What’s Going To Happen To Ruth?

How we respond to cases such as this says something fundamental about what we are as a people, a culture, a society. Do we just let this woman die as result of her bad luck, bad judgment, and laziness. If it were all about the judgment and laziness, I may not feel too guilty as a member of the society in which I live and which allows such a situation to exist (freedom is free to f**k up). But the one third of the equation that includes luck makes me sort of queasy. Rich 73 year old alcoholic women don't live on the street. Don't we have a responsiblity as humans to design, build, and maintain systems, structures, and institutions to shelter this woman? If not, I'm sort of ashamed.

I agree to some extent with Eckermann. However we live in an era of finite resources. How many children could be immunized, cured or educated with the money that might be spent helping this poor women who is not willing or able to help herself or even fully cooperate with her treatment? It is definitely a sad situation and there is no perfect solution. Sometimes we just can't solve other people's problems for them and nature, cruel as it is, just has to run it's course. Could that mean allowing her to live on the streets and die sooner or late, sadly it might. By all means an attempt should be made, repeated attempts in fact, to help her get her life together but it sounds like they have not been successful and may never be successful. The human condition is sometimes tragic. Blame god or fate or nature.

Heartbreaking. There, but for the grace of God, go I or any of us.We will read of her demise in the near future. Taking her off alcohol cold turkey could kill her. Sleeping in the streets in the cold would kill her. Wheeling around in this heat could kill her. She really does not have any good choices that I see. So sad, and no solutions.

Noletaman, it would be simple to blame god or fate or nature for our shortcomings and failures, but I encourage us to have the courage to assign blame where it belongs: to ourselves. We choose where to spend our limited resources. You seem to suggest that our choice is limited to either succoring the poor and addicted or immunizing and educating the young. I believe that is a false choice. One choice may be between me paying $36,000 in income taxes (as I did last year) and paying $40,000 (ouch!). Another choice could be between funding an endless war in Afganistan against a bunch of guys wearing flip-flops and pajamas or using those resources to maintain an adequate safety net for people like Ruth. You are correct that there are choices to be made. The choices we make determine the quality of our character as a society.

Eckermann, go talk to her. Maybe she'll listen to you and change her ways. Paying $36k in taxes indicates that you probably have the financial means to change her situation and do some good. You seem passionate, why not give it a shot? Or are you too busy? Not wanting to get involved? Have better or more important personal things to spend your money on?

We should require that anyone who receives services and is an alcoholic also receive "alcohol deterrents" (ADs) treatment - specifically, disulfiram and calcium carbimide - and perhaps mental health services. Even if they don't participate in the mental health services the alcohol deterrents (used long term) would make alcohol almost a non-issue.

Well Santabarbarasand, I am not a professional social worker or psychologist, so I would imagine that my intervention would not be as effective as that of professionals in the field. What I do, I do well because of my training and exeperience. My point is that Ruth would benefit from a systematic and institutional approach to her condition, just as my field of endeavor is successfully accomplished by trained professionals. The problem, as I see it, is that we, as a society, don't particularly care to pay for the professionally staffed systems and institutions that would be necessary to care for Ruth. I'm not excluding myself from blame. I'm just saying.

I actually know Ruth. I worked at Casa for a few years. She has had and still has tons of support. She herself has wanted to get sober, and was a few different times. But it is what it is. Ruth is Ruth. And she may never have the willingness to get and stay sober. But she still is a beautiful person with a story to tell. She is always welcome at the Casa, and only is sent out when she sneaks in alcohol. She may die out there like 25 homeless people did last year. It's the life of the homeless. Sad but true. Love and Tolerance People...
a fair, objective, and permissive attitude toward those whose opinions, practices, race, religion, nationality, etc., differ from one's own; freedom from bigotry.

rstein9, I believe this is the most insensitive thing I've read in the Independent! What kind of idiot would recommend suicide to a sick person? If it’s tongue in cheek comment? It’s not funny but it is very sick!

I agree with you Eckermann. The fact that our nation wastes trillions of dollars and lives on unnecessary wars, military toys and waste could be put to much better use. Say, housing the homeless for one. Bet there'd be billions left over for more domestic jobs and projects.

Thank you, Trenches, for some of the back story. I live in the lower east side, barely squeaking by financially, and have probably seen her. There are at least three other women who are homeless, two, presently living at Casa Esperanza, beg for money every day at the gas station, money probably for booze -- at least, months ago, they were often drunk. The third, about 65, is living in a van on the street, a van provided by a business owner out of the kindness of his heart after her RV was towed away for unpaid tickets. These are just the ones I see every day --- and, of course, there are derelict, sad males.

This last woman who's living in a van has an alcohol problem and is distinctly mentally off but refuses to do anything for herself, such as the New Beginnings program. Who can make her? No one. If the business owner took back his van, she'd be in the bushes.

The solution is money. Those like Eckermann with that kind of income have an obligation, imo, to provide some of that money towards public shelter. We all are the society he writes of, but unlike many of us, he has ability to do something about it. We all know, blah, blah, blah, about international choices and obligations --- but to blame society, well, it's exactly as he says, it's ourselves, our choices --- and it does come down to the individual.

Casa Esperanza was built in good part with individual donations; there could be help for the Ruths out there with more individual donations. This society is not going to change but rather than blaming society, we all should look in the mirror, especially those of us who can afford to do something and don't. (The $36,000 tax bill would probably be much less if a good portion of the income were donated.)