Photo by BF / Utilized with Permission
There were more problems (a fight amongst a number of youths) near the YMCA park today - as was noted (with opinions presented) on the Ward 5 "Kingston Citizens" group --- and on the Kingston Neighborhood Watch "ClickFix" --- both of which (There are direct links to these organizations in the sidebar >>>) are wonderful tools for citizen awareness, communication and activism.
There are also more comments up on "ClickFix" about the situation (as reported) at Elizabeth Manor - which is relavent not only to Elizabeth Manor - but to other such "boarding houses".
A citizen is responsible for their property.
A parent is responsible (to a certain age) for their youth.
A not-for-profit and/or privately owned organization would logically (No?) be responsible for their property and what goes on (at the very least, in regard to children and youth that are not in the company of parents or caretakers...) on their property.
A landlord, though not to the same extent, is responsible (at least after strikes one, two and three..., one would think...) for their tenants.
If a youth is out of line, at home, in the neighborhood, at school, etc. - all sorts of interventions - from pins petitions to arrests - to the youth being sent to a youth facility - occur; sometimes inclusive of the arrest of enabling, neglectful and/or abusive parents...
Do we demand less around here from professionals?
From those who provide youth services, room and board to the needy, etc.?
It is not in anyone's best interest - not (as applies) the youths; not the residents; not the landlords; not the facility owners, operators or workers; not the neighbors; not nearby schoolyards and children; and certainly not the City of Kingston (as a whole) - to allow the situation at the YMCA and/or at Elizabeth Manor to continue "as is" [and as it has reputedly been for a long time.]
A lot of the problems with these sorts of places - locally - appears to be lack of professional oversight.
If youth are gathering on "private" (but "not for profit"?) property - one would think providing (via the facility) adult supervision would be a logical (for the youth's sake and the organizations sake) preventative and proactive stance. [BTW, do truancy officers check out these parks?]
And - in regard to rooming houses and such?
Mentally ill chemically addicted (MICA) clients need to be (and deserve to be, for their own safety and chances for recovery...) placed in the appropriate setting.
Active alcoholics and addicts (at least those receiving Social Service money) should be required to go for treatment - housed apart from MICA clients and housed apart from those that have acquired a clean and sober history.
Newly recovering alcoholics and addicts need and deserve a sober [with professional oversight] housing environment.
And those with criminal histories "should" be receiving regular visits from (as applicable) their probation and/or parole agents on a regular basis, attending whatever programs they need, etc.
What is so difficult to understand about all of that?
Did you ever see the show called (I think it was on "Saturday Night Live") "lowered expectations?"
This is about safety (for everyone concerned) --- and human dignity.
Why not do what needs (Why do we simply go 'round and 'round and 'round on the same issues?) to be done?
