Olcay Gulsen recounts in her column in LINDA the feelings evoked by seeing on the street people who seem lost in their own thoughts, reminding her of her own father. The businesswoman describes the inner tension between the instinct to avoid the painful sight and the empathy that restrains her, feeling a 'heartache' for each person who appears confused and unpredictable in public space. [1]
Gulsen explains the root of this emotional reactivity through the complex medical history of her family. Her father was diagnosed with schizophrenia at the age of fourteen and suffered from multiple dependencies, including drugs, alcohol, and gambling, which is why, since the age of eighteen, he lived in a psychiatric institution (GGZ). During that period, daily medication under supervision ensured him a stability and safety that she considers his happiest years, even though he was subjected to regular drug tests. [1]
The situation changed radically in 2015 with the introduction of a major legislative reform concerning the organization of long-term care. This amendment led to the withdrawal of structural support for chronic patients, resulting in Gulsen being excluded from the system that previously protected him. Her father was displaced into homeless shelters, where, within a few weeks, he developed a severe heroin addiction and entered states of recurring severe psychosis, making confrontation with this health regression a devastating challenge for the family. [1]
The author emphasizes the artificial and dangerous nature of the idea that individuals with complex mental health problems only need a place to sleep. She highlights that the absence of structure and professional medical care led to rapid physical decline, culminating in her father's death two years before the publication of the article, in a state of extreme exhaustion caused by toxins. Gulsen poses the rhetorical question about an alternative scenario where medical support would have been maintained, suggesting that the death could have been prevented through timely intervention. [1]
The author generalizes the personal experience to the national level, declaring that the large number of homeless people reflects the side effects of the 'home care' policy. She considers it impossible and unrealistic to expect families, lacking medical expertise, to manage psychoses or severe depression of relatives alone. This inadequate pressure is presented as a form of systemic negligence that leaves vulnerable individuals failing socially. [1]
Gulsen cites data from the Central Bureau of Statistics (CBS) to illustrate the crisis: at the beginning of 2024, there were approximately 33,000 homeless persons aged between 18 and 65, compared to 26,600 recorded at the beginning of 2022, indicating a significant increase in socioeconomic vulnerability. She refuses to view these abstract figures, insisting on the human narratives behind the statistics. [1]
In conclusion, the columnist describes her voluntary activity at the 'Stoelenproject' project in Amsterdam, where together with her sister Dolshe they prepare hot meals for approximately 60-65 homeless people. This local initiative does not claim to replace deficient medical services, but offers necessary nighttime refuge and a warm meal, encouraging readers to identify and join such social projects in their local communities. [1]
- Categories:
- Society
- Entities:
