Scare tactics aren’t the answer for overdose crisis,

[maryjane48]

http://www.campbellrivermirror.com/news ... oner-says/

[twobits]

http://www.campbellrivermirror.com/news/scare-tactics-arent-the-answer-for-overdose-crisis-b-c-s-chief-coroner-says/

Why? Cuz the "Education" message is working so well?

[GordonH]

Every addict makes a choice, to either actually get clean (only if they are serious) or get there next fix. If it's the latter one they really don't care if it kills them or not, they just want that high.

Meanwhile the government is spending huge amounts of money on people, who just turn around and do it again to themselves.

[dle]

Fear is not an option:

https://www.castanet.net/edition/news-s ... htm#213137


Right, because NOT doing anything to get them OFF the killer drugs is working so well. It's exactly this kind of pansy-arse kid-gloves attitude towards the crisis and druggies in general that has it at epidemic proportions - why can't they see this?

If scaring someone straight gets them off drugs then it's all good. Giving them a place to shoot up safely only works if they go there to shoot up and ya, they will live, but if they aren't shooting up any drugs at all ever then hey! Guess what! they will live too (and longer, better lives!)

[hobbyguy]

Every addict makes a choice, to either actually get clean (only if they are serious) or get there next fix. If it's the latter one they really don't care if it kills them or not, they just want that high.

Meanwhile the government is spending huge amounts of money on people, who just turn around and do it again to themselves.

That is a rather simplistic response.

I have never known a person who set out to become an addict or alcoholic. Have you ever known anyone who chose that as a goal in life?

It is easy to dismiss the entire issue by dehumanizing folks and calling them "addicts" rather than recognizing them as people who fell into a trap, and one that is very, very difficult to escape. These folks are not "the other" - they are us except that "there, but for the grace of God, go I".

Life, and what it does to people, is not that simple. Many who want to remove themselves from the trap try, and fail, try and fail - everything from their circumstances to their pasts to genetics plays a role in that. To label them as "addicts" is just try to ignore that, dehumanize them, and inflate personal feelings.

I have seen good people, good workers that I managed, fall into the trap when their personal lives hit a rocky patch. I have watched, when despite the company spending many thousands on rehab, they try to get out of the trap (they want to!) but fail and relapse. It is a helpless feeling. Most of them, I do not know the outcome, as the company only tries for so long, and then they become "societies problem".

In many ways it is "societies problem". We have chosen to ostracize and label these folks. We have chosen to allow our fears to dictate how we treat these people, and it has mostly been without compassion.

None of us go through life without some rocky patches and without pain and without making mistakes.

Many "addicts" got there by the route of pharmaceutical company exploitation (oxycodone) and simple paths like car accidents, sports injuries etc. Many get there by being trapped in untenable circumstances (sexual abuse, domestic violence etc.) from which there is little escape except through getting high, and the &55h##3 dealers who "upsell" them to addictive substances to ensure a steady stream of profits. Some "addicts" are not even visible - they quietly go about trying to lead "normal" lives until they get a bad hit of fentanyl and overdose in their homes (50% of overdose deaths happen in private residences).

Some of the overdoses are not even addicted persons, but folks who were sold "recreational" drugs that were laced with fentanyl. (An old @%%h##3 dealer trick - get a low potency "batch" - dust it with something nasty - in the 1960s some dealers would "dust" low potency marijuana with PCP.)

It is anything but simple.

The way out is not through dehumanizing and labeling people. The way out is not through ostracizing people. The way out is through realistic and compassionate approaches.

How much money do we spend trying to go after dealers? Has our prohibition been successful? Yes it has, in EXACTLY the same way that alcohol prohibition was in 20th century America. It has been successful in creating organized crime gangs, it has been successful in criminalizing many ordinary folk, it has been successful in creating gang violence, it has been successful in creating a lot of petty crime to pay for contraband substances, and it is creating many needless deaths.

The alternative will not "make this problem go away" - but it will minimize the harm and costs to our society and better protect its citizens.

Decriminalization of addicts. Full supports from housing through to rehab to educational assistance and mental health therapies. And yes, legal controlled supply for those who are, and those who remain addicts.

I can see the "eyes roll". We are already spending more than that on the prohibition efforts and its fall out.

We are clogging our medical system to the point where regular taxpayers must wait 8-10 hrs and more for care in our ERs and regular taxpayers must wait an hour or more for an ambulance. Some regular taxpayers are NOT getting the care they need because we close our eyes to the addictions solution and stick steadfastly to the simplistic and unworkable prohibition path.

