Decisions and Poverty - here is a site by a lady who has worked with poor people for a long time which covers the same topic I addressed recently here before the conversation shifted to women's rights issues.
One of the things she addresses is the role of the law in sometimes saving lives of drug users - that is something I think about when drug legalization is disccused. I fear that legalization of the really dangerous drugs like cocaine, heroin, meth would really raise the death rate from drug use over the long haul. You can make a Darwinian argument that maybe society would be better off without them, but its pretty callous.
Chapter 5: Decisions and Poverty
(This is Chapter 5 of "Up and Out," a book condensing my long experience about how to best help poor people. ......
(For other chapters, look at "Categories" on the right and click on the chapter you choose.)
PART 1: THE AMERICAN POVERTY TRAP
Chapter 5: Decisions and Poverty
It is almost impossible to be in a situation where there are literally no choices. Even the most controlled prisoner still has some choices: whether to eat, drink fluids, speak, cooperate or not. Most of us have many more choices than that. In fact, we have so many that choosing among them can be a problem. Most choices matter very little. Others can change our lives drastically.
The poor have choices too. Some of these choices have a big effect on whether they become poor, and whether they stay poor. Even when their choices are limited, they still count. They still can make the difference between a better life and a worse one, and between staying in poverty or moving "up and out."
Non-poor people face many of the choices that poor people face. But for the poor, a bad choice is usually more harmful. It is not that the poor are more to blame for bad choices, but that they pay a higher price, because they have fewer resources to fall back on when they do. So making good choices and avoiding bad ones is even more crucial for the poor.
Choices made between the ages of around 14 to 25 are the ones that form us most. Most choices made to smoke or use drugs are made then. Spouses are usually chosen then. Careers are usually chosen then. Criminal behavior usually begins then. Study habits and work habits are formed then. Character choices are made then. These early choices can shape a life so firmly that it takes a terrific effort to change them later.
It is not that we cannot change course later in life. People do every day. But it is much more difficult then. It involves trying to catch up with where we might have been if our youthful choices had been better. And it also involves cleaning up the mess we left by bad choices.
Every effort that can be made by the poor to make good choices, every effort that can be to help them do so, will pay huge dividends for the rest of their lives. Having the right kind of help at the right time can greatly increase their chances for success.
What are some of the most important ways that bad choices by the poor can make them poorer and keep them that way? The choices with the biggest effect are about an emotionally charged and highly controversial subject: that is, about sex.
Remember that Chapter 4, "What the Poor Are Like," pointed to the fact that most of the poor are families headed by a young, never-married female. That one fact comes from making the worst choice any young woman can make who does not want her children and herself to be poor. That choice is having sex outside of marriage. That one choice is the cause of most poverty in America! That is a fact that is not popular; but it is still a fact.
Are the poor alone in having sex outside marriage? No. But it is more devastating for them. They start earlier. They have fewer checks on early sexual activity. They have fewer resources to fall back on when a pregnancy results.
What would help? Abortion? Remember, many have already had 2 or 3 abortions, and 2 or 3 children, by the age of 18 or so. Not aborting all their children is their choice. In this country, we do not have forced abortions.
What else would help? Wouldn't using birth control methods to avoid pregnancies help? How about using sex education in schools to teach them to always use birth control methods?
Sex education in schools has been tried for years. Afterwards, the use of birth control methods does indeed increase. The problem is, so does the level of sexual activity! So the net result is more unprotected sex than before. Not only do pregnancies increase afterwards, sexually-transmitted diseases do to. (These increases come even when a section on abstinence is included in sex education courses.)
It seems we forgot something when we decided to rely on sex education: teens think they are invincible and immortal. They think bad things happen to other people, but not to them. This population typically does not even take the precaution of using seat belts! They think they would never have an accident. And we were expecting that if we educated them to, that they would always take precautions before having sex? Something even mature, married couples may neglect to do? We had not considered with whom we were dealing.
There is something, however, that has a better track record. That is teaching abstinence-only courses (that is, without giving any information at all about birth control methods) in middle schools and high schools. The result has been less early sex, fewer pregnancies and fewer cases of sexually-transmitted disease. (1) Both these typically continue to decline in that school every year that the abstinence-only course is taught.
