ILNews

Attorneys seek to help homeless veterans

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The tile floor is clean, and two couches, one white, the other orange, fill the living room. In a small bedroom down the short hallway, a twin bed is covered with a blue blanket. Half a loaf of bread sits on the kitchen table.

This is the home of a hero.

At one time, the resident of this modest dwelling wore a uniform, served her country and, for doing that, was called a hero. She, along with other military personnel, were thanked and praised countless times for protecting this country’s liberties.

Today, she struggles to protect herself from homelessness.

The problem of homeless veterans of the U.S. military is growing and starting to include younger soldiers who fought in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. Estimates put the number of homeless veterans between 130,000 and 200,000 on any given night, according to a 2009 report by the National Coalition for the Homeless.

In Indianapolis, the Hoosier Veterans Assistance Foundation is helping move these individuals from the streets into permanent housing. The personal baggage many veterans carry includes a substance abuse problem or a mental health issue. As these troubles are brought under control, HVAF begins tackling other barriers like job skills, personal financial management, transportation and benefits from the Department of Veterans Affairs.

The entire effort is not considered successful until the veteran is able to find a permanent place to live.
 

15col-Homeless_Moreau_Bill.jpg Bill Moreau, partner at Barnes & Thornburg LLP, has been a strong advocate for the homeless. (IL Photo/ Perry Reichanadter)

However, one persistent obstacle to achieving this final goal has been solving legal issues. HVAF clients can have a suspended driver’s license, owe child support or have an outstanding warrant for a misdemeanor case which is enough to prevent employment, stability and finding a place to live.

A small ensemble of attorneys who support the HVAF is stepping forward to find a way to provide legal assistance. They have issued a “Request for Good Ideas” and are asking their colleagues in the legal community to suggest a model or method for delivering these services to the veterans.

“We really think in the community there are probably some folks who know the best way to do this,” said Steve Benz, HVAF board chair and associate general counsel at Eli Lilly & Co.

Holistic approach

After he retired from 20 years of service in the U.S. Army, Charles “Chuck” Haenlein was asked to serve on the HVAF board of directors. His first reaction was to wonder “how can veterans be homeless?”

Former military personnel have access to the VA which offers services and benefits that can care for and sustain them. But many of the veterans arriving on HVAF’s doorstep either do not know how to maneuver through the bureaucracy of the VA or have had a bad experience with the government agency.

Attorneys can help with filing VA paperwork, said Trent Sandifur, partner at Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP and HVAF board member. In some cases, for example, that could then provide a disabled veteran with a $2,000 monthly benefit which could ensure the financial footing needed to stay housed.

Yet, the clients at HVAF have a host of social problems which influence the legal issues, and the effort to remedy the legal entanglement cannot bare fruit until those social concerns are addressed, Sandifur, an Army veteran, said.

Consequently, he and his colleagues envision a holistic approach with the lawyer being part of the treatment team surrounding any particular client. The attorney would get to know the veteran and help clear the path to a permanent home instead of putting out a legal fire and then leaving, Sandifur said.

Every veteran who comes through the foundation has a legal issue to be resolved, Haenlein said. HVAF can give them a place to stay and get them clean and sober but that problem with the law will still be hanging overhead.

The entire story

One recent Thursday morning, a team of volunteers from Lilly were spread around the HVAF facility on North Pennsylvania Street in Indianapolis doing a variety of maintenance and cleaning tasks. HVAF staff members, Cindy Thomas, executive vice president, and Ron Shelley, chief operations officer, walked through the new Manchester apartment building that the foundation opened in November 2011.

They recalled one veteran broke down in tears when she saw her apartment. The night before, that veteran had slept under a bridge.

The numbers of veterans coming to HVAF have been rising. In 2009 and 2010, the foundation provided services to 2,121 and 2,081 veterans, respectively, while in 2011 the number rose to 2,259.

Why military personnel become homeless is not an easy question to answer. Certainly, the down economy plays a role, but the military is a highly regimented life and often accompanied by lots of alcohol consumption which can complicate the transition back to civilian life. Also, Thomas said, the veterans may have had a bad childhood before they enlisted, so they were predisposed to the social problems.

According to Thomas, of the 13 women currently in the HVAF program, more than half have experienced sexual trauma in the military and in their childhoods.

The attorneys helping HVAF would not be expected to be social workers but, Haenlein explained, could provide assistance on those legal issues the therapists cannot resolve.

As these veterans are falling from the system, trouble with the law can grow as bills go unpaid and conflicts arise. Then they can fall prey to unscrupulous landlords, car dealers and tax preparation services that pop up every spring, Haenlein said.

Sometimes a situation can be defused by having an attorney who is representing the veteran write a letter or make a phone call. A simple act can calm the tensions by giving the veteran credibility and highlighting that the veteran has someone who will hold the other party accountable.

Under HVAF’s vision, attorneys working with veterans would get to see the whole story. Bill Moreau, partner at Barnes & Thornburg LLP and tireless advocate for the homeless, noted lawyers celebrate victory when they resolve the legal problem. But that is not the end of the story, and success at HVAF is not declared until the client’s homelessness ends.

