but having lived with pretty severe addiction for some years, and spent lots of time around fellow addicts in considerably worse circumstances, it's pretty hard to imagine that a house on its own is some kind of solution. Especially when compared to a support network and high quality addiction treatment, medical care, and mental health services. In terms of sustainable recovery, the former is a luxury, while some combo of the latter are essential requirements. Of course, having all of them is by far the best.. man, addiction is a bitch.

[etchalon]

"Housing first" isn't the belief that providing a house "on its own is some kind of solution". It's the belief and practice of not refusing to provide housing support until people meet certain criteria – which is often how governments approach the problem.

"We only help those who help themselves", etc.

You get people a safe place to sleep and then provide them with resources to become re-integrated into society, not the other way around.

[PeterisP]

If someone is very much not ready "to become re-integrated into society" then they can't be independently entrusted with a house (because they'll screw up life for others around them and the house itself with various asocial and illegal acts), that "safe place to sleep" has to be in an institution controlled by others with some enforced rules - until they become capable of following the rules on their own, which generally requires treating the addiction, and is the point when they can become re-integrated into society.

[etchalon]

1. They can generally be "trusted" with a house. It's a house. You sleep there.

2. The idea they need constant monitoring comes from the same outdated approach that believes we shouldn't help people unless they deserve it and we can make sure they deserve it. That model has not proven effective and either reducing homelessness or reducing homelessness' external costs on society. It has proven even less effective at improving long term mental health and addiction issues.

3. We have not found a long-term solution to chronic mental health and addiction issues. No approach, yet, has shown outsized performance over any other. Housing First approaches, however, have shown an improvement in homelessness, medical services and criminality – which might be the best we can hope for.

[stcroixx]

An addict will tear a house apart to sell the electrical wire and possibly plumbing for scrap at a recycling center, rendering it a fire safety hazard to the rest of the neighborhood.

[etchalon]

And a non-addict could leave the stove on. People do dumb shit. Keep in mind most "housing first" initiatives don't literally provide "homes". It's usually apartments.