LGBTQ-Identifying Homeless Youth

homelessness, Homlessness, housing discrimination, Inequality, LGBTQI

June is Pride month so I thought that it would be appropriate to spend some time discussing the growing number of LGBTQ youth who are experiencing homelessness in the U.S.A. Roughly 40% of youth who are homeless in the U.S. are LGBTQ-identifying (HRC 2017). Many cities in the U.S. have seen drastic increases in the number of LGBTQ youth who are experiencing homelessness in the past decade. LGBTQ youth who are homeless are more likely than their heterosexual and cisgendered counterparts to experience high rates of mental health issues, STDs and STIs, physical and sexual abuse, and substance use (Page 2017, Keuroghlian et. al. 2014).

While LGBTQ youth homelessness has been a significant issue for quite some time, research on LGBTQ youth who are homeless has just started to catch up with reality. In this post, I would like to highlight some of the insightful and useful research that has recently been published on this issue. These articles span disciplines, methodologies, and theoretical frameworks. But, since homelessness is a complex issue that demands an understanding of how complex the world is, I believe that it is necessary for policymakers, policy administrators, and policy analysts to examine research from all disciplines when trying to figure out how to best serve homeless LGBTQ youth.

First, Michelle Page’s 2017 article titled “Forgotten Youth: Homeless LGBT Youth of Color and the Runaway and Homeless Youth Act” is critical work that is worth reading. Page examines the understudied experiences of LGBTQ youth of color. She makes research and policy recommendations for how to better serve LGBT homeless youth of color who often face additional injustices and challenges than their white LGBT homeless youth counterparts. Page draws attention to an area that needs more investigation in this concise piece, writing: “Legislative invisibility is the phenomenon that when certain classifications of people, like LGBT, are not specifically addressed in a statute, they reap no benefit from it even though it is meant to benefit everyone. This type of invisibility is a consequence of implementing overly generalized policies, which lack nuance, to extend to homeless youth on a national scale. Laws based solely on the experiences of one identity group, when members within the group are also members of varying subgroups, can only provide a limited amount of support.” (p. 20).

Second, the 2016 article by Elaine M. Maccio and Kristin M. Ferguson titled “Services to LGBTQ runaway and homeless youth: Gaps and recommendations” reveals the results from studying 19 non-profit and government organizations that are serving LGBTQ homeless youth. These agencies receive money from the federal Runaway and Homeless Youth Act (RHYA) to design and implement programs that range in objectives from housing to education. Maccio and Ferguson’s research identifies and explains gaps in the current service environment and suggests alternative methods to better serve LGBTQ youth who are homeless. One of the interesting observations made by the authors is that LGBTQ youth who are housed in both emergency and transitionary housing programs with youth who are not LGBTQ-identifying are less likely to stay in the housing programs largely due to harassment by their non-LGBTQ peers. The authors recommend that more programs try to use supportive housing models for LGBTQ youth. They recommend and highlight models that have been successfully implemented and can be designed in other programs.

Third, in the 2014 article “Out on the Street: A Public Health and Policy Agenda for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Youth Who Are Homeless,” authors Alex S. Keuroghlian, Derri Shtasel, and Ellen L. Bassuk examine prevalent and dangerous health trends within the LGBTQ homeless youth community. The goal of this article is to develop “responsible practices and policies” (p. 66) for addressing issues facing LGBTQ youth who are homeless such as mental health and substance use problems, suicidal acts, violent victimization, and a range of HIV risk behaviors. The authors break down the research by subpopulations, identifying the most serious risks and health issues for transgender, lesbian, gay, and bisexual youth populations individually. They also show that race and ethnicity can influence a homeless LGBTQ youth’s health outcomes. Keuroghlian, Shtasel, and Bassuk draw attention to the need for increased HIV education amongst homeless LGBTQ youth and they identify some promising methods for designing and implementing health education programs. For example, they discuss new internet-based initiatives that are designed to reduce HIV transmission amongst LGBTQ youth who are homeless (p. 68).

Fourth, in the 2014 edition of Young Adult Library Services, Jama Shelton and Julie Winkelstein published an article titled “Librarians and Social Workers: Working Together for Homeless LGBTQ Youth.” Not only is this article a useful guide for librarians and library staff, it is also a fantastic example of interdisciplinary work. This article shows that when people work together across fields, industries, and disciplines, LGBTQ youth who are homeless have the best chance at receiving the highest quality services.

