Harinina: have you heard of wet houses? - SoberRecovery : Alcoholism Drug ...

Welcome to the Sober Recovery Community

Already registered? Login above ---^

To take advantage of all the site?s features, become a member of the supportive Sober Recovery Community. Ads will no longer appear on the forums if you are a registered user

Yesterday, 03:07 PM

? #1 (permalink)

Member

Join Date: Mar 2005

Location: Seeking Peace

Posts: 1,188

have you heard of wet houses?

I'd post the link but I don't think I can...

The Detroit Free Press has an article today about wet houses. They are a place for chronic, homeless alcoholics to live. A place where they can drink behind closed doors.

Advocates say that it will reduce police, jail and emergency room services because the alohoholic can drink in peace rather than in public.

I don't know how I feel about the idea. My exah has been homeless at times. He's been in jail. He's been in the emergency room. He's been in psych wards. If you accept that alcolism is a disease (which I most definitely do), than isn't it an act of compassion to give him a room...a place to live...even though he is sick...or maybe especially BECAUSE he is sick?

Or is this just another form of enabling. Homelessness isn't the bottom for some people. Some people never get better. I worry that my exah is one of them. Being homeless hasn't done it...jail...er visits...psych wards...maybe he doesn't have a bottom. Maybe it's an act of compassion to give him a place where he can live and drink in peace. (Just as long as it isn't MY house).

I just don't know what I think about it.

What do you think?

__________________
Why not go out on a limb? That's where the fruit is. - Mark Twain

We must be willing to let go of the life we have planned, so as to have the life that is waiting for us.

-E.M. Forster

Yesterday, 03:27 PM

? #2 (permalink)

Member

Join Date: Oct 2012

Location: texas

Posts: 39

I have seen this on tv. It really blew my mind at first. Still not quite sure I know what to think of it. The theory behind it is just as you said. They get a room, food, and are allowed to drink. They are rationed so many alcoholic drinks a day. Supposedly research has shown that some alcoholics end up drinking less after being there for a while.

Definately got mixed feelings about it.

The Following User Says Thank You to Lynnrae2 For This Useful Post:

Yesterday, 03:29 PM

? #3 (permalink)

Member

Join Date: Oct 2012

Location: texas

Posts: 39

might be a peace of mind for family members though. At least they know where their son, daughter, husband, wife, are at.

The Following User Says Thank You to Lynnrae2 For This Useful Post:

Yesterday, 03:38 PM

? #4 (permalink)

Member

Join Date: Oct 2006

Location: right here, right now

Posts: 2,387

One opened this year in my town. I don't know how to feel about it either. On the one hand, yes, it gives alcoholics a place to drink themselves to death with some dignity -- that's been the argument from the people who created it. That it's sort of like a hospice for alcoholics who can't be cured.

On the other hand it makes me angry. Because hospice is for people for whom there is no help; a place for them to die with dignity. These "wet houses" are for people who either deny they are sick or refuse to get treatment. It's more like leper colonies than hospices. It's a way for well-meaning do-gooders to feel like they're doing something for these unfortunate addicts when, in reality, they're padding their fall and preventing them from hitting rock bottom, thereby really being the ultimate codependents.

I don't know which one it is. If my AXH was homeless, would I rather that he had a place to drink himself to death while being warm? Sure. But I would rather that his life become so uncomfortable that he decided to get sober.

There have been several people who died there. The cops are there a lot. There are I believe something like 23 apartments in this place. There are many times that many addicts and mentally ill people who camp out in the woods. I sort of have the feeling that the people who are together enough to be able to apply for a spot in these houses could theoretically become sober, too. The folks who sleep in the woods out here don't even have the wherewithall (most of them) to consider that there may be options. So are these houses harming people that could be helped, while ignoring the people who really are beyond sobriety and recovery? I don't know.

__________________
My
"If you're going through hell, keep going!" (Winston Churchill)
"Unacceptable behavior is unacceptable." (LaTeeDa)
"Sometimes the hardest thing and the right thing are the same."

Yesterday, 03:39 PM

? #5 (permalink)

Member

Join Date: Oct 2006

Location: right here, right now

Posts: 2,387

Quote:

They get a room, food, and are allowed to drink. They are rationed so many alcoholic drinks a day. Supposedly research has shown that some alcoholics end up drinking less after being there for a while.

Oh -- then that's something different. What I'm talking about is just subsidized housing for "chronic inebriates" where nobody cares how much they drink as long as they don't cause trouble.

Yesterday, 04:49 PM

? #7 (permalink)

Community Greeter

Join Date: Feb 2008

Location: Kansas

Posts: 9,766

I've never heard of subsidized housing for chronic inebriates.

For low-come families...yes.

For disabled folks...yes.

Even if the housing rent is 100% subsidized, the alcoholic would still responsible for food, clothing, utilities, etc. I don't get it.

I did watch a documentary on a place like what LynnRae described. It's sort of like a halfway house in that there are multiple people with their own rooms, but instead of recovering alcoholics, it's the opposite.

I definitely have mixed feelings on the subject.

__________________
DeVon & the Zoo Crew

?An error doesn't become a mistake until you refuse to correct it.
--Orlando A. Battista

Yesterday, 05:00 PM

? #8 (permalink)

Linkin Park Enthusiast

Join Date: Feb 2012

Posts: 255

I saw it on tv too, like they get so many free shots per day or something to keep the DT's away.

Ridiculous, in my opinion. If people can get state assistance, they should be sober. Our tax dollars are paying them to stay drunk.

And I keep telling the ABF I won't pay for him to drink. At least I KNOW him.

