When are empathy and social sensitivities taken too far?

[Mary Terry]

Southwest Airlines in the US just changed their policy to require morbidly obese passengers to buy two seats. Thank God. I've had miserable flights wedged against or between hugely fat people who spill out of their seat into MY seat. Those people can get a refund for the second seat after the flight if it turns out that there was an available empty seat on the plane.

Do I have empathy for those people? Yes
Should I have to suffer BECAUSE of those people? No

 

[Outdated]

Southwest Airlines in the US just changed their policy to require morbidly obese passengers to buy two seats.

I like that idea. Misplaced sympathy causes more harm than good in society. Morbid obesity is not a medical condition that people have no control over, it's a lifestyle choice.

There's a similar situation with the way a lot of people feel "sympathy" for homeless people and keep giving them money. In my country we have a very robust welfare system and none of these people need money, I know this from personal experience - I was homeless for 12 years. The people that are always begging for money are the drug addicts and alcoholics, and as soon as they get money they go on a binge and make life hell for everyone around them.

I like the system that has evolved in my city, it seems to work very well. Here's an excerpt from a letter that I recently wrote to the housing minister in another state suggesting that they take a closer look at how things work here:

In Adelaide all homeless support services operate only in the CBD. For rough sleepers to be able to access any of these services they must be sleeping rough within the CBD every night, and yes, they do check on you and verify that you’re not just lying to get in to social housing.

The CBD doesn’t have all that many permanent residents to get upset about the presence of homeless people and most of those live high up where they’re not forced to live amongst the associated problems.

Having the great majority of homeless people in one place makes it a lot cheaper and a lot easier to coordinate and deliver homeless services and it also makes the situation a lot easier and cheaper to police.

The next important piece in this equation is the Homeless Hostels, specialised hostels within the CBD for homeless people to stay in. When a place becomes available for them homeless people live in one of these special hostels for a while and it is the hostel staff that organise and apply for placements within regular social housing. This isn’t just a rubber stamp procedure, the staff are specially trained and won’t make applications on a tenant’s behalf unless that tenant meets a particular criteria.

The tenant must demonstrate that they are “able to live independently” before staff will apply for social housing for them. Part of this assessment has to do with how well people are able to cook and clean and look after themselves but there’s also a much more important factor – if a tenant is always scabbing money and smokes off of other people then they are not living independently and are not eligible for placement in social housing.

This system separates the genuinely homeless people from the useless drug addicts and alcoholics that give homelessness a bad name. Specifically because of this areas that have a high density of social housing don’t turn in to horrible ghettos where no one wants to live and we don’t have regular residents complaining about more social housing being built. Our quiet suburbs remain mostly peaceful.

 

[Mary Terry]

I like that idea. Misplaced sympathy causes more harm than good in society. Morbid obesity is not a medical condition that people have no control over, it's a lifestyle choice.

There's a similar situation with the way a lot of people feel "sympathy" for homeless people and keep giving them money. In my country we have a very robust welfare system and none of these people need money, I know this from personal experience - I was homeless for 12 years. The people that are always begging for money are the drug addicts and alcoholics, and as soon as they get money they go on a binge and make life hell for everyone around them.

I like the system that has evolved in my city, it seems to work very well. Here's an excerpt from a letter that I recently wrote to the housing minister in another state suggesting that they take a closer look at how things work here:

In Adelaide all homeless support services operate only in the CBD. For rough sleepers to be able to access any of these services they must be sleeping rough within the CBD every night, and yes, they do check on you and verify that you’re not just lying to get in to social housing.

The CBD doesn’t have all that many permanent residents to get upset about the presence of homeless people and most of those live high up where they’re not forced to live amongst the associated problems.

Having the great majority of homeless people in one place makes it a lot cheaper and a lot easier to coordinate and deliver homeless services and it also makes the situation a lot easier and cheaper to police.

The next important piece in this equation is the Homeless Hostels, specialised hostels within the CBD for homeless people to stay in. When a place becomes available for them homeless people live in one of these special hostels for a while and it is the hostel staff that organise and apply for placements within regular social housing. This isn’t just a rubber stamp procedure, the staff are specially trained and won’t make applications on a tenant’s behalf unless that tenant meets a particular criteria.

The tenant must demonstrate that they are “able to live independently” before staff will apply for social housing for them. Part of this assessment has to do with how well people are able to cook and clean and look after themselves but there’s also a much more important factor – if a tenant is always scabbing money and smokes off of other people then they are not living independently and are not eligible for placement in social housing.

This system separates the genuinely homeless people from the useless drug addicts and alcoholics that give homelessness a bad name. Specifically because of this areas that have a high density of social housing don’t turn in to horrible ghettos where no one wants to live and we don’t have regular residents complaining about more social housing being built. Our quiet suburbs remain mostly peaceful.