It goes on, but if you really think about it, and you have an ounce of compassion for your fellow human beings then you will see that it is us, society, that created the opiod crisis. It is only us, society, that can change that. It starts by accepting that our fixation on prohibition is incorrect.

[GordonH]

^^^ Oh no they are all very much human hobbyguy, since we are only species on this planet that will knowing get addicted to something that will cause death (sooner or later... meaning drugs or alcohol).

We are also a species that has the ability if we put our minds to it to get clean of our addiction.

Its all about choices, those wanting to continue being addicted made their choice.

[my5cents]

There's also another application for fear.

Spread fear, to inform those who haven't yet become addicted.

When I was a kid, tales and the media depicting serious addition and the suffering experienced attempting to get off drugs scare the heck out of me. That's why I've never tried them.

It was fear.

Whatever works.

[dle]

There's also another application for fear.
!
Spread fear, to inform those who haven't yet become addicted.

When I was a kid, tales and the media depicting serious addition and the suffering experienced attempting to get off drugs scare the heck out of me. That's why I've never tried them.

It was fear.

Whatever works.

EXACTLY! Fear of lots of things kept me straight as a kid too (fear of the cops, fear of jail, fear of parental given consequences, fear of drugs from watching a friend die of an OD, fear of drinking and driving from having a friend's mom die in a crash). I don't think there's a better deterrent out there than good ol' fear! I didn't grow up a fretful person but I have a healthy respect for the fact that life can change in a nano-second from a dumb choice. Those fears played a big part in why I did have the chance to grow up - a lot of my friends didn't get that chance.

There HAS to be consequences! It's just a no brainer to me. WHY are we not wanting to use fear tactics?? If it saves a life and gets someone off drugs yahoo! One for the good guys.....

[dle]

There's also another application for fear.
!
Spread fear, to inform those who haven't yet become addicted.

When I was a kid, tales and the media depicting serious addition and the suffering experienced attempting to get off drugs scare the heck out of me. That's why I've never tried them.

It was fear.

Whatever works.

EXACTLY! Fear of lots of things kept me straight as a kid too (fear of the cops, fear of jail, fear of parental given consequences, fear of drugs from watching a friend die of an OD, fear of drinking and driving from having a friend's mom die in a crash). I don't think there's a better deterrent out there than good ol' fear! I didn't grow up a fretful person but I have a healthy respect for the fact that life can change in a nano-second from a dumb choice. Those fears played a big part in why I did have the chance to grow up - a lot of my friends didn't get that chance.

There HAS to be consequences! It's just a no brainer to me. WHY are we not wanting to use fear tactics?? If it saves a life and gets someone off drugs yahoo! One for the good guys.....

[dle]

Every addict makes a choice, to either actually get clean (only if they are serious) or get there next fix. If it's the latter one they really don't care if it kills them or not, they just want that high.

Meanwhile the government is spending huge amounts of money on people, who just turn around and do it again to themselves.

That is a rather simplistic response.

I have never known a person who set out to become an addict or alcoholic. Have you ever known anyone who chose that as a goal in life?

It is easy to dismiss the entire issue by dehumanizing folks and calling them "addicts" rather than recognizing them as people who fell into a trap, and one that is very, very difficult to escape. These folks are not "the other" - they are us except that "there, but for the grace of God, go I".

Life, and what it does to people, is not that simple. Many who want to remove themselves from the trap try, and fail, try and fail - everything from their circumstances to their pasts to genetics plays a role in that. To label them as "addicts" is just try to ignore that, dehumanize them, and inflate personal feelings.

I have seen good people, good workers that I managed, fall into the trap when their personal lives hit a rocky patch. I have watched, when despite the company spending many thousands on rehab, they try to get out of the trap (they want to!) but fail and relapse. It is a helpless feeling. Most of them, I do not know the outcome, as the company only tries for so long, and then they become "societies problem".

In many ways it is "societies problem". We have chosen to ostracize and label these folks. We have chosen to allow our fears to dictate how we treat these people, and it has mostly been without compassion.

None of us go through life without some rocky patches and without pain and without making mistakes.

Many "addicts" got there by the route of pharmaceutical company exploitation (oxycodone) and simple paths like car accidents, sports injuries etc. Many get there by being trapped in untenable circumstances (sexual abuse, domestic violence etc.) from which there is little escape except through getting high, and the &55h##3 dealers who "upsell" them to addictive substances to ensure a steady stream of profits. Some "addicts" are not even visible - they quietly go about trying to lead "normal" lives until they get a bad hit of fentanyl and overdose in their homes (50% of overdose deaths happen in private residences).