__________________

I'm swimming in the smoke, of bridges I have burned
So don't apologize, I'm losing what I don't deserve

The Following User Says Thank You to pixilation For This Useful Post:

Yesterday, 06:05 PM

? #10 (permalink)

Member

Join Date: Jun 2011

Posts: 780

There is a bean counter in this mix. And I am leaning towards the health insurance industry.

It's a hell of alot cheaper to supply them with some cheap gut rot booze than to pay for detox, rehab, recurring hospital stays.

IMO, this is about MONEY. Health is no longer an issue. How very disturbing.

Yesterday, 06:09 PM

? #11 (permalink)

Earthworm

Join Date: Feb 2007

Location: Canada

Posts: 678

Its a ridiculous idea,the ultimate in enabling.

Yesterday, 07:25 PM

? #13 (permalink)

Member

Join Date: Mar 2012

Posts: 826

I'm sorry, I find it very obnoxious that active alcoholics are being provided a safe place to drink when there are children who are hungry and cold.

Funded enabling.

Bad idea, on so many levels.

__________________
?There's no coming to consciousness without pain.?
? C.G. Jung

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Katiekate For This Useful Post:

Yesterday, 08:25 PM

? #14 (permalink)

Member

Join Date: May 2009

Location: Land of Cotton

Posts: 3,178

According to this NYT article, this housing alternative is actually "cheaper" for the taxpayer.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/01/ma...re-t.html?_r=0

__________________
Everything will be OK in the end. If it's not OK, then it's not the end.

The Following User Says Thank You to tjp613 For This Useful Post:

Yesterday, 08:52 PM

? #15 (permalink)

Member

Join Date: Oct 2006

Location: right here, right now

Posts: 2,387

Yeah, tjp, I don't wish to turn this into a political discussion, but it's infuriating and disgusting to me that tax payers at all are involved in paying for anything for addicts. Infuriating.

Yesterday, 09:05 PM

? #17 (permalink)

SR Moderator

Join Date: Apr 2007

Location: South Seas

Posts: 53,156

It's an emotive issue. There's probably no right answer.

A lot of homeless alcoholics and addicts in my town die from other causes apart from drink/drugs...violence, accident, exposure, ill health....

these places, at least where I am, are not for the middle tier alcoholic - they're for the homeless, the vagrants, and those who've reached the end of their tether and may not be capable of making much in the way of rational decisions anymore.

It's not the Ritz.

Maybe it's because I'm an alcoholic myself and I can see what might have been in every homeless guy but I personally don't see that as enabling.

It's not a perfect solution, but to me it's a humane response to a pretty damn intractable problem.

__________________
It is never too late to be who you might have been.
George Eliot

Last edited by Dee74; Yesterday at 09:32 PM.

Yesterday, 09:11 PM

? #18 (permalink)

Member

Join Date: Nov 2011

Location: Louisville, KY

Posts: 375

I have never heard of this, but I live in a small town. It would never fly here.

__________________
I want to be the person God expects me to be
***myself

Yesterday, 09:29 PM

? #19 (permalink)

Member

Join Date: Aug 2011

Posts: 1,603

A few questions came to mind:

Do these houses have rules? What if someone is violent? Are they kicked out?

Are the houses cleaned periodically? Or do the alcoholics live in there among vomit, excrement and spilled alcohol?

What if they wander away drunk; wouldn't that defeat the purpose?

The Following User Says Thank You to Ragamuffin For This Useful Post:

Yesterday, 10:16 PM

? #21 (permalink)

To thine own self be true.

Join Date: May 2009

Location: U.S.A.

Posts: 5,786

I personally feel that as human beings we have the right in this society to a dry place to live, whether we are alcoholics or otherwise. I also personally believe that we have the responsibility as a SOCIETY (not individually) to provide dry shelter to all human beings who need it. I agree with Lillamy, though, that there are people who are homeless who do not have the resources, contacts, or even the presence of mind to secure shelter and it seems discriminatory to provide for alcoholics so they can drink in peace while ignoring those even less fortunate. It's a huge dilemma in this country.

__________________
God, grant me the serenity
to accept the things I cannot change,
the courage to change the things I can,
and the wisdom to know the difference.

Peace out.

Yesterday, 11:27 PM

? #22 (permalink)

Member

Join Date: Oct 2012

Location: Portland, OR

Posts: 4

I just read the NY Times article from the link someone posted above... My gut reaction was one of horror and I can't really get past that. Hearing things like this is what keeps me sober.

The Following User Says Thank You to BrightStarr For This Useful Post:

Yesterday, 11:49 PM

? #23 (permalink)

Member

Join Date: May 2012

Location: Arizona

Posts: 167

I have never heard of this before. I will admit that I would not want one near my home for fear of disruption in the neighborhood and worries about my young son, but really I am not troubled by the idea in general because sadly many alcoholics and addicts live and die on the streets alone, and in my way of thinking it just not right. Also it might have some impact on the reduction of crime, and other concerns that affect the general non-addicted society.

I would actually view this very similiar to many other services provided to addicts; for example clinics that provide free clean needles, or free vials of Narcan to reverse an opiate overdose; so they can carry it with them, or have available for friends who might overdose. If you want to argue enabling continued use; well these things might also be an example.

And then hmmm.. what about churches, and shelters offering free meals to those in need; a lot of them are addicts, or alcoholics. Wouldnt this also be enabling? Well technically I think it would by the common definition.

I actually view all of the above as more of a kind love, instead of tough love.
And in some cases, I can actually see where an alcoholic living on the streets, who then had the opportunity for shelter, a free defined amount of liquor, a bit of kindness; might actually begin to reduce his drinking and rely only on the freeebies, their life might improve if they were given a helping hand.

Of course just like everything else; it would have zero affect on some, and they would use it just as a flop house.

Hopefully funded by donations, as taxpayers should have a choice in all these matters.