Originally Posted by Robbie

Just read the report.

It actually says that "1 in 30 children were homeless at some point last year".

I take that to mean that they weren't perpetually homeless living in the gutter by themselves.

As I would understand that...it would mean that their parents may have lost their home or apartment at some point.

I'm thinking that would mean that a large percentage of them may be counted as "homeless" when the reality is that their parents might have been scrambling to get a new place for a few days?

Not saying that "homeless" children aren't a problem. I just think that the definition of "homeless" being used in that report is most definitely not the picture the OP used of a child all alone on the streets.

Matter of fact...I'm pretty sure if I lived in one of those cheap "extended stay" motels that people actually LIVE in...I would be counted as "homeless".

I'm not even sure if they count people who lose their jobs and apartments/homes and move back in with their parents temporarily as "homeless"?

Anyway, the "homeless at SOME POINT" was what caught my eye when I read that.

When I hear "homeless children" I see something in my head similar to the pic that the OP posted. I'm sure there are some of those too...but I don't think that the "1 in 30" are homeless like that.