As for the best way to tackle these legal issues, the team of attorneys has not devised any particular solutions yet and, instead, is hoping other lawyers will fill in the details, Moreau said. Rather than sending in résumés, the group wants to get proposals or outlines of potential structures for providing and sustaining the legal assistance program.

Moreau’s passion for helping the homeless comes from his father, retired Army veteran Donald Moreau, who served as the executive director of HVAF before Haenlein. It also stems from the work he did with former Indianapolis Mayor Bart Peterson’s administration to craft a blueprint for ending homelessness in the city within 10 years.

He is hopeful that homelessness among veterans can be eliminated. Helping former members of the military, Moreau said, is a goal that has broad support and has unified political opponents.

“At least in this country, we can actually make good on a promise to vets,” he said.

Making a proposal

The HVAF is now taking proposals for how to provide legal services to veterans. Written responses should be sent electronically to Charles Haenlein, HVAF president and CEO, at CHaenlein@hvaf.org no later than Oct. 19, 2012. Other questions should be directed to Haenlein.

A copy of the “Request for Good Ideas” is available at www.hvaf.org. Click on RFGI in the news section on the home page.•

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Homeless Vets
    Thank you for helping from the bottom of my heart. If not for a daughter the veteran that was in Vietnam and Irag would be homeless with no help from VA. The solutions from VA has always been more pills. With him drinking since 1971 they don't seem to mix. He can't quit on his own and no one cares unless you have the big money to go to a center that will care for you as an inpatient and counsel long and hard to get to the root of the problem.Thank you for helping others.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. California Sex Offender Management Board (CASOMB) End of Year Report 2014. (page 13) Under the current system many local registering agencies are challenged just keeping up with registration paperwork. It takes an hour or more to process each registrant, the majority of whom are low risk offenders. As a result law enforcement cannot monitor higher risk offenders more intensively in the community due to the sheer numbers on the registry. Some of the consequences of lengthy and unnecessary registration requirements actually destabilize the life’s of registrants and those -such as families- whose lives are often substantially impacted. Such consequences are thought to raise levels of known risk factors while providing no discernible benefit in terms of community safety. The full report is available online at. http://www.casomb.org/index.cfm?pid=231 National Institute of Justice (NIJ) US Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs United States of America. The overall conclusion is that Megan’s law has had no demonstrated effect on sexual offenses in New Jersey, calling into question the justification for start-up and operational costs. Megan’s Law has had no effect on time to first rearrest for known sex offenders and has not reduced sexual reoffending. Neither has it had an impact on the type of sexual reoffense or first-time sexual offense. The study also found that the law had not reduced the number of victims of sexual offenses. The full report is available online at. https://www.ncjrs.gov/app/publications/abstract.aspx? ID=247350 The University of Chicago Press for The Booth School of Business of the University of Chicago and The University of Chicago Law School Article DOI: 10.1086/658483 Conclusion. The data in these three data sets do not strongly support the effectiveness of sex offender registries. The national panel data do not show a significant decrease in the rate of rape or the arrest rate for sexual abuse after implementation of a registry via the Internet. The BJS data that tracked individual sex offenders after their release in 1994 did not show that registration had a significantly negative effect on recidivism. And the D.C. crime data do not show that knowing the location of sex offenders by census block can help protect the locations of sexual abuse. This pattern of noneffectiveness across the data sets does not support the conclusion that sex offender registries are successful in meeting their objectives of increasing public safety and lowering recidivism rates. The full report is available online at. http://www.jstor.org/stable/full/10.1086/658483 These are not isolated conclusions but are the same outcomes in the majority of conclusions and reports on this subject from multiple government agencies and throughout the academic community. People, including the media and other organizations should not rely on and reiterate the statements and opinions of the legislators or other people as to the need for these laws because of the high recidivism rates and the high risk offenders pose to the public which simply is not true and is pure hyperbole and fiction. They should rely on facts and data collected and submitted in reports from the leading authorities and credible experts in the fields such as the following. California Sex Offender Management Board (CASOMB) Sex offender recidivism rate for a new sex offense is 0.8% (page 30) The full report is available online at http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/Adult_Research_Branch/Research_Documents/2014_Outcome_Evaluation_Report_7-6-2015.pdf California Sex Offender Management Board (CASOMB) (page 38) Sex offender recidivism rate for a new sex offense is 1.8% The full report is available online at. http://www.google.com/url?sa= t&source=web&cd=1&ved= 0CCEQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F% 2Fwww.cdcr.ca.gov%2FAdult_ Research_Branch%2FResearch_ documents%2FOutcome_ evaluation_Report_2013.pdf&ei= C9dSVePNF8HfoATX-IBo&usg=AFQjCNE9I6ueHz-o2mZUnuxLPTyiRdjDsQ Bureau of Justice Statistics 5 PERCENT OF SEX OFFENDERS REARRESTED FOR ANOTHER SEX CRIME