Rough Sleeper in your shed?

TresGats

Hi, I'm just wondering , would you allow a rough sleeper to use your shed/ outbuilding as a temp home, or conversely allow him/her to pitch a tent in your garden/ land.
Every year rough sleepers seem to die, some having a greater profile than others. I am sure that this could be helped by citizens willingly allowing rough sleepers to pitch up a tent or sleep in a shed. It offers a level of privacy and security, (i.e, the person may store their sleeping and cooking gear there). I'm sure most people wouldn't begrudge the odd kettle of hot water,
I'm not talking about someone moving into your house here, just a system where interested parties on both sides sign up and choose each other, if you like.
The govts current way of dealing with rough sleepers is if you don't get a bed, you get a sleeping bag. I really feel so sorry for those cold souls I see huddling in doorways. There are actually companies making a profit installing anti- sleeping spikes/ bumps in shop doorways, thus cutting out safer areas to sleep.
I'm not really au fait with the sleeping 'boxes' that have gone up in Dublin City Centre, other than they were overcrowded. A friends son opened one on their walk to school one morning a few months ago and there were 6 people in it, I believe they are intended for 1 or 2.
Adequate shelter is one of our most basic needs. This Christmas there are over 2,100 children in Dublin classified as homeless. Most, if not all would be in emergency accomodation- A b&b or hotel usually block-booked by the HSE.
However, as sad as their plight is, I feel more empathy for the rough sleeper, the cold, the boredom, the mind numbing poverty and feeling of being cut off from society..
I'm just wondering do you think such a voluntary scheme would work? Obviously there would have to be basic agreements, (not financial ones, just say, smoking in the shed is hazardous etc).
If people can literally rent out 'nice sheds' with double bed in their gardens all over Dublin , and I am not using my shed, it is secure. Personally, if I was homeless and couldn't get a hostel bed , or maybe didn't want one due to fighting/ drug use in such places I would prefer a secure garden.
Boardsies, what do you think? Am I deluded, over trusting, patronising? Or could such an idea work, even on a small scale.?
Any opinions welcome, thank you.

topper75

I would not.

I don't think it is ethical that I go to work and pay off a mortgage on a property whilst letting somebody else enjoy that property, or a portion thereof, whilst I work.

I'm aware from reading/listening to debates on the issue that this opinion I hold makes me a mean-spirited person in the eyes of some. But they have yet to counter the point I just made to my satisfaction.

baby and crumble

topper75 wrote: »

I would not.

I don't think it is ethical that I go to work and pay off a mortgage on a property whilst letting somebody else enjoy that property, or a portion thereof, whilst I work.

I'm aware from reading/listening to debates on the issue that this opinion I hold makes me a mean-spirited person in the eyes of some. But they have yet to counter the point I just made to my satisfaction.

I get where you're coming from, but I wonder if you could come to an arrangement with that person rough sleeping that in exchange for the right to pitch a tent on your property, they could perhaps be responsible for raking leaves, etc. That way they are also building up experience as a gardener or groundskeeper, which would help them move on when the times comes for them to get back on their feet.

TresGats

topper75 wrote: »

I would not.

I don't think it is ethical that I go to work and pay off a mortgage on a property whilst letting somebody else enjoy that property, or a portion thereof, whilst I work.

I'm aware from reading/listening to debates on the issue that this opinion I hold makes me a mean-spirited person in the eyes of some. But they have yet to counter the point I just made to my satisfaction.

Do you ever think that you could be a victim of the system yourself?
We are humans, not land accumulators or work-bots. Do you not think we should look out for each other?
Has anyone ever helped you when you needed it?

looksee

While it seems like a generous idea on the face of it I can't see it working. Someone sleeps in your shed, where is he going to use as a toilet, is there any water available? If he is smoking or drinking or doing drugs, its on your property, you are responsible, whether the shed gets burned down possibly with him in it, or there is drug paraphernalia on your property.

He brings someone else back one night and they do the damage, then what?

You go away for a week, do you leave him there?

Someone sees him clearing leaves and accuses you of housing an employee in substandard accommodation and so on. It would be only a matter of time before some busybody started complaining either about you allowing vagrants to live in your garden, or giving out because you had this poor old man living in a shed with no bed and no toilet and what are you going to do about it? This would be the same person who would walk past someone sleeping in a doorway with no more than a tut-tut.