There are other excellent research articles and policy resources on this topic that are emerging. Even as I write this blog post and even as you read it, there is probably someone who is working diligently to try to find creative methods for serving LGBTQ youth who are homeless. However, there is always more work to be done to assist LGBTQ youth who are homeless. Whether you are a scholar, an activist, a government official, a business leader, or a non-profit representative, you too can try to find ways to support LGBTQ youth who are homeless. I have provided some resources below that may be helpful to those who would like to support LGBTQ youth who are homeless and to those LGBTQ-identifying young people who are experiencing homelessness and looking for resources.

Note: All of the hyperlinks in this article were accessible to the public on 6/26/17 but the links may have expired since then. I do my best to maintain and update expired links, but please let me know (by leaving a comment in the comments section below) if a certain link has expired. Thank you!


If you would like more information on LGBTQ youth homelessness in general or if you need city-specific or county-specific resources, check out the National Coalition for the Homeless’ LGBT Homelessness project: 

Lambda Legal:

True Colors Fund:

If you are a young LGBTQ person experiencing homelessness in Los Angeles, check out the Los Angeles LGBT Center:


Human Rights Campaign. “LGBTQ Youth Homelessness” (2017):

Keuroghlian, Alex S., Derri Shtasel, and Ellen L. Bassuk. “Out on the street: a public health and policy agenda for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender youth who are homeless.” American Journal of Orthopsychiatry 84.1 (2014): 66.

Maccio, Elaine M., and Kristin M. Ferguson. “Services to LGBTQ runaway and homeless youth: Gaps and recommendations.” Children and Youth Services Review 63 (2016): 47-57.

Page, Michelle. “Forgotten Youth: Homeless LGBT Youth of Color and the Runaway and Homeless Youth Act.” Nw. JL & Soc. Pol’y 12 (2017): 17-92.

Shelton, Jama, and Julie Winkelstein. “Librarians and social workers: Working together for homeless LGBTQ youth.” Young Adult Library Services 13.1 (2014): 20.


This Week in Housing Policy

affordable housing, homelessness, Homlessness, housing, housing discrimination

We’re only on Tuesday and so far, this week has produced a lot of strong media coverage of issues pertaining to the relationship between housing policy and inequality (social, economic, and racial inequalities in particular). Most of the year, it seems that issues of homelessness and housing policy receive meager media attention, so to have multiple news outlets covering these important issues in a span of a few days is very exciting! Whether or not you agree with the framing of these news stories or the policy suggestions implicit in these articles, it is still worth it to read the coverage of these issues, as they often get overlooked.

First on the agenda, the New York Times Magazine published a poignant piece on how the public policies that incentivize homeownership in the U.S.A. have contributed to inequality over time. This article, titled “How Homeownership Became the Engine of American Inequality,” was written by the acclaimed author Matthew Desmond who wrote last year’s hit book titled Evicted. (If you’re a housing policy nerd like me, then this is a must read!) In the article, Desmond does a great job demystifying some of the more complex and opaque features of the U.S. tax code as it is applied to issues of housing and homeownership. For example, he describes how the mortgage interest deduction (MID) favors middle and high income earners who own homes, but he notes that there is no comparable tax incentive for renters, who tend to have lower incomes. The MID was designed to encourage Americans to purchase residential properties at inflated prices, forcing them to borrow funds in the form of mortgages. This significantly contributes to the widening of the gap between affluent Americans and Americans who are struggling to get by financially. In addition, Desmond explains how racially discriminatory housing policies from the past, such as the G.I. Bill, are still affecting unequal housing outcomes for racial and ethnic minorities in today’s America. He also provides readers with profiles of individuals and families who own homes and rent properties to show the drastic differences in their experiences with housing in America.

To access Desmond’s article (published May 9, 2017), click here:

To access info about Desmond’s book Evicted, click here:

Second, the news outlet National Public Radio (NPR) has also paid more attention than usual to issues of housing, homelessness, and inequality in the past week. On May 3, 2017, Terry Gross produced a piece on the “forgotten history” of housing segregation in the U.S.A. This story profiles historian Richard Rothstein’s latest book The Color of the Law (more info on his book is accessible here: The Color of the Law). Gross’s article and Rothstein’s book both describe how redlining created a “state-sponsored system of segregation” in U.S. housing policy.  Rothstein notes that “the term ‘redlining’ … comes from the development by the New Deal, by the federal government of maps of every metropolitan area in the country. And those maps were color-coded by first the Home Owners Loan Corp. and then the Federal Housing Administration and then adopted by the Veterans Administration, and these color codes were designed to indicate where it was safe to insure mortgages. And anywhere where African-Americans lived, anywhere where African-Americans lived nearby were colored red to indicate to appraisers that these neighborhoods were too risky to insure mortgages.” This blog has examined redlining in previous posts, check the archives for more in-depth information on this abhorrent practice. Gross’s article, and the book that it profiles, show how these segregationist policies that began in the 1930’s are still negatively affecting African Americans today.

You can access this story (both audio and written commentary) here: “A ‘Forgotten History’ Of How The U.S. Government Segregated America”

In addition, NPR, in concert with PBS’s Frontline, produced an interesting piece on the abuse of the affordable housing system in the U.S.A. Published on May 9, 2017, this piece, titled “Affordable Housing Program Costs More, Shelters Fewer”, describes how the federal low-income housing tax credit program (LIHTC) has failed the American people, both affordable housing program beneficiaries and American tax-payers alike. The LIHTC was established to incentivize private companies to build housing for low income Americans. However, the investigation into the program by NPR and Frontline “found that with little federal oversight, LIHTC has produced fewer units than it did 20 years ago, even though it’s costing taxpayers 66 percent more in tax credits.” This means that more tax-payer money is being spent on a program that is producing fewer housing units for low income Americans. In other words, the program is ineffective at assisting poor Americans gain quality affordable housing. This report provides a critical look into the murky world of affordable housing policy and sheds some light on who is “winning” and who is “losing” in the twenty-first century. Spoiler alert: low income Americans who are seeking affordable housing are definitely losing while investors from private equity firms and companies that cater to the housing market are definitely winning.

You can access this fascinating and timely article here:


Homelessness and Incarceration

homelessness, mass incarceration

In the United States, ex-prisoners are more vulnerable to homelessness than those who have not been incarcerated.  According to a report published by the Vera Institute of Justice, 30-50% of all people under parole supervision in the cities of Los Angeles and San Francisco are homeless.  The authors of the report, Nino Rodriguez and Brenner Brown, note that there are “…three main factors [that] contribute to and complicate homelessness among people leaving prison. First, ex-offenders face the same social and economic conditions that lead to homelessness among the general population. Ex- offenders returning to the community also confront barriers to housing associated with their criminal justice system involvement. Finally, there is a lack of ownership of the problem among government agencies and community organizations.” (The report can be found at:

Ex-offenders, especially those with felony charges on their records, face barriers when trying to secure housing and employment.  BAN THE BOX is an organization campaigning to end employment discrimination against those who have been convicted or imprisoned by abolishing the box on employment applications that asks job seekers to disclose any past convictions.

In addition, according  to a report by the Wall Street Journal, most ex-convicts are STILL unable to live in public housing after their release from prison due to archaic rules established in the 1990s.  The War on Drugs gave birth to federal rules that do not allow former criminals with specific drug charges (for example producing methamphetamines) to reside in public housing.  Many local housing authorities and states impose additional restrictions on public housing applicants.  These rules lead to the exclusion of ex-prisoners from public housing.  For more on the relationship between mass incarceration and homelessness, check out Dr. Michelle Alexander’s exceptional book, The New Jim Crow (2012).

People who are experiencing homeless are more likely to be arrested or re-arrested.  In a 2002 ethnographic study of incarceration rates of homeless men in San Francisco and St. Louis, researcher Teresa Gowan found that: “…crimes of desperation, aggressive policing of status offenses, and the close proximity of many ex-cons created a strong likelihood of incarceration and re-incarceration. Conversely, for jail and prison inmates, time inside consistently eroded employability, family ties,and other defences against homelessness: several of the men had become homeless for the first time directly following release from a carceral establishment…each trajectory reinforced the other, creating a homelessness/incarceration cycle more powerful than the sum of its parts, a racialized exclusion/punishment nexus which germinates, isolates, and perpetuates lower-class male marginality.”

The link between incarceration and homelessness is troubling.  There are many government and non-government agencies and organizations working to assist ex-prisoners in securing housing, employment, and supportive services.  Project Greenlight in New York, COMPASS in Rhode Island, and Tennessee Bridges in Tennessee are three of the many organizations across the country trying to implement innovative approaches to decreasing homelessness for ex-prisoners.