I wish a similar way to deal with the growing homeless population in the US would be applied. I'm not holding my breath, though.

 

[Outdated]

I wish a similar way to deal with the growing homeless population in the US would be applied. I'm not holding my breath, though.

Shifting them to outlying areas makes the coordination and delivery of services much more difficult and much more expensive as well. It also makes policing much more difficult and expensive and doesn't solve any real problems. If anything an "out of sight out of mind" mentality can make things a lot worse.

Using the central business district of a big city for this just makes more sense.

 

[Mary Terry]

Shifting them to outlying areas makes the coordination and delivery of services much more difficult and much more expensive as well. It also makes policing much more difficult and expensive and doesn't solve any real problems. If anything an "out of sight out of mind" mentality can make things a lot worse.

Using the central business district of a big city for this just makes more sense.

It seems to me that the druggies and alcoholics tend to cluster in CBDs where it's easy to acquire their poisons of choice and where charities will feed them. The non-addicted truly "homeless" tend to gravitate toward more remote areas because they don't want to be preyed on by the druggies and alcoholics.

It's such a huge problem in the US that I really don't know what can and should be done about it. The federal government and most of the states that have a homeless problem are not keen on throwing money at it. Even the west coast states, California, Oregon, and Washington state are showing less "compassion" and willingness to give "free stuff" to the homeless than in years past.

 

[Outdated]

It seems to me that the druggies and alcoholics tend to cluster in CBDs where it's easy to acquire their poisons of choice and where charities will feed them. The non-addicted truly "homeless" tend to gravitate toward more remote areas because they don't want to be preyed on by the druggies and alcoholics.

It's a pretty big problem in Australia too but there's a slightly different dynamic happening in South Australia now where a lot of the truly hopeless drug addicted are now congregating in country towns, most likely because they don't like the heavy police presence in the city. Country towns are now closing their doors and closing their hearts to homeless people and finding different ways to move them on.

It was pretty good in the city though, I felt safe there. The Adelaide cops are all pretty good and because they all do regular foot patrols they get to know all the local residents and they know who's likely to be trouble and who isn't. They get used to the difference between the drug addicted and people that just have mental problems too and I've witnessed great compassion and understanding from them.

In the city they all get fed 5 solid meals a day, there's hot coffee and hot showers in the mornings and people that will do your laundry for you. All provided by charities at no cost to the city. They don't have to pay rent or electricity or any other bills and they get more than $300 a week in unemployment benefits to spend, if you can't live on that then something's seriously wrong with the way you live.

The homeless hostels are partly government funded but for the most part they are operated by charities too so it works out to not be an overly expensive exercise.

 

[Judge]

The homeless of Reno were getting squeezed by local laws and politicians forcing them to comply with shelters rather than keep their "shantytowns" along the Truckee River. Some complying and others resisting or relocating elsewhere.

Of course recently the president issued another Executive Act that seems to criminalize homelessness altogether.

Ending Crime and Disorder on America's Streets

 

[Outsider]

The phrase “Too much sensitivity” and similar ones are subjective; I prefer not to use them unless someone gives specific examples of what he/she deems “excessive sympathy”, “lack of sympathy”, etc. It makes sense to discuss particular cases without using broad terms that are vaguely defined.

Now, regarding the obesity – I participated in a statistical study of the causes of childhood obesity. As we have discovered, the most prevalent cause of this health problem are food commercials aimed at children and teenagers. It was not surprising to discover that the uncompassionate Big Food is behind this societal malady. This is an example of lack of sympathy on the part of the food producers.

 

[Mary Terry]

Now, regarding the obesity – I participated in a statistical study of the causes of childhood obesity. As we have discovered, the most prevalent cause of this health problem are food commercials aimed at children and teenagers. It was not surprising to discover that the uncompassionate Big Food is behind this societal malady. This is an example of lack of sympathy on the part of the food producers.

I disagree. The primary cause of childhood obesity is parents who allow their children to eat that garbage and don't require their children to get exercise. When grownups are morbidly obese, it is a personal lifestyle choice as another poster observed.

 

[Judge]

I disagree. The primary cause of childhood obesity is parents who allow their children to eat that garbage and don't require their children to get exercise. When grownups are morbidly obese, it is a personal lifestyle choice as another poster observed.

Agreed.

With children in our society and individual households everything pretty much begins and ends with whether or not parental control is applied, or adequate to the occasion. And some of that control usually involves how many hours of television is allowed in the household. Limiting whatever propaganda and marketing it exudes to impressionable children. Not to mention the legal precedents of how the courts hold parents accountable to the actions of their children first and foremost.

Without any emphasis on sensitivity or empathy. -Just responsibility.