The Parable of the Starfish
We’ve all heard the
parable of the starfish: a man comes across a young boy throwing starfish into
the ocean. The man, seeing this, tells
the boy that what he’s doing is a waste of time because, there being thousands
of starfish, his actions won’t make a difference. And then comes the boy’s famous
response. Picking up a starfish, he says,
“It makes a difference to this one!”
I got to thinking
about the starfish story as I was driving home from work today and passed a
homeless man panhandling on the side of the road. It’s a frigid day—windy and cold, with a
chance of rain and sleet in the afternoon.
In short, a day that must make the despair of homelessness even more
biting and sharp. Stopped at a red
light, I looked at the man, bundled up yet shivering, holding up his makeshift
sign, and wondered what I should do.
Give him a dollar? Ignore him? Work for systemic change that will end
homelessness?
The light turned green
and I continued on my way. But I
couldn’t get those questions out of my head.
I am, after all, the Executive Director of a nonprofit whose mission is
to end poverty. In a sense it is my job
to wrestle with these issues. That said,
I think we’ve all heard the various responses to what I call the Paradox of the
Panhandler:
- · If you give him (or her) money, he’ll waste it
- · You shouldn’t give him money; buy him food instead
- · He should get a job
- · Panhandling—now there’s a way to make money without working!
- · It won’t make a difference
- · I’m too busy
- · This won’t solve the problem
Perspective
From the point-of-view
of the homeless man the most important course of action is that you help him. The obvious counterpoint to this is that each
of us can only give so much, can only spare so much change, can only stop so
many times during the day to help another in need. And if we take the attitude that it is better
to work for systemic change, well, that isn’t exactly a picnic, now is it?
None of this is
revolutionary; it seems to me we are all vaguely aware of these thoughts when facing
the problem of homelessness, and perhaps that is why we prefer to look away. Yet the outreached hand of a person in need imposes
on us a stark question: what are we going to do today for this human being?
Unfortunately, what
tends to happen is that some people, moved by any of the mysterious impulses
that motivate human beings, give the man some change; and most others do
nothing at all. Neither scenario gets to
the root of the problem, which is multi-varied and ranges from a weak social
safety net to a poor mental health system and lack of affordable housing and
jobs.
Solutions
If we are to solve the Paradox of
the Panhandler, it seems, we must not only confront the immediacy of the
homeless person asking us for help; no, we must also address the very system
that makes it possible for human beings to have to sleep on the streets or in
dingy shelters, devoid of dignity, of safety, of hope. A tall order, to be sure, but as Martin
Luther King wrote, “An injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.” We can only ignore the suffering of others
for so long. Eventually, that suffering
will make itself known, will impinge upon the comfort we enjoy. And though we may not have the solutions to
endemic injustice, surely we have within us the ability to contemplate them, to
advocate for whatever can be done, and to take what action we can.
Good News!
Finally, the good news
is that we now have some promising approaches to ending homelessness. For instance, a recent NY Times article ‘How
to Help Homeless Families,’ noted that
“Cities are moving away from
long-term shelter and focusing, instead, on developing better ways to identify
and prioritize vulnerable individuals and families, prevent crisis, and rapidly
re-house people, using short-or-long-term assistance as needed. ...The evidence
is mounting that this works.”
Cities, though, aren’t
robots. They are run by politicians
voted into office by the voting public. If
we know how to at least try to end homelessness, and we elect the people with
the power to implement those policies, it stands to reason that, at a minimum,
we can push our elected officials to implement those policies. What’s more, we must be willing to sacrifice
something to make the policies tenable, be it paying slightly higher taxes,
approving ballot measures to authorize the construction of more affordable
housing, or voting out of office politicians who fail to live up to their
promises.
No comments:
Post a Comment