Another thing we should be paying attention to is that teens involved in sexual activity do not do as well in school. (2)
But what about the young, unwed mother? Often she is no longer in school, without the opportunity for abstinence training. Even if she had it, she is already a mother. What good would it do?
It is still helpful to make abstinence training part of any program to help the poor. It may help her not to conceive any more children before she marries. It may also help her to live without the financial drain of the succession of live-in boyfriends that by now have become a part of her life. These boyfriends, as described in Chapter 4, help keep her poor.
Abstinence training is good even for the men in anti-poverty programs. Most already have children, whom they do not support. They need to understand how important it is to be a good father to their children. They need to understand how important it is to marry their woman, and bring up those children with two parents living together in the same house.
Most of these fathers either had no father themselves, or had terrible fathers. They need to be shown why they should do better, and helped to learn how to become good husbands and fathers. Many times, they do decide to do better. It is a long road, but any improvement helps. Such improvements also help them, with their wife and children, to become less poor and more prosperous.
Another youthful choice that traps people in poverty is abuse of drugs or alcohol. Staying clean from substance abuse helps avoid poverty. Once addicted, however, it takes specialized programs to kick the habits. Ordinary programs for helping the poor are not suitable for this task. They are not designed for it, are not up to it, and seldom work with someone still addicted.
Before entering an ordinary program for exiting poverty, addicts must be required to enter a specialized program for addicts and complete it successfully. They should not be admitted to anti-poverty programs until they graduate successfully and are prepared to show continually that they are drug free and not abusing alcohol. If they are admitted to the anti-poverty program, then lapse, they should not be allowed to continue in the program until they successfully complete a anti-addiction program again.
Note #1: patience sometimes pays off with addicts. Many who succeed in leaving addiction permanently do so only after repeated failures. Keep them trying.
Note #2: This is sad, but true. Almost no addict will ever enter a rehab program unless a judge gives them the choice of rehab or jail, or unless it is a rehab program in prison. So it is important to take advantage of such a fact, and to realize that when an addict is charged with a crime minor enough to be given a jail-or-rehab choice, that is their big chance! There are few such chances, too.
That is the wrong time for family or friends to try to help them to get out of jail in other ways! Instead, they should thankfully cooperate with such a judge by not "rescuing" their loved one from jail, but by letting the pressure work that the judge is bringing. These chances do not come every day, and have saved many addicts. Don't work against such a judge! Not getting someone out of jail can seem hard-hearted to families. The jailed addict will bring tremendous pressure on them, perhaps wringing their hearts by showing much distress. Don't cave in! Let them have a shot at changing their lives instead. These are few and far between. Don't waste any of them!
Even if such an addict is facing prison, not jail, that can also be an opportunity for rehab. That is because prison is almost the only other time that an addict will agree to go into a rehab program. Instead of focusing on freeing the hapless addict - who will go back to his or her addiction as soon as they hit the street again - it can help more to focus instead on getting them into a prison that has an addiction-rehab program.
Again - the only time almost all addicts willingly go into rehab (and stay for the whole program instead of ducking out quickly) is in either jail-or-rehab rulings by a judge, or in prison rehab programs. Don't be in a hurry to save them from these pressures to rehab by bailing them out of their legal troubles - which, remember, are the result of their own choices, freely made.
Look - jail or prison can save the life of your dear one! Most addicts die early. When I was in prison, I heard addict after addict say frankly, "Prison saved my life. If I hadn't been locked up, I would be dead by now." And we heard about many friends who did die, almost as soon as they were released and could get drugs or alcohol again.
If a dear one who is an addict is faced with time behind bars, don't heed their pleas to help them go free. Think. Get some good advice. And consider letting them be compelled to face doing time, with the possibility that it will help them to make the decision to quit that all your pleading will probably never do.
Understand that they tune out your pleadings to quit, even when they pretend to listen. But jail or prison sometimes gets their attention! Give them what amounts to their best shot at quitting - maybe their last shot. Give them a shot at a normal life. Give them a shot at not dying in the near future. Sometimes true pity and love means taking the harder road. We have to love them enough to say no, but give them a chance at real help instead. It may not work - and they won't appreciate it at the time! - but that is what true love is. Don't let them down. This is their big chance - and yours too.
Well - so much for addiction. The point is: first, help young people decide not to try drugs or alcohol in the first place. And second, do not take current addicts into your anti-poverty program. If they lapse into addiction again, require them to leave the anti-poverty program immediately, until they successfully complete a rehab program. Then re-admit them, as long as they stay clean and are willing to undergo random drug tests to prove it.
Another youthful choice that makes people poor is not trying hard enough to do well in school. There is surprising peer pressure on them to do badly. So they end up with a lack of education in general, a lack of reading and math skills, and a lack of study habits that are a real handicap if they try to catch up later. All these lacks are a problem in trying to find a good job. They will help keep the badly-educated poor.
So part of every program for helping the poor should include remedial courses in reading and math, courses to help them get a GED certificate, and encouraging them to take college and/or job-training courses after getting the GED. Volunteer teachers and mentors are the backbone of such charitable catch-up education programs.
Another common bad choice made in youth is to have an attitude of disdain toward real work. (Which also comes from peer pressure.) A good program to help the poor has to address negative attitudes toward work and replace them with positive ones. These lessons are important. They should be based on a good, field-tested curriculum on the subject.
Even so, nothing will really help with work attitudes without the experience of actually going to work and continuing to work. No program to help the poor should ever fail to require its clients to work. If they will not work, in spite of whatever training they complete in positive attitudes toward work, they should not be allowed to stay in the program.
Many programs will give them a chance to try again later, however, after being required to be out of the program for a certain number of weeks or months after refusing to work.
Some programs hesitate to require clients to work when unemployment is high. We did not find that to be a problem in San Jose in the late 1980s, however, even though unemployment rates there ranged between 6.5% and 7.5%. Our clients always found jobs, once they clearly understood that they had to work in order to stay in the shelter.
(When unemployment is in the 6.5-7.5% range, much of that is actually "transitional" or "frictional" unemployment, not "real" unemployment. Most of that range consists of people who are truly simply transitioning between jobs, and are out of work only briefly. It is not necessary for unemployment to be as low as the rare 2%-3% range of the boom of the late 1990s, in order for clients to find a job. Those who want to work can still find jobs even with a 6.5%-7.5% unemployment rates, as we demonstrated.)
Finally, making a choice to commit crimes in youth often leads to a life of criminal behavior. (Again, this is often a result of focused peer pressure, especially from gangs.) While such a life may have bursts of prosperity, it leads eventually to poverty. One reason is the lack of income during considerable time behind bars. Another is that ex-cons have a harder time finding good jobs. Another is that, without a real turning away from crime, criminal activity will continue. That means more lost jobs, the bad record gets worse, and more time is lost to prison.
Ex-cons should by all means be helped. But it is better to include some experienced ex-con volunteers, who clearly have a verifiably good track record for a several years after prison. Their experience will be essential, as these are hard cases. (They are beyond the scope of this chapter, but will be discussed later.)
What is crucial is never to make that first youthful decision to commit a crime. Any efforts we can make to help at-risk children face the results of choosing crimes, and gangs, are very much worth making.
There are other important choices that help make and keep people poor, which will be addressed in later chapters. But these are the bad choices that are the most costly: unwise sex lives; early addiction; bad attitudes toward learning in school and toward succeeding in work; and committing any criminal acts. These are so important in forming the adult that a young person will become, that they alone can make all the difference as to whether anyone becomes or remains poor.
_________
(1) "Sex Respect" program, 1987-89, 14 schools in 6 midwestern states: 1990 follow-up with 3500 students, showed pregnancy rates cut in half. Canyon High School, Comal County, Texas: in 1987-89, pregnancies cut from 22 to 14; in 1990, cut again to 7. San Marcos, California, with "Teen Aid," pregnancies cut from 27% to 2.5%. East St. Louis, Illinois, with "Sex Respect," 1989-1991: pregnancies cut from 41 to 10.
(2) 1987 "Survey of High Achievers," from "Who's Who Among American High School Students."
upandout.us |