There is a robbery at your home, he is going to get blamed for it, and your insurance could easily opt out because he is resident on the site.

The possibilities are endless. Now I know that someone will accuse me of looking for problems and being mean-minded, but turning a blind eye to someone sleeping in an old barn in a field, and letting them into a shed in a garden are two entirely different things.

Peregrinus

topper75 wrote: »

I would not.

I don't think it is ethical that I go to work and pay off a mortgage on a property whilst letting somebody else enjoy that property, or a portion thereof, whilst I work.

I'm aware from reading/listening to debates on the issue that this opinion I hold makes me a mean-spirited person in the eyes of some. But they have yet to counter the point I just made to my satisfaction.

I think that may be because they can't understand the point you just made.

As far as I can see, you "don't think it is ethical" that you earn money to pay for something, and then give it or lend that thing to, or share it with, someone else.

Most people will find that very puzzling. Why would that not be ethical behaviour? Sharing the the fruits of your labours with others less well-positioned than yourself is pretty classic ethical behaviour, isn't it?

looksee

I think it is more likely that he is simply misunderstanding the meaning of the word 'ethical'.

Peregrinus

The possibility did occur to me that he is misusing "ethical". But that just makes my point; nobody counters his point, because they don't understand his point, because they don't think that the word "ethical" means what he thinks it means.

Ethical: Conforming to moral principles or ethics; morally right; honourable; virtuous; decent.

prediction 1

lots of ppl will take issue with first response

prediction 2

none of these ppl with internet opinions will have housed a rough sleeper in their shed

Midnight Sundance

Not a chance!! How are you supposed to vet them? How do you not know that they aren't a drug user or mentally unstable?!! A friend of mine woke up to a man in her room
Many years ago. Turns out he had been sleeping in her shed at the bottom of the garden for quite a while. Watching her and waiting for an opportunity to come in. That story still sends chills down my spine thinking how lucky she was that she managed to escape him , so to answer your question. No way!!!

pwurple

No.

I know 4 homeless people fairly well. All 4 have some serious problems, and I would not be happy with any of them living within arms reach of my children.

Person number one is an alcoholic with some weird sexual thing going on. We live in the city, he usually sleeps on our street. When i am walking the kids to school, he stands in front of us, and pulls his pants down in front of the kids. Bizarrely my two little girls think it's hilarious, and laugh at him, but it freaks me out.

Person number 2 is more harmless than the creepy bloke above, also lives near us. Also an alcoholic, but is chatty enough. He has mental health issues. Gives me a different name every time I see him. Has tales about fighting in ww1 (is in his 50's), and generally cannot tell reality from the dream world. He sleeps somewhere different every night, doesn't lke to stay in one place. If there was a shed, he wouldn't stay in it. Indoors freaks him out he says. Does not like confinement.

Person number 3 is a relative of mine. Drugs. Lots and lots of drugs. He has homes available to him, his parents, his siblings, but all say no drugs so he refuses. I'd not be up for a drug den in my garden.

Person number 4 is a young guy, who I can only describe as lacking every social skill there is, which is a polite way if saying, is a complete prick and cannot live in normal society. I know him, because my friend let him stay in her shed when she found him in there one day. I met him a few times, asked him how he got into this situation. He had fallen out with his family, no control over his temper. Everything they said was a perceived slight, and he was violent, he cut off contact. He was very very touchy, and my friend found she couldn't even talk to him either without setting him off, so she just left him there and got on with it, rather than try to get rid. Anyway, long story short... he got to know their comings and goings, and one day, while they were at work, the house was broken into, robbed, and no sign of this guy that evening or since.


Your additional security thoughts are flawed. Remember the fraud triangle? The three things people need to commit a crime? Opportunity, rationalisation and pressure. The pressure is poverty, rationalisation will be apparant if you have a house and they don't, how unfair... and you then provide the opportunity by leaving the place unattended.

pwurple

One more thing actually. People born here have a heck of lot of advantages over someone exiting a wartorn or impoverished country. Education, healthcare, all manner of facilities and training etc. If they have ended up homeless by living their whole life in Ireland, there is something seriously seriously wrong which a bed just won't fix. 

honestly, taking these people in as some kind of indentured garden slaves doesn't sit well with me either.
What does the future look like for someone living in a garden shed, with no income or way of making money? There's no dignity there, and no independence.

