Quote:
Originally Posted by rubecube
Portugal does a lot of good things. However there is enough research now that shows that compelling people to enter treatment doesn't really work in terms of treating addiction. Furthermore, B.C. has a massive problem with unregulated substance use treatment facilities (thanks, BC Liberals!), which often scam addicts out of their various benefits (e.g. welfare, EI, etc.). The unregulated facilities that aren't scams often offer programs that aren't evidence-based and are usually lacking adequate facilities and staffing. (Source: I work directly in this industry)
There are private, licensed operators and centres operated by the various health authorities, which are subject to regulations and usually provide better treatment than the unregulated providers. However, the licensed operators are often not affordable and the HA centres have a very limited number of beds. There are also significant wait times to get into these facilities.
If we want to start compelling people to go to treatment, there needs to be better infrastructure in place. Wouldn't you agree that until that infrastructure is in place, we need harm reduction strategies such as safe supply to keep people from dying.
See above. Additionally there are not enough safe-consumption sites in the province to support this requirement.
It's pretty contradictory to state that dealers are acquiring safe supply drugs to resell them AND that there is not significant demand for safe supply drugs.
|
Rube, what evidence do you have that shows compelling people to treatment doesn’t work? If the metric used is that it’s not 100% effective than obviously. People need to stop looking for a panacea and start looking at the most realistic option. The current model being utilized (especially in BC with decrim) has been a colossal failure, resulting in MORE overdoses and MORE deaths. But what changes? Instead of circling back and reviewing their policies, the chief medical officer and chief coroner insist that “safe supply” is the answer. Addicts seek out fentanyl, full stop. Why? Because heroin doesn’t match the high of fent.
The people making these policy decisions are academics who are creating policy on theory vs lived experience. Even addictions nurses I’ve worked with in the past are completely naive. Several of them told me that it was so great that they had solved the addiction problem because they provided a safe consumption site and that after an addict used, they were good for the day. I had to break the news that several hours adter they used, they then used again in a friends basement, or again in an alley, or again in a shelter.
Create government run treatment facilities that are voluntary (choose this or choose jail). Provide detox, provide education, provide half way houses that are not contracted out, they are run by corrections. Maybe it only achieves 30% success rate but I’d take that over the current situation any day.
Also deal with the root cause, beef up customs to intercept fentanyl imports. Create a national ports police and hand down substantial sentences for opioid traffickers/importers.
No one in government is taking this seriously. Sometimes decisions need to be made for people who can’t or won’t make them for themselves. Especially those decisions that impact the lives of the average citizen who doesn’t deserve to have their property stolen or be accosted near a bus stop or a park. The real crime is allowing people to waste away on the streets and enabling their addiction.