News Update: Mayor Garcetti Will Not Enforce Restrictive Ordinances on Homeless Residents of Los Angeles

homelessness, Los Angeles

Eric Garcetti addresses a crowd with Amy Elaine Wakeland at the Los Angeles Missions’s Annual Thanksgiving for the Homeless

As the last night of June 2015 drew to a close, Mayor Eric Garcetti revoked his support for the new ordinances (passed by the Los Angeles City Council last week) that would criminalize people experiencing homelessness and trample on their property rights.  In a statement, Garcetti said: “I strongly support the enactment of laws that enable the City to ensure that its public areas are clean and safe. However, the City must balance the need to maintain its sidewalks with the rights of the people who have no other choice but to live on them….[we need] smarter law enforcement, more compassionate treatment of homeless Angelenos, and [to] strengthen the City’s ability to withstand legal challenge.”

Garcetti refused to sign the ordinance into law and returned the ordinance to the City Council for further consideration.

The failed ordinances directed police officers to remove the property of people experiencing homelessness from the streets of Los Angeles after only a 24 hour warning.  The items would then be “stored” or impounded by the city for at least 90 days.  The ordinances would have denied people experiencing homelessness access to their own belongings–including important legal documents, tents and sleeping materials, and items of personal value.  The ability to access one’s property is central those trying to survive on the streets of Los Angeles.

These ordinances dripped with cruelty and unconstitutionality. Luckily, Mayor Garcetti withdrew support before these abhorrent ordinances could destroy the property and decrease the citizenship rights of people experiencing homelessness in Los Angeles.

CLICK HERE to view a map that shows where people who are experiencing homelessness reside and survive in Los Angeles. The map was designed by the Los Angeles Times.

Redlining And Homelessness

homelessness, Housing Policy, Racism

Redlining is the practice of denying services and/or capital to the residents of a neighborhood based on the residents’ race and ethnicity. The practice began in the 1930s when government sanctioned city planners (and later private sector entities) drew red lines around neighborhoods that they believed were inferior because of the racial makeup of the neighborhood. These red lined areas represented areas where government officials planned to withhold services and capital and sustain racially segregated cities and suburbs. It was a very transparent, unapologetically racist strategy for reducing the supply of quality housing for people of color. This system perpetuated housing inequality early on in the nation’s history, promoting and contributing to a high risk of homelessness for people of color.  And while this practice has historical origins, it is still a rampant problem in the United States of America.  The recent lawsuit against Associated Banks shows us how prevalent these despicable practices still are and how they hurt the quest for housing equality for all Americans.

Comedian Larry Wilmore, host of Comedy Central’s The Nightly Show,  recently ran a segment on redlining practices in America.  While the tone of the video clip is comedic in nature, Wilmore disseminates vital information about redlining in an engaging manner.  If you are interested in how institutional racism has affected homelessness and housing inequality this is a good video to watch. Check it out….

CLICK HERE to watch Larry Wilmore’s brief history of redlining on the Nightly Show

For more information on redlining in the past and present check out these sources:

“Redlining: Still A Thing,” by Emily Badger. The Washington Post. 28 May 2015:

“The Racist Housing Policy That Made Your Neighborhood,” by Alexis Madrigal. The Atlantic. 22 May 2014:

Dreier, Peter. “Redlining cities: How banks color community development.” Challenge (1991): 15-23.

Rice, Willy E. “Race, Gender, Redlining, and the Discriminatory Access to Loans, Credit, and Insurance: An Historical and Empirical Analysis of Consumers Who Sued Lenders and Insurers in Federal and State Courts, 1950-1995.” San Diego L. Rev. 33 (1996): 583.

“Skid Row” — History of the Terminology

homelessness, skid row

Have you ever wondered where the term “skid row” comes from?  Or, have you ever wondered if you are using the term in a grammatically salient manner?  Lately, I have been questioning the origins of the term and its correct grammatical usage.  In order to learn more, I consulted the excellent book From Nazareth to Skid Row: The Real Reality of Skid Row: Systemic and and Homiletic Insights, by Rev. Jeffrey R. Thomas, PhD.

Below is an excerpt from the book that gives some insights into the intricacies of this terminology.  This excerpt (from Chapter 1) shows how grammar and language are influenced by class, society, and power.

“The term Skid Row originated in Seattle, Washington, in the early 1900s as a result of transient work that included logging.  As trees were cut, timber slid or skidded from the tops of mountains to the foothills below.  There, transient workers, then known as hobos, were employed to load the timber.  Subsequently, the area became known as Skid Row.  This term was gradually accepted across America to refer to communities of transient and homeless populations.  Thus, Skid Row became a pejorative term.  Consequently, using the phrase ‘on Skid Row’, as is commonly stated, should be considered a ‘double negative’.  The terms ‘on’ and ‘Skid Row’ socially, not grammatically, negate each other in the following way.  No one lives ‘on’ Beverly Hills, they live ‘in’ Beverly Hills. No one lives ‘on’ Brentwood.  They live ‘in’ Brentwood.  In these cases, reference is being made to specific communities.  In the same way, when referring to Skid Row as a community, individuals live ‘in’ Skid Row.  Moreover, if reference to Skid Row is not being made as a community but as a negative social condition, the term refers to derogatory social pathology.  In this way, the term Skid Row is a negative term.  Accordingly, “on Skid Row” is inappropriate terminology.  Thus, respecting the dignity and humanity of individuals residing in the community demands that reference be made as ‘in Skid Row'”.

If you are interested in learning more about the history of Los Angeles’s Skid Row community, watch this oral history video.

City of Los Angeles Further Criminalizes Homelessness

Homlessness, Los Angeles

Last week, the City Council of Los Angeles took a giant step backward when it approved two archaic ordinances that allow for the involuntary removal of the property of homeless individuals from the streets of Los Angeles.  These ordinances, which are expected to be approved by Mayor Eric Garcetti, allow police officers to remove the property of people experiencing homelessness from Los Angeles streets after only 24 hours notice. The previous time allotted for warning was 72 hours.  Property will then be impounded by the City.  Tents will be subject to removal by the police between the hours of 6am-9pm.  Any tents found on the street between the hours of 6am-9pm will be “stored” (or impounded) for 90 days.

People who want to retrieve their personal property must find transportation to the impoundment center (which is a costly and arduous process for people experiencing homelessness).  The city is referring to these centers as “storage facilities”, not impoundment centers, because “storage facility” sounds less cruel and less bureaucratic, but in reality the retrieval of property poses further problems for people experiencing homelessness.  There will be forms to fill out and people will have difficulties navigating the system for retrieving personal property, as is often the case with impounding property.  The city has no “storage” system in place yet to accommodate the new ordinances, which shows that a lack of preparedness will make retrieval of property even more confusing and difficult for people who are experiencing homelessness in Los Angeles.  (City Council members even admitted that this lack of storage preparedness is a problem.)

The only Councilman to vote “no” on these horrible ordinances was Gil Cedillo. Councilman Cedillo was supported by homeless rights advocates and community organizers who were tightly packed into the City Council meeting.  “We should have a war on poverty, not on the poor,” Cedillo said at the City Council meeting.

One particularly eloquent homeless advocate was quoted in the Los Angeles Times on June 23, 2015 explaining the injustices of the ordinances from the point of view of people who support the rights of the homeless: “‘I don’t see how the city can acknowledge the involuntariness of the homeless, make breezy poetry about intent to provide solutions in the distant future and then feel entitled and moral to confiscate people’s property in the immediate,’ said Alice Callaghan, a longtime homeless advocate and director of a skid row school for immigrants’ children.”

Louise Mbella, Downtown Women’s Action Committee secretary was quoted in the Los Angeles Times critiquing the ordinances for their constitutional dubiousness and their lack of compassion: “The new ordinances are just cruel…If you negate the right to occupy public space to certain human beings, don’t call it public…You’re asking them to carry three suitcases on their backs.”

How did the City of Los Angeles get to this terrifying place of cruelty and inhumanity towards people experiencing homelessness?  Business Improvement District advocates have been imploring the City Council and the Mayor’s office to limit the visibility of the homeless in downtown Los Angeles to improve opportunities for financial gain.  Business Improvement District representatives believe that if people experiencing homelessness (and their belongings) are out of sight, then they will be out of mind.  This is textbook example of how “money talks” in politics.  The folks with “business improvement” goals–or gentrification goals–have overwhelming support from local politicians who will be looking for the electoral support of business minded voters in the next election cycle.  People who are experiencing homelessness face far more barriers to voting than business leaders and are therefor, not a valid constituency in the eyes of local political leaders.  If they were considered an important voting block, then they would have more than one City Council member representing their interests.  In Los Angeles, economic capital translates into political capital, leaving business leaders (and supporters of gentrification) to profit while allowing for the demonization and criminalization of people who are experiencing homelessness.

