Youth Homelessness Article Summary The Criminalization of Poverty: Montreal's Policy of Ticketing Homeless Youth for Municipal and

Transportation By-Law Infractions This article explores the negative impacts of social profiling. More specifically, it delves into the multi-faceted issue of how homeless youth are stigmatized and perpetually marginalized through the enforcement of ticketing for statutory and by-law offences. The article goes on to take a more in-depth look into the connections between ticketing and homelessness in Montreal and explores some of the more systemic social issues regarding youth homelessness. The author also investigates the relationship between police and youth and presents some positive alternatives to zero-tolerance policing. The author first identifies that as a fourth-year law student, he spent time verifying outstanding fines and found that a significant number of people being ticketed were homeless. More specifically, he identifies that many of the recipients of these tickets were those who were targeted for by-law and municipal transit infractions such as panhandling, jaywalking, squeegeeing, sleeping in parks, and/or creating public disturbances. The goes on to identify that in many cases, it was not unusual to find homeless youth who had racked up $7000 to $20,000 in ticket fines. The author continually refers to what he calls "the criminalization of poverty"--more specifically, victimizing and marginalizing an already vulnerable population in addition to placing financial burdens upon them. He argues, this act of criminalization negatively impacts homeless youth by creating barriers to life opportunities such as employment, credit, education, which in turn, creates stress for those already in direly stressful situations.

The author indicates that 71% homeless youth have had interaction with the criminal justice system. He goes on to list some of the most common infractions that homeless youth were ticketed. Among them included sleeping on public transit; free-riding public transportation; drinking in public; and loitering in public parks after hours. Based on the author's findings, it appears as though males are targeted disproportionately. 92% of individuals issued a ticket were male. Douglas goes onto discuss the ineffective nature of broken windows theory and the idea of zerotolerance policing as a deterrent to anti-social behaviour among homeless youth. He points out that the key purpose of using broken windows theory in conjunction with zero-tolerance strategies is to create a strict atmosphere which fights crime by fighting the disorder that precedes it. More specifically, in order to prevent minor crimes from escalating into major ones, strict law-enforcement strategies are used to maintain order and prevent chaos. Douglas goes on to identify that the fundamental flaw in this ideology is that it is ineffective. Despite zeropolicing efforts to maintain public safety and 'restore' order, there is no significant connection between targeting the homeless and reducing crime rates. Douglas makes use of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms as a means to outline the rights of vulnerable peoples in our society. Furthermore, he cites several sources including the Charter itself to assert that the violation of human dignity or freedom through persecution by means of disadvantage, stereotyping, political, or social prejudice is unconstitutional. He also describes the Youth Protection Act and Youth Criminal Justice Act as attempts to safeguard against injustice but points out that legislation in and of itself is not enough. Douglas asserts that social profiling, discrimination, and social exclusion are so frequently experienced among homeless youth that

rarely is this population in a position to advocate for themselves by way of challenging these offences in court. Douglas sites Stephen Gaetz when claiming that street youth are often portrayed as violent, delinquent, deviants rather than victims of their homelessness. He takes this opportunity to identify that based on Gaetz' research, the criminal justice system and shelter systems are failing to do enough to address this issue. Similarly, Douglas cites Gaetz as identifying that this act of victim-blaming would be unacceptable for other youth populations. More specifically, Gaetz' research has revealed that the levels of violence and other forms of crime experienced by homeless youth are substantially higher than that of their non-homeless counterparts. Similar to Gaetz', Douglas argues that policies around the use of public spaces are significant when considering how homeless youth are targeted. Douglas notes the unfairness of legislation that mandates prison sentences for unpaid fines and policy objectives that make any sort of 'public disorder' a priority for the police. One of the most significant arguments in Douglas' paper is that these policy initiatives tend to create an atmosphere where police tend to assign responsibility for 'public disorder' to groups who are visibly marginalized or appear to be homeless. Furthermore, Douglas points out that these infractions are rarely enforced by police when committed by most citizens. By nature, homeless people carry out their day to day lives in the public. Ironically, street youth have no viable alternative but to carry out their private lives in the public sphere if they are, by definition, homeless. More specifically, if shelter services, affordable housing, and/or adequate employment opportunities are not available to them, carrying out their daily routines in public is their only option. Douglas takes this opportunity to refer to an example of a municipal court judge who was astonished to hear about a by-law that designated the 'appropriate' use of street furniture. The minimum fine was $500 for that

infraction. The conclusion one can draw is very clear, if homeless youth did not have a safe space to sleep, and chose to sleep on a public bench, it was highly possible that they would be slapped with a $500 fine. Douglas also makes several valid points regarding how fiscally irresponsible it is to excessively target, and subsequently fine homeless youth. This is especially true in cases where the youth end up in prison. His argument is clear--taxpayers money would be better spent on providing services for youth and creating effective legal and social policies. Douglas uses the Kelowna R.E.S.P.E.C.T program as an example of a good alternative to ticketing homeless youth and creating more positive police-citizen relationships. This program works through the use of 'positive ticketing'--giving out positive tickets to youth who are found not to be engaging in negative or destructive behaviour. These tickets may look like slushee vouchers, free coffee or pizza, movie passes, etc. He also points out that policy changes in Victoria have created progress for homeless youth when the court ruled that during the hours of 7 pm to 7am, camping was allowed in public parks. This changed the use of public space in Victoria and permitted those outside of the middle class to really make use of public spaces without being forced to pay for it. I argue that this article is valuable for our project because it outlines the very point that we are trying to make--that systemically, there is a major issue around 'boxing people in'. This could be literally in the sense of social profiling. More specifically, the mere appearance of homeless youth making them a victim of discrimination. It could also mean preventing them from participating in wider society--that is, to be socially excluded. This article will be useful in formulating the fundamental basis for our advocacy because it very clearly outlines the point that we are trying to make. Similarly, it looks at how homeless

youth are punished for being victims rather than trying to find adequate solutions to prevent youth from becoming victims of homelessness. I think this article is vitally important when considering some of the legal issues we have regarding homelessness and furthermore, it nicely outlines the systemic issues of youth homelessness and many of the problems around it.

Article Summary "The Criminalization of Poverty: Montreal's Policy of Ticketing Homeless Youth for Municipal and Transportation By-Law Infractions"

Amanda Young Student Number: 100804341 Professor: Zuby Saloogie Monday March 4th, 2013. Human Rights