Supreme Court ruling opens doors to drug injection clinics across Canada

[sclitheroe]

Originally Posted by Ark2

The incentive for that drunk to stop is he has to hit rock bottom. If you are intentionally doing everything in your power to prevent that from happening, odds are he isn't going to stop.

The idea that we would supply drug addicts with both free drugs and a safe place to inject them and somehow expect that this would lead to them getting better is so ridiculously backwards that it defies comprehension. Not only would the government enable an extremely dangerous addiction, but you would almost certainly cultivate an environment where this type of behaviour becomes more socially acceptable.

The life of a drug addict should be hard. It should be painful, embarrassing, shameful, etc. because that is the only way to bring someone to the conclusion that they need to make a change. Once they get there, then it's the moral obligation of others to help make that change possible. Creating a consequence free environment where someone can continue their dangerous and destructive habit all so that a few dollars on the bottom line are saved, is, in my opinion, pure evil.

Rock bottom has very little to do with ease of access or convenience - for the dedicated addict, the things you mention here are pretty trivial, mostly just daily speedbumps like you dealing with a traffic jam on your way to work. Recovery is driven by desire for change from within - for the most part, the external factors can be stacked all the way to death before they'd have any real bearing.

[VO #23]

Originally Posted by transplant99

I get that...but it makes absolutely no sense.

Again, just because the junkie has a place to use a clean needle, doesnt mean that is the only place he/she will do so. Its absurd to believe that anyone who is jonesing for a fix and isnt within a clinics proximity is going to wait until the opportunity to get there arises. They are going to use whatever means available to satisfy the addiction. So the money being spent to supply the safe place really would be wasted the second that addict doesnt use the facility and uses a dirty needle in the alley behind the fleabag bar.

Im all for helping this segment of society (as it is a horrendous place to find oneself), but IMO this particular option makes no difference....and instead may be taking away resources from what really needs to happen...... treatment and breaking the addiction.

Of course there is still opportunity to shoot in an alley, in a park, or wherever. It's not a perfect solution to the problem. However, the point remains that Insite gives the option for sterilized needles, sterilized water, etc to be used while trained professionals watch to make sure that people in trouble (ie OD'ing) can get the fast help they need. Given the popularity of this particular clinic, and the demonstrated positive results it has had both on the individual addicts as well as the community in which they live, it seems hard to argue that this is not better than nothing.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Ark2

No one is saying that they are, but there are arguments that they should be getting free drugs and even people in this thread that are in support of this idea. That's who I was addressing in my last post.

Your last post was addressed to me. Can you point out to me where I suggested they should be supplying drugs?

Originally Posted by Ark2

The life of a drug addict should be hard. It should be painful, embarrassing, shameful, etc.

A lovely sentiment.

That's the way we've always done it, but amazingly, there are still drug addicts everywhere. How come it hasn't worked? Not shameful enough? Not painful enough? Alleys too clean? AIDS too easy?

[jayswin]

A lot of responses in this thread are basically saying "the solution isn't perfect, so the solution is useless".

[CrusaderPi]

Originally Posted by flameswin

A lot of responses in this thread are basically saying "the solution isn't perfect, so the solution is useless".

Which makes sense, because the non-solution we had up to now has been working so very well.

[HOZ]

Originally Posted by flameswin

A lot of responses in this thread are basically saying "the solution isn't perfect, so the solution is useless".

DUDE, if that is how you read things then you seriously need to re-read.

The solution is no solution at all. Just a way for people to feel warm and fuzzy about themselves while not really addressing the real issue. Which is, "How do we get them off their addiction?"

[Bagor]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

A friend of mine had a son who got hooked, and he was enabled (not by clinics) but hear me out. His parents gave him money, got him clean needles and give him a safe place to get high.

He didn't hit rock bottom because of that, and it took his parents tossing him out and not enabling him to realize that his choices were bad.

I'd be fine with clinics if they forced these addicts to take a hard look at their choices and put conditions on the use of the clinics.

Same ....

I've a friend currently going through something similar and it is gutwrenching to watch and listen to.

After similar enabling to what you mentioned and on the advice of drug councellors they've just cut all ties with him and told him he's not welcome in their house or to see them any more until he gets himself clean (detachment, I think is the term). Haven't closed the door but left strict conditions.

As my friend says ..... if it takes him waking up with the shame of realising that he sold himself the night before for a hit to realise the extent of his problem and seek help for himself then that's what it's going to take.