Peregrinus

Deleted User wrote: »

prediction 1

lots of ppl will take issue with first response

Yes. Indeed, I suspect that the first response may be been designed to elicit lots of reaction.

Deleted User wrote: »

prediction 2

none of these ppl with internet opinions will have housed a rough sleeper in their shed

Yes, but there's no inconsistency there. The fact - if it is a fact - that the first response was a poor rationalisation for rejecting the idea doesn't mean that there are no good reasons for not implementing it.

There are considerations against it, some of which have already been mentioned - some people are homeless for a reason; they have problems that make them difficult to live with.

And there's also the response that offering garden sheds is a piss-poor solution to the problem tha entirely fails to tackle, or even identify, the causes of the problem, that offers little (no access to bathrooms or toilets, for example, or places to prepare food) and that deprives rough sleepers of the one thing they do have, and frequently value, which is the company of other rough sleepers.

The impulse to offer your garden shed to a rough sleeper arises from decent ethical impulses, but it's not actually hugely effective or beneficial. You'd do better to give money, or volunteer time and talents, with an organisation tacking the problem in a more structured way, and/or to bring political pressure to bear so that governmental authorities prioritise the problem.

Pat Mustard

pwurple wrote: »

Your additional security thoughts are flawed. Remember the fraud triangle? The three things people need to commit a crime? Opportunity, rationalisation and pressure. The pressure is poverty, rationalisation will be apparant if you have a house and they don't, how unfair... and you then provide the opportunity by leaving the place unattended.

Rationalization will also be inhibited by alcohol, drugs and mental illness, which are common among homeless people.

Pressure will already be there and opportunity will be made far more likely.

Olishi4

I'm not sure how that would work op. I don't really see any "voluntary scheme" like that working at all and I can't see many signing up for it.

If I was to even consider doing something like that, I know it would be very difficult to go to bed each night knowing that someone was starving outside in my garden or if it was really cold, how could you leave someone out in your shed or a tent in your garden?

I understand that your point is that this happens on the streets anyway but I think there are better more effective ways to help people in need. I think this idea could lead or end with either the homeless person or the house owner being taken advantage of or the formation of unusual, unhealthy relationships.

FreudianSlippers

No. There could be serious legal/insurance issues if something were to happen to that person whilst on your property.

topper75

baby and crumble wrote: »

I get where you're coming from, but I wonder if you could come to an arrangement with that person rough sleeping that in exchange for the right to pitch a tent on your property, they could perhaps be responsible for raking leaves, etc. That way they are also building up experience as a gardener or groundskeeper, which would help them move on when the times comes for them to get back on their feet.

In practical terms, I don't need such assistance. But in principle I appreciate your acknowledgement that some consideration must be given in exchange for goods and services.

I don't mind raking leaves myself! I hate the job I do to pay all the bills though. Letting somebody freeload on that does not feel like any kind of justice.

TresGats wrote: »

Do you ever think that you could be a victim of the system yourself?
We are humans, not land accumulators or work-bots. Do you not think we should look out for each other?
Has anyone ever helped you when you needed it?

I'm old enough to know that life can go screwy on people despite good efforts. But when somebody is on the streets in a sleeping bag and has that drugged look - I work off the assumption that they have burned a good many bridges to get there. I'll give somebody help who's making efforts for themselves beyond holding out an empty cup. I'm not an island - I'm interconnected with my fellow human beings. But I don't let myself open to abuse by the same token.

Peregrinus wrote: »

Most people will find that very puzzling. Why would that not be ethical behaviour? Sharing the the fruits of your labours with others less well-positioned than yourself is pretty classic ethical behaviour, isn't it?

I don't see it as ethical for people who have made no effort at working or seeking work sharing in the fruits of my work. I see that as INjustice rather then justice.

looksee wrote: »

I think it is more likely that he is simply misunderstanding the meaning of the word 'ethical'.

Peregrinus wrote: »

The possibility did occur to me that he is misusing "ethical". But that just makes my point; nobody counters his point, because they don't understand his point, because they don't think that the word "ethical" means what he thinks it means.

Ethical: Conforming to moral principles or ethics; morally right; honourable; virtuous; decent.