Some of the overdoses are not even addicted persons, but folks who were sold "recreational" drugs that were laced with fentanyl. (An old @%%h##3 dealer trick - get a low potency "batch" - dust it with something nasty - in the 1960s some dealers would "dust" low potency marijuana with PCP.)

It is anything but simple.

The way out is not through dehumanizing and labeling people. The way out is not through ostracizing people. The way out is through realistic and compassionate approaches.

How much money do we spend trying to go after dealers? Has our prohibition been successful? Yes it has, in EXACTLY the same way that alcohol prohibition was in 20th century America. It has been successful in creating organized crime gangs, it has been successful in criminalizing many ordinary folk, it has been successful in creating gang violence, it has been successful in creating a lot of petty crime to pay for contraband substances, and it is creating many needless deaths.

The alternative will not "make this problem go away" - but it will minimize the harm and costs to our society and better protect its citizens.

Decriminalization of addicts. Full supports from housing through to rehab to educational assistance and mental health therapies. And yes, legal controlled supply for those who are, and those who remain addicts.

I can see the "eyes roll". We are already spending more than that on the prohibition efforts and its fall out.

We are clogging our medical system to the point where regular taxpayers must wait 8-10 hrs and more for care in our ERs and regular taxpayers must wait an hour or more for an ambulance. Some regular taxpayers are NOT getting the care they need because we close our eyes to the addictions solution and stick steadfastly to the simplistic and unworkable prohibition path.

It goes on, but if you really think about it, and you have an ounce of compassion for your fellow human beings then you will see that it is us, society, that created the opiod crisis. It is only us, society, that can change that. It starts by accepting that our fixation on prohibition is incorrect.

You sound like a nice guy, full of empathy, but I respectfully must disagree with your reasoning, for what is probably another simplistic reason. If someone keeps using drugs we can't save them every time. They might get saved today, but good chance they are gonna die tomorrow or the next day as long as they keep using. They are, quite simply, addicts, and no point in sugar-coating the obvious. Yep, you are correct in saying it could happen to any one of us but wouldn't make us any less of an addict. Call it what it is. Addiction. And it's killing people. Hugs and handshakes aren't going to keep them alive.

[hobbyguy]

^^ I would suggest that you look at the real world results in Portugal. It has worked.

What we are doing atm is not working. Don't believe me? Suggest you look at all the money and effort that a caring governor, John Kasic, has put into trying to solve the problem with the prohibition attitude, and how it has not worked. Kudos to Kasic for really caring and really trying, but in context, the results just are not there.

[dle]

^^ I would suggest that you look at the real world results in Portugal. It has worked.

What we are doing atm is not working. Don't believe me? Suggest you look at all the money and effort that a caring governor, John Kasic, has put into trying to solve the problem with the prohibition attitude, and how it has not worked. Kudos to Kasic for really caring and really trying, but in context, the results just are not there.

Yeah, see that's just my point - exactly what you said that what we are doing atm is not working - totally agree! And, what we are doing at the moment is all the molly-coddling and running after people who are making the CHOICE to do drugsto treat them with naloxone to try and save them, for this time, for this OD. Sad thing is though, they probably won't make it the next time. An addict (yes, they ARE addicts, let's call a spade a spade), is NOT IN THEIR RIGHT MIND, so completely incapable of making good life decisions for themselves. IMHO, the ONLY way to save the lives of these addicts (or the weekend warriors) is for them to NOT DO THE DRUGS. If they even do it once, that is the bullet spinning in the chamber. They choose to play the Russian roulette in their altered frenzied state of mind to get that fix regardless of the knowledge it could be laced with fentanyl. Kindness isn't going to save that person's life, only them not doing the drugs is going to save their life (at least of dying from doing drugs). Giving them clean drugs to enable them to continue to live their life of choice as a drug addict is just counter-productive to the goal of them living sober and productive, happy lives.

[hobbyguy]

^^ people, myself included, make bad choices all the time. Most you can figure a way out of.

Addictions are far too complex a problem to apply "some dogs have spots, therefore all dogs have spots" thinking.

IF the unfortunates who are addicted to opiods were not criminalized, then they would have easier access to pathway out and to a productive life, a job etc. Hard to get a job if you are classed as a criminal. Many would find a way off welfare and become taxpayers and contributors.

IF the unfortunates who are addicted to opiods had access to government supplied regulated and consistent dose opiods, then:

1) the market for smugglers pretty much dries up
2) the gang thugs lose big $$$
3) the welfare we provide some folks would go toward rent etc. instead of straight into the pockets of gang thugs
4) some of the unfortunates who are addicted would stop stealing stuff etc. to pay for their addiction

Think about that, we taxpayers are already paying for a big chunk of the illicit opiods. Should