I get these clinics from an infection control pov (and the subsequent financial savings) but that's about it for me, unless I suppose during one of these "life years" saved that some of the addicts finally get it, and get themselves clean.

Sad reality imo is that with drug abuse there's recovery and death, no inbetween (except for the life of chaos).

Pump a lot more money with the projected savings into more treatment centres that take no merde wouldn't go a miss (imo).

[Flame Of Liberty]

Originally Posted by Ark2

I guess I'm just not understanding how it is helping them overcome their addiction. You give them a clean, safe place to shoot up, great. That gets them off the needle how exactly? Society does not have an obligation to get other people high, and simply waving your hands and saying that you are doing something good does not change reality. I think that's the issue with your typical white, middle class North American these days. They have no real social issues to fight for of their own, so they adopt those of others. However, since it doesn't really affect them, they don't care if what they are doing truly has any positive value, just as long as it feels like it does. That's basically what is happening here. Just keep shovelling #$%@ against the tide and tell yourself that you're doing something good.

Strange times indeed where some can actually try to argue that helping someone else get high is a moral obligation.

Fantastic post, spot on.

[SeeBass]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Ummmm.....what?

Sarcasm off

[Caged Great]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Im all for helping this segment of society (as it is a horrendous place to find oneself), but IMO this particular option makes no difference....and instead may be taking away resources from what really needs to happen...... treatment and breaking the addiction.

The amount of deaths from ODing dropped by a net of 26% in the area that the first clinic opened. That is making a difference. Plus the staff there isn't just handing out needles and saying go to it, they are informing them of treatment options that are available if they want to break away from the addiction. Knowing that there is assistance out there if you're wanting to make a change is as important as having safe needles to use.

Between reducing OD's, lowering aids and hepatitis and other related disease rates in communities, and enabling those who are of the right mindset to change their lives to have that option available to them readily, I don't really understand what there is to complain about.

The costs of these sites is minimal in the whole scheme of things, and the costs of the prevented diseases would likely offset a good portion of it anyway.

[Ark2]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Your last post was addressed to me. Can you point out to me where I suggested they should be supplying drugs?

I quoted what you said as it was a good starting point for the point that I wanted to make. Nothing more, nothing less.

A lovely sentiment.

That's the way we've always done it, but amazingly, there are still drug addicts everywhere. How come it hasn't worked? Not shameful enough? Not painful enough? Alleys too clean? AIDS too easy?

Ummm... because there will always be drug abuse? You aren't ever going to get rid of it, but I don't get how that somehow lends to this silly notion that you might as well try anything else.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Ark2

I quoted what you said as it was a good starting point for the point that I wanted to make. Nothing more, nothing less.



Ummm... because there will always be drug abuse? You aren't ever going to get rid of it, but I don't get how that somehow lends to this silly notion that you might as well try anything else.

put your own thoughts together.

If there is always going to be drub abuse, why not accept that (in the way that you have) and decide to lower policing, judicial, medical and societal costs with what is a relatively small investment, mostly from the province and federal government?

[Weiser Wonder]

Originally Posted by Ark2

The incentive for that drunk to stop is he has to hit rock bottom. If you are intentionally doing everything in your power to prevent that from happening, odds are he isn't going to stop.

The idea that we would supply drug addicts with both free drugs and a safe place to inject them and somehow expect that this would lead to them getting better is so ridiculously backwards that it defies comprehension. Not only would the government enable an extremely dangerous addiction, but you would almost certainly cultivate an environment where this type of behaviour becomes more socially acceptable.

The life of a drug addict should be hard. It should be painful, embarrassing, shameful, etc. because that is the only way to bring someone to the conclusion that they need to make a change. Once they get there, then it's the moral obligation of others to help make that change possible. Creating a consequence free environment where someone can continue their dangerous and destructive habit all so that a few dollars on the bottom line are saved, is, in my opinion, pure evil.

I want evidence that anything you said here is true.

AFAIK, the 'rock bottom' concept is pop psychology and not anything an actual addictions counselor would recommend. Not many experts see the logic or effectiveness in the 'take away all of someone's resources and support and hope they improve somehow' method.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Weiser Wonder

I want evidence that anything you said here is true.

AFAIK, the 'rock bottom' concept is pop psychology and not anything an actual addictions counselor would recommend. Not many experts see the logic or effectiveness in the 'take away all of someone's resources and support and hope they improve somehow' method.

AKA, Punish the Addiction out of them.

No self-aware addict enjoys their addiction. That's the whole point.

[Calgaryborn]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

put your own thoughts together.

If there is always going to be drub abuse, why not accept that (in the way that you have) and decide to lower policing, judicial, medical and societal costs with what is a relatively small investment, mostly from the province and federal government?

Because drug abuse is never self contained. It preys on society and spreads like a disease. If an addict's average life once addicted is 10 years these clinics might add 5 years to that. I honestly can't see it doing much better than that.

That 5 years will be spent stealing from stores and family members if they still have contact; It will be 5 extra years of providing discount sex for anyone who will get you high or give you a few bucks; 5 more years of welfare payments and food kitchens; 5 more years of them dealing drugs or acting as mules for their drug dealers: 5 more years of in and out of jail and in and out of hospitals/clinics because you've been beaten up or you have gotton another STD; 5 more years of family dreading to get that phone call that tells them that little Johnny or little Jane finally finally finished killing themselves through the drugs or through the places they go and the things they do to get the drugs.

Easy access to drugs does spread it faster. Police not only are instructed to leave the clinic alone but also access to and from the clinic. That gives drug dealers a safe zone which I'm sure they use.

I realize within that 5 extra years the person might find whatever they lacked in the first 10 years to get off the drugs but, that is a faint hope and put up against the damage they do isn't a good investment.

Also, access to information on treatment programs is everywhere. It is at the walk in clinics and hospitals. It is offered at social services and at every stop in the legal system. There are people reaching out to them at the soup kitchens and homeless shelters. You don't need a police free zone/shoot up gallery in order to get that message out.

[Mike F]

Originally Posted by Caged Great

The amount of deaths from ODing dropped by a net of 26% in the area that the first clinic opened. That is making a difference. Plus the staff there isn't just handing out needles and saying go to it, they are informing them of treatment options that are available if they want to break away from the addiction. Knowing that there is assistance out there if you're wanting to make a change is as important as having safe needles to use.

Anyone have any stats on the number or % of people using the safe injection clinics that actually cleaned up? That would go a long way to convincing me of their value.

[Caged Great]

Originally Posted by Mike F

Anyone have any stats on the number or % of people using the safe injection clinics that actually cleaned up? That would go a long way to convincing me of their value.

On their website, it says that they have issued 14 518 referrals for treatment. Now that's not to say that all those people have actually broken the habit, but even if a small percentage do, that's still a sizable amount of people.

Another thing that's a positive with these is that petty crimes go down significantly in the area (break ins etc.)

It does work, and helps the people that are in that situation.

[Mike F]

14 518 referrals says to me that they give a referral to each person who uses the clinic. Without evidence on how often those referrals led to positive results, it's a meaningless number.

[Calgaryborn]

Originally Posted by Mike F

14 518 referrals says to me that they give a referral to each person who uses the clinic. Without evidence on how often those referrals led to positive results, it's a meaningless number.

Your right of course. It also would be the same referral they get at the court house, walk in clinics, soup kitchens, ect. It is mistaken to assume that these people aren't well aware of the help that is out there or that without this shooting gallery(clinic) they simply die without any offer of help. If you think about it of all the places drug addicts frequent the place they go to get high is likely the last place they would be at when sobering up would sound the most attractive.

The down turn in petty crime makes no sense at all, either. The addicts still have to generate money to get their drugs. Is most of the down-turn because they go elsewhere to steal and such? Is the neccessary lack of police presence around the shoot up clinic lowering the numbers for petty crimes like pan-handling and public intoxication? The crime is committed because they need money for drugs. Nothing in this program appears to offer another avenue to gaining this income. I'm not sure how any down-turn in petty crime could be credited with this clinic.

[VO #23]

Originally Posted by Mike F

14 518 referrals says to me that they give a referral to each person who uses the clinic. Without evidence on how often those referrals led to positive results, it's a meaningless number.

The "positive results" of the clinics have been well-documented throughout this thread. For the last time: Insite's direct mandate is NOT to reform addicts through rehabilitation. It is more preventative in nature. There are OTHER SERVICES that deal with the addiction issues on a case-by-case basis. Insite is merely there to assist in preventing the transmission of disease, prevent death by OD, and offer some limited support to the addicts. It has, by many measures, been a great success in the area.