WITHIN 3 YEARS OF PRISON RELEASE WASHINGTON, D.C. Within 3 years following their 1994 state prison release, 5.3 percent of sex offenders (men who had committed rape or sexual assault) were rearrested for another sex crime, the Justice Department’s Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) announced today. The full report is available online at. http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/press/rsorp94pr.cfm Document title; A Model of Static and Dynamic Sex Offender Risk Assessment Author: Robert J. McGrath, Michael P. Lasher, Georgia F. Cumming Document No.: 236217 Date Received: October 2011 Award Number: 2008-DD-BX-0013 Findings: Study of 759 adult male offenders under community supervision Re-arrest rate: 4.6% after 3-year follow-up The sexual re-offense rates for the 746 released in 2005 are much lower than what many in the public have been led to expect or believe. These low re-offense rates appear to contradict a conventional wisdom that sex offenders have very high sexual re-offense rates. The full report is available online at. https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/236217.pdf Document Title: SEX OFFENDER SENTENCING IN WASHINGTON STATE: RECIDIVISM RATES BY: Washington State Institute For Public Policy. A study of 4,091 sex offenders either released from prison or community supervision form 1994 to 1998 and examined for 5 years Findings: Sex Crime Recidivism Rate: 2.7% Link to Report: http://www.oncefallen.com/files/Washington_SO_Recid_2005.pdf Document Title: Indiana’s Recidivism Rates Decline for Third Consecutive Year BY: Indiana Department of Correction 2009. The recidivism rate for sex offenders returning on a new sex offense was 1.05%, one of the lowest in the nation. In a time when sex offenders continue to face additional post-release requirements that often result in their return to prison for violating technical rules such as registration and residency restrictions, the instances of sex offenders returning to prison due to the commitment of a new sex crime is extremely low. Findings: sex offenders returning on a new sex offense was 1.05% Link to Report: http://www.in.gov/idoc/files/RecidivismRelease.pdf Once again, These are not isolated conclusions but are the same outcomes in the majority of reports on this subject from multiple government agencies and throughout the academic community. No one can doubt that child sexual abuse is traumatic and devastating. The question is not whether the state has an interest in preventing such harm, but whether current laws are effective in doing so. Megan’s law is a failure and is destroying families and their children’s lives and is costing tax payers millions upon millions of dollars. The following is just one example of the estimated cost just to implement SORNA which many states refused to do. From Justice Policy Institute. Estimated cost to implement SORNA Here are some of the estimates made in 2009 expressed in 2014 current dollars: California, $66M; Florida, $34M; Illinois, $24M; New York, $35M; Pennsylvania, $22M; Texas, $44M. In 2014 dollars, Virginia’s estimate for implementation was $14M, and the annual operating cost after that would be $10M. For the US, the total is $547M. That’s over half a billion dollars – every year – for something that doesn’t work. http://www.justicepolicy.org/images/upload/08-08_FAC_SORNACosts_JJ.pdf. Attempting to use under-reporting to justify the existence of the registry is another myth, or a lie. This is another form of misinformation perpetrated by those who either have a fiduciary interest in continuing the unconstitutional treatment of a disfavored group or are seeking to justify their need for punishment for people who have already paid for their crime by loss of their freedom through incarceration and are now attempting to reenter society as honest citizens. When this information is placed into the public’s attention by naive media then you have to wonder if the media also falls into one of these two groups that are not truly interested in reporting the truth. Both of these groups of people that have that type of mentality can be classified as vigilantes, bullies, or sociopaths, and are responsible for the destruction of our constitutional values and the erosion of personal freedoms in this country. I think the media or other organizations need to do a in depth investigation into the false assumptions and false data that has been used to further these laws and to research all the collateral damages being caused by these laws and the unconstitutional injustices that are occurring across the country. They should include these injustices in their report so the public can be better informed on what is truly happening in this country on this subject. Thank you for your time.

  2. Freedom as granted in the Constitution cannot be summarily disallowed without Due Process. Unable to to to the gym, church, bowling alley? What is this 1984 level nonsense? Congrats to Brian for having the courage to say that this was enough! and Congrats to the ACLU on the win!

  3. America's hyper-phobia about convicted sex offenders must end! Politicians must stop pandering to knee-jerk public hysteria. And the public needs to learn the facts. Research by the California Sex Offender Management Board as shown a recidivism rate for convicted sex offenders of less than 1%. Less than 1%! Furthermore, research shows that by year 17 after their conviction, a convicted sex offender is no more likely to commit a new sex offense than any other member of the public. Put away your torches and pitchforks. Get the facts. Stop hysteria.

  4. He was convicted 23 years ago. How old was he then? He probably was a juvenile. People do stupid things, especially before their brain is fully developed. Why are we continuing to punish him in 2016? If he hasn't re-offended by now, it's very, very unlikely he ever will. He paid for his mistake sufficiently. Let him live his life in peace.

  5. This year, Notre Dame actually enrolled an equal amount of male and female students.

ADVERTISEMENT