In Vernon, Ontario, two teenagers camped behind a grocery store. When onlooker Tami sought to help, the boys claimed to have been disowned by off-the-grid parents. Tami and others secured them basic necessities and a room in a hostel, though others desired more information before agreeing to help. It was a hoax: the boys were from a loving, middle-class California family and simply wanted be on their own. When the truth came out, Tami claimed she did not regret helping; other helpers felt manipulated. Is there a relevant relationship between charity and what a donation is used for?

Cities across the United States have turned to hostile architecture to curb the homeless population within their cities. Hostile architecture is anything that makes a place less hospitable, such as spikes under an overpass or ridges on a bench to prevent sleeping. These are seen as a quick fix and could potentially benefit businesses by making the cities seem cleaner and potentially deter crime. However, the architecture does nothing to help the homeless, actively taking city funds that could be directed towards helping these people better their lives.

Vicky chooses not to give money to a homeless beggar because she worries that he will use the money to buy drugs or alcohol and wonders how he became homeless in the first place. Is her choice morally justified? What moral duties do we have to the less fortunate?