Fredrik Mansfield

March 16, 2015

Honors 231 BB – Final Paper
It is an average rainy day in Seattle. You pass by a man sitting on the concrete sidewalk,

bundled in layers, holding a sign saying, “Anything helps.” You feel pity, and so you buy him a

sandwich and go about your day, feeling righteous for ‘doing the right thing.’ You forget about

that man sitting on that concrete sidewalk, getting more and more drenched, regretfully eating

your now-soggy sandwich in order to make it to the next day, where he can repeat the same

degrading cycle. What you do not know is that this man has a name. Just a month ago, he lost his

job and apartment to an alcohol addiction, his escape for too much stress. Now he is one of a

growing number of houseless Americans, looked down upon as ‘dangerous,’ and ‘worthless.’

Houselessness is an issue that few are willing to care about. Trapped in a cycle with too little aid

and too much fear, they have become the invisible in our midst.

Street Youth Ministries (SYM) is a non-profit organization intent on loving houseless

youth of all levels of depravity; I have seen youth who are deep in drug addiction to a young man

hoping to attend the University of Washington soon. SYM mainly operates as a drop-in center,

allowing the youth to come in for food, clothing, warmth, activities, and the care of the staff,

volunteers, and other guests. While the staff encourage youth to take advantage of the resources

available – job connections and interview preparation, housing resources, and drug rehabilitation

programs – the hope is that the youth will seek to empower themselves. The mission of SYM is

to provide the street youth of the University District with relationships, life skills, and resources;

the goal is not to solve the problem of their houselessness and get them into homes.

Essentially, the entire purpose of the organization is to provide care to street youth. This,

of course, raises the question: Who is not caring for these youth, such that this organization

needed to be created? Structurally, this begins with a political system that allows for the poor to

reach a state of poverty in which they cannot afford to pay for a place to live. The current
 Fredrik Mansfield
March 16, 2015
Honors 231 BB – Final Paper
economic system of neoliberalism does just that. Neoliberalism is structured to cut public

spending in order to free the market for more economic flow. By taking economic power away

from the government and giving it to the people, the wealthy become not only wealthier but

more powerful, and they use this power to influence policy from income tax cuts to decreased

worker regulation, allowing them to achieve even greater wealth. On the contrary, the poor are

now silenced politically, becoming increasingly burdened and more financially deprived by the

new policies (Harvey 2005). By neoliberal logic, all sectors should become privatized to increase

efficiency and foster competition that leads to growth. This increased privatization has made the

public safety net a thought of the past. The fruits of this increased privatization – inadequate

public education, higher costs of medicine, reduced welfare – are producing an increasing

amount of wealth disparity in the United States, and is making the journey out of poverty and

houselessness all the more difficult (Lawson 2007). Care for the houseless is ignored by the

government out of interest in neoliberal privatization, and as a result, NGOs and volunteers are

left to do the necessary care work.

The shift of care out of public services reflects the understanding of care as a private

rather than public matter. As Nakano-Glenn explains, family life and all aspects of care – child-

rearing, elderly care, cleaning, etc. – became increasingly separated from economic life as work

began to move away from the home. As a result, care became seen as a private matter (2010).

The issue of seeing care as a private matter is that it shifts the responsibility of care away from

the public, enabling the wealthy and the government to ignore the needs of the poor who become

trapped in debt and other struggles. At SYM, the many needs of the young adults I work with are

apparent and pressing. The organization, however, cannot get government funding. Funds are
 Fredrik Mansfield
March 16, 2015
Honors 231 BB – Final Paper
low and needs are not always met because SYM cannot meet them alone, and the public sphere

is not providing the support that is needed.

It has become increasingly clear to me through my time at SYM that residual poverty

knowledge and the prevalence of inequality on top of poverty are closely related. Hickey

describes residual poverty knowledge directed locally as understanding poverty to be “a problem

of the personal deficiencies, culture, irresponsibly or immoral behavior of poor people” (2009).

When looking at poverty locally, well-off Americans tend to judge the poor as worse people.

However, the poor do the same for the wealthy as well, in many cases. I have noticed this again

and again at SYM. As a volunteer, I am understood to be better off, and it has taken many of the

youth a long time to warm up to me. Many of them still do not trust me. Between each other,

however, there is an understanding of the situation they are all struggling with, and they engage

in caring for one another without as much hesitancy. I understand their caution around me,

because I myself can relate to the general perception of the rich among the poor. The rich are

seen as greedy and selfish by much of the poor and middle class. The stigma in both directions is

rooted in a disconnect, a gap in care across economic class. Consider this hypothetical: If a

country were to be impoverished but have absolutely no inequality – everyone was equally poor

– they would all understand each other and care for one another without the stigmas associated

with class. Stigma has less to do with poverty and more to do with inequality.

The disconnect between the wealthy and poor leads to misunderstandings of the

economically distant other, which has detrimental effects on the poor when it influences policy

decisions. Much of the movement to decrease welfare is rooted in a misrepresentation of the poor

as being dependent upon welfare. By this argument, welfare is hindering the poor from desiring

to help themselves out of their financial situation (Fraser, Gordon 1994). Working at SYM has
 Fredrik Mansfield
March 16, 2015
Honors 231 BB – Final Paper
taught me that this is far from the truth, but it has also revealed to me how one could arrive at

such a conclusion. Week in and week out, I see many of the same youth come in, taking food for

themselves and picking out clothes. They seem happy, for the most part; the face they wear at

SYM does not suggest a frustration with their poverty. It becomes easy to imagine that they are

doing nothing to attempt to address their own need, simply living off of the resources of the

NGOs that provide them services. Yet when I am fortunate enough to hear one of the youth share

a story about their struggles, all thoughts of their dependency disappear. The struggle to survive

on the streets and seek employment through stigma of being houseless is difficult enough;

without a caregiver’s assistance in the process, it is practically impossible. I often take for

granted how much care I have been privileged to receive in my life. Employment, I have begun

to realize, is all about the ontology of care. As Lawson describes, we are shaped by the care we

have been given in our lives (2007). These relationships form who we are. These relationships

also form who we know and are connected to, and human connections are the most effective

medium through which we become hired or accepted into a program. For many of the houseless

youth I have talked to in SYM, they do not have the myriad of connections I do.

Like me, most people are not aware of the immeasurable care that has shaped them. This

lack of awareness is heavily tied to the American sense of individualism that permeates our

culture. Individualism is the notion that we have the power to shape ourselves, and our success

can therefore be attributed to ourselves. Anyone who does not succeed, ergo, is responsible for

their shortcomings. One problem with individualism is that it cannot acknowledge care as being

essential to making us who we are. As Tronto analyzes in her book Moral Boundaries, “such an

admission would undermine the legitimacy of the inequitable distribution of power, resources,

and privilege of which they are the beneficiaries” (1993). What Tronto is shedding light on is
 Fredrik Mansfield
March 16, 2015
Honors 231 BB – Final Paper
that individualism and the devaluation of care provides a justification for the inequality created

by the concentration of wealth and power by the elite. Because of this care is devalued.

The need for care is present among all of us; as noted earlier, care shapes who we

become. Yet the perpetuation of the devaluation of care is critical in order to inhibit a relational

analysis of poverty, which would bring our country’s economic inequality into question. Part of

residual poverty knowledge is understanding poverty to be an issue of the global south, as the

result of failing governments and economic systems (Hickey 2009). Poverty in America, as a

result, is associated with an individual’s failure to succeed within the framework of a successful

nation. It is not the issue of those who have been successful or the government to help them, it

would seem; they dug their own grave and need to dig themselves out. This disconnect from the

poor allows us to shift the responsibility of caring for the poor away from ourselves. However,

what it actually accomplishes is protecting the wealthy and the government from their

contribution to inequality and their role in solving the problem.

In my time at SYM, I have attempted to learn as many names as possible. It is a constant

struggle, as I am not an expert at remembering names. There is a young man – I will call him

Brian – whom I see every single week. From first impression, I presumed he was in a gang. He

would come in every day, take some food, hang out with his friends for a while, and leave. After

getting to know his name, I learned he was different from my first impression; he was incredibly

kind, and he always made sure to watch out for the younger guests at SYM. Two weeks ago, I

was walking near the SYM drop-in center with some friends, and I saw him coming from the

opposite direction. One of my friends said, “Hey, we should cross the street,” and my other

friends agreed and followed him to the other side of the road. This shocked me; after all, I knew

Brian. I continued on that side of the sidewalk, gave Brian a friendly acknowledgment, and then
 Fredrik Mansfield
March 16, 2015
Honors 231 BB – Final Paper
informed my friends on the importance of not judging others. This story holds a great deal of

significance, though, because their fears were my initial impression as well. Only through

forming a relationship with Brian was I able to see him for who he really was: A young man like

me in many respects, only he has been victimized by an economic institution that fosters

inequality. Our responsibility to care for one another extends beyond the need to receive care that

each one of us has; it also allows us to understand each other fully rather than relying on

uninformed judgment.

As I mentioned earlier, the mission of SYM is essentially to provide care for houseless

youth. In critically analyzing my organization, I found it necessary to use a care ethical analysis.

As Tronto lays out in Moral Boundaries, there are four elements that make up care ethical

analysis: Caring about, taking care of, care-giving, and care-receiving (1993). I shall go into

depth about the success the organization has had in achieving each element.

Caring about is the first element of care ethical analysis, which involves recognizing a

need and acknowledging that the need should be met. SYM was created when the University

Presbyterian Church (UPC) congregation first became aware of the many houseless youth in the

area. Before the creation of SYM, many members of UPC were noticing youth sleeping in

doorways and on staircases in the University District. Rather than simply ignoring this need,

UPC recognized that the problem needed to be addressed, and partnered with other churches in

the area to form a youth shelter (Harper 2015). Intrinsically, many needs make up the need of

providing care for houseless youth. SYM recognizes the social determinants of health – food,

water, sanitation, shelter, and community – as being needs that should be addressed.