No - deliberate usage (maybe there are connotations!) - see above. Receiving without earning is immoral.

Deleted User wrote: »

prediction 1

lots of ppl will take issue with first response

prediction 2

none of these ppl with internet opinions will have housed a rough sleeper in their shed

Probably, we are inundated with virtue signalling as people seek to manage their online PR in virtual personal brochures (social media personas).

pwurple wrote: »

No.

I know 4 homeless people fairly well. All 4 have some serious problems, and I would not be happy with any of them living within arms reach of my children.

pwurple wrote: »

If they have ended up homeless by living their whole life in Ireland, there is something seriously seriously wrong which a bed just won't fix. 

Mental health is the elephant in the room in all the celebrity guitar twanging doesn't seem to care. We went from locking them up in Victorian times to pretending they are the same as us and their free will to self-harm is not to be questioned. If only there were some middle ground.

Peregrinus wrote: »

Yes. Indeed, I suspect that the first response may be been designed to elicit lots of reaction.

I didn't mean to (naively, I now see). I just gave an honest answer. I did state that I was aware it might not be a popular position.

Graces7

Thank you for this thread.

I had a long chat in dunne's before Christmas with a man who was sleeping in a friend;s shed.

His misfortunes had left him with no job, no home and as he had quit his job perforce, no benefits. ( not going into details but it was the right thing to do in his case)

He had enough friends who were allowing him to sleep there, letting him use the shower etc.He was neat and clean and knew how important this was, not to let standards slip.

There are cases and there are times when this can bridge a gap and support someone while they get on their feet again.

He said very cogently that now he knew who his friends were.

pwurple

Graces7 wrote: »

Thank you for this thread.

I had a long chat in dunne's before Christmas with a man who was sleeping in a friend;s shed.

His misfortunes had left him with no job, no home and as he had quit his job perforce, no benefits. ( not going into details but it was the right thing to do in his case)

He had enough friends who were allowing him to sleep there, letting him use the shower etc.He was neat and clean and knew how important this was, not to let standards slip.

There are cases and there are times when this can bridge a gap and support someone while they get on their feet again.

He said very cogently that now he knew who his friends were.

And this is not a rough sleeper.
A rough sleeper will have burnt all his bridges with his friends and family. This man has not.

looksee

Heavens, if it was a friend, someone I knew well, he would be on the settee, at least!

BorneTobyWilde

Maybe ireland needs trailer parks like in USA
House all the homeless in them
Give them a home



Would solve the problem
Get them out of city

Stealthfins

Insurance could be tricky, what's to stop one person from making an injury claim and ruining it for everyone else.

pwurple

Another person who thinks the problem is "a home".

It's not.
It's mental health services.
It's addiction services.
It's our care system.
It've every problem that isn't solved.

Where people sleep is only a symptom of other stuff. There are plenty of beds.

doolox

I would have to know this person well and then well enough so he or she could sleep in the house on a temporary basis a week or two.

I have no close friends so I cannot see it happening any time soon.

I would imagine that my wife and family would find it hard for any longer than two weeks any absences from home for work etc. would be hard to implement.

I would imagine that there would be a lot of legal, social, security or other reasons to do what most people do and keep my property to myself.

Stovepipe

re post 21 above, de facto trailer parks already exist in Ireland. Ask anyone who runs a holiday home caravan park and they will tell you that there are people living fulltime in their caravans, now, despite the fact that it's supposedly not allowed, under local bylaws or the like. In some cases, Councils are turning a blind eye because they have no means to house people, if they force them to quit the caravan. Some people have lost their homes and are "minding" the caravan. I can think of at least two families in my area who were building a house and fell on hard times and are stuck living in a caravan beside the shell of their incomplete house. I know of one man who was thrown out by his wife and had to live in his camper for quite a while until he got a permanent place. I can also think of two individuals who slept in their work office over their businesses, because of being thrown out of home. I suspect the use of alternate housing is more common that people think or are prepared to admit.

L1011

People sleeping in their offices wasn't unheard of a decade ago either - difficult enough renting conditions then albeit not as bad as now. Place I was working in 2006 had minor flooding due to a rarely if never used before office shower leaking after daily use from someone living on-site; he wasn't noticed as people often took naps in the break room on split shifts etc.