Watch the news coverage here:

CLICK HERE to watch the news coverage from ABC 7

CLICK HERE to listen to and read KPCC’s coverage of this news


This picture depicts people experiencing homelessness and people advocating for the homeless at the Los Angeles City Council meeting where the stringent enforcement of the destruction of encampments was approved.

Picture from: Genaro Molina (


Holland, Gale.  “L.A. City Council OKs crackdowns on homeless encampments”.  The Los Angeles Times.  23 June 2015.

Holland, Gale.  “L.A. vote makes it easier to break up homeless camps”.  The Los Angeles Times.  16 June 2015.

“Homeless, Not Helpless” — The Documentary


The documentary “Homeless Not Helpless”, created and directed by Felix Rodriguez, depicts the complex realities, struggles, and challenges that are associated with homelessness.  The documentary interviews people who are experiencing homelessness and people who work with (and advocate for) people who are experiencing homelessness in New York state.  Non-profit leaders and church representatives speak on the social, economic, and policy barriers to achieving housing equality for all, while the chronically homeless individuals share their stories and experiences.  One man who is “signing”** in the film asks commuters to “take me with you” since they are presumably driving home.

The slogan “homeless not helpless” is a popular organizing phrase for those in the homeless and housing rights movements. The slogan first gained popular usage in the 1980s when it was used by homeless rights activists (mostly homeless and formerly homeless individuals) across the country as a rallying cry drawing more attention to the need for increased basic and supportive services for homeless adults, youth, and families in the U.S..  Basic services include food, water, housing, utilities,  health care for both physical and mental health needs, and safety/security.  Supportive services include addiction recovery services, domestic violence services, education and career development, employment assistance, and parenting support or child care services.

**Signing is the act of holding up a sign in a public space and requesting money for food, transportation, and housing, or requesting work opportunities and housing by writing these needs on the sign.  Many people who are experiencing homelessness use signing as a way to make money for food, shelter, and transportation (bus or metro fare).  So, if you see someone with a sign on the side of the road asking for your help, please try to help in any way that you can!

For more information on this documentary, see this article, written by E. Assata Wright, for the Hudson Reporter (April 15, 2012):–yet-hopeful-NJCU-students-film-documentary-on-JSQ-homeless-?instance=secondary_stories_left_column

211 Gets Jammed in Seattle

affordable housing, homeless children, homeless families, homelessness, housing

This week, National Public Radio (NPR) has been covering homelessness in Seattle.  This affluent, idyllic city has raised to fourth on the list of cities in the nation with the highest rates of homelessness.  Seattle follows New York City, Los Angeles, and Las Vegas as the city with the greatest number of people experiencing homelessness.  Unlike other cities in America (even the “big three” of NY, LA, and LV) where homelessness is decreasing (albeit slowly) due to increased policy efforts targeted at veteran and family homelessness, Seattle has seen an increase in homeless residents in the past decade.  Seattle’s 211 line (the emergency line for homeless residents in crisis) is flooded with calls and the waiting lists for shelters and affordable housing units are years long.

CLICK HERE to read NPR’s article “Amid Seattle’s Affluence, Homelessness Also Flourishes” by John Ryan, published on April 7, 2015.

CLICK HERE to read NPR’s follow up coverage on homelessness in Seattle…”Homeless Families Wait Longer For Shelter Under Seattle’s System” by John Ryan, published April 8, 2015

Homelessness and Violence

homelessness, mental health, policing

This past Sunday (3/1/15), the fatal shooting of a unnamed and unarmed mentally ill man experiencing homelessness occurred on Skid Row in Los Angeles.  The video of the police confrontation went viral and as of today, Wednesday (3/4/15), over 6 million people have watched this horrific video.  If you missed it, click here for more information…  This tragic incident illustrates how vulnerable people experiencing homelessness are to violence.  People who are experiencing homelessness are much more susceptible to violence (physical and sexual) incurred by law enforcement, by other people who are experiencing homelessness, and by the public.  When living on the streets and in shelters with no security, homeless individuals are at greater risk of harm.  Sunday’s incident also reinforces the idea–propagated by proponents of police reform–that violence and death in police interactions with people of color, the mentally ill, the addicted, and the homeless represents an epidemic that must be stopped.  The Los Angeles Police Department has not released the name of the deceased yet, although community activists and news outlets continue to put pressure on the department for more information.  If you are following this story and looking for a reliable news source, then I recommend KPCC’s coverage of the event and subsequent fallout, found here: For updates, visit KPCC (public radio station of Southern California)