Additionally, health services and activities are recognized as needs of the population they are

serving. However, not all of these needs are taken care of by SYM.
 Fredrik Mansfield
March 16, 2015
Honors 231 BB – Final Paper
Taking care of is the second phase of caring, and it focuses on taking accountability for

being part of the solution (Tronto 1993). While SYM does not hold itself responsible for meeting

all of the needs of the youth, it does take part in the responsibility of making sure many needs are

met. For needs such as shelter, for example, SYM is connected to numerous houseless shelters in

the area through which youth can find a bed to sleep in for the night. There are some needs that

SYM recognizes as needs but does not take care of: In my interview with Rowena Harper, the

director of SYM, she recognized that the organization was not perfect at taking care of all needs

of the houseless youth. When asked what improvements she would like to see for SYM to best

serve the community if money weren’t an issue, Rowena responded that mental health is a major

issue among youth who are houseless, and it is beyond the expertise of the staff and volunteers to

provide care in this manner (Harper 2015). Mental illness is a need of many houseless youth

which is not often met, as the issue is complicated to address and requires extensive training. As

a result, and in the case of SYM, it is difficult to assume responsibility for being a part of

addressing the need. Another need SYM does not take care of is the emotional need of feeling

confident in one’s own clothing. While SYM provides enough clothing for those who need it, the

options are rarely ones that the young adults would consider flattering and feel their self-esteem

boosted while wearing. Emotional needs are equally important to physical needs, and this need is

not currently being taken care of.

The third element of the caring process is care-giving, which requires actually providing

the care that is needed (Tronto 1993). Of the needs for which SYM assumes responsibility, the

organization does not have the resources to fully meet most of those needs. 80% of SYM’s

funding comes from individual donors, and this amount is never enough to fully meet the needs

of the youth (Harper 2015). Food, for example, is limited; it may not be enough to satisfy
 Fredrik Mansfield
March 16, 2015
Honors 231 BB – Final Paper
everyone, especially when that meal is often the only meal these young adults have each day.

The showers can only be used by one person at a time, and some people are not able to take

advantage of this resource during the hours of drop-in as a result. Also, the activities provided

outside of drop-in time have a limited number of spots for the youth, because the organization

cannot afford to bring all of the houseless young adults to their activities. While the needs that

SYM assumes responsibility for are met to a certain degree, they are not all fully met, and

therefore SYM cannot fully give the care it intends.

The fourth and final aspect of care ethical analysis is that of care-receiving. This step

recognizes that there is a recipient of the care given, and that the recipient is the only one who

can assess whether or not the need was met (Tronto 1993). In my analysis, I feel that SYM has

been successful at this phase of the caring process. Earlier in the history of SYM, the

organization only served youth ages 14-23. However, they found that many of the youth who

were aging out of their program were still in need and seeking SYM’s help in providing

resources and connections. Responding to this need, SYM expanded its age range to 14-28

(Harper 2015). Surveys are provided for the youth to make sure that their voice is heard. Trends

are also observed by the staff and volunteers so even unvoiced concerns are addressed. There are

young adults who are frustrated that they are not allowed to smoke inside the drop-in center, but

other members need to not be surrounded by cigarette smoke, so their needs are honored. Those

who desire to smoke are allowed to step outside to do so, and all needs are honored.

My time at Street Youth Ministries has helped me realize what poverty looks like. It is

not a number on a federal document, a drug addiction, nor a photograph of an African child.

Poverty looks like all of us; indeed, there is no difference between us all. We are all formed by

care, and in need of care. I have worked alongside the houseless – the seemingly invisible in our
 Fredrik Mansfield
March 16, 2015
Honors 231 BB – Final Paper
midst – and I hope that with each time I smile at one of them and call them by name, they know

that I care.
 Fredrik Mansfield
March 16, 2015
Honors 231 BB – Final Paper
Works Cited

Fraser, Nancy, and Linda Gordon. "A Genealogy Of Dependency: Tracing A Keyword Of The

U.S. Welfare State." Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 19, no. 2 (1994):

309-36.

Harper, Rowena. Interview by author. Face-to-face. Seattle, February 25, 2015.

Harvey, David. "Freedom's Just Another Word..." In A Brief History of Neoliberalism, 5-35.

Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005.

Hickey, Samuel. "Rethinking Poverty Analysis from the Margins: Insights from Northern

Uganda." Afriche E Orienti 11, no. 2 (2009): 103-18.

Lawson, Victoria. "Geographies Of Care And Responsibility." Annals of the Association of

American Geographers 97, no. 1 (2007): 1-11.

Nakano-Glenn, Evelyn. "Paid Caring in the Home." In Forced to Care: Coercion and

Caregiving in America, 128-151. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press,

2010.

Tronto, Joan C. "Care." In Moral Boundaries: A Political Argument for an Ethic of Care, 101-

24. New York City, New York: Routledge, 1993.