The Homeless. By Christopher Jencks. Cambridge,
Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1994. 161 p. $17.95 (p).
Christopher Jencks has written a highly readable, occasionally
acerbic, essay carefully analyzing and modifying where warranted
the most popular explanations for the rise and persistence of
homelessness in the United States. Drawing upon the work of others
like Martha Burt and Peter Rossi and upon available Census and
survey data collected by government agencies, Jencks revisits
many of the standard questions in the field: how many homeless
are there? what roles have deinstitutionalization of mental health
facilities and the availability of crack cocaine played in the
continuing crisis? to what extent and in what ways has the economic
restructuring contributed to breakdowns in family structures that
have resulted in homelessness? how have changes in the housing
market, including the destruction of single-room occupancy units,
the imposition of higher housing quality standards and the use
of rent control laws contributed to homelessness?
In each of these instances, Jencks wrestles with certain weaknesses
he finds in standard arguments, sometimes reaching conclusions
different from those espoused by other scholars. Thus, he argues
that deinstitutionalization of the mentally ill continues to be
a major contributor to homelessness because of the insistence
of civil libertarians on eliminating involuntary commitment. Jencks
seems to relish taking the occasional iconoclastic positions on
this issue and others such as his speculations about how the creation
of a network of shelters and other support structures for the
homeless may have contributed to homelessness (by making it easier
for those Rossi has called "precariously housed" to
leave uncomfortable living situations or for relatives or friends
who have provided them with space to force them out).
In place of the shelter industry, Jencks recommends a series of
"partial solutions" to deal with various sub-sets of
the homeless. For families with children, Jencks would provide
greater welfare and housing benefits. At the same time he is realistic
about the high costs of getting single mothers off welfare and
the likely unwillingness of American society to pay those costs.
With regard to mentally capable childless adults, Jencks is not
terribly optimistic that expenditures on job training will yield
much success, given the contemporary American economy. His only
suggestions are the creation of a mixture of publicly-managed
day-labor exchanges to serve the private market and the resuscitation
of public service employment. Jencks also advocates bringing back
private residential spaces for individuals, even if the result
is the cubicle hotels of an earlier era. However, he recognizes
that guaranteeing such spaces to individuals might not only meet
the needs of some of the current homeless, but might encourage
other individuals to become homeless and would require many localities
to change their municipal housing codes, perhaps in the face of
neighborhood opposition.
Even if society were prepared to support these policy approaches
to dealing with the mentally capable, questions remain about how
to treat the mentally ill. More than many civil libertarians,
Jencks takes an interventionist approach to directing the behaviors
of the mentally ill both in how they use public benefits and how
much freedom they are to be accorder in remaining outside institutionalized
care. At the same time, he is willing to spend a greater portion
of societal resources to make sure the mentally ill receive the
services they need. While Jencks concedes that we have not done
a good job of evaluating the effectiveness of such services, he
ultimately argues that society has a "moral contract"
to do what it can "to reconcile the claims of compassion
and prudence" (p.122).
David B. Rosenthal
State University of New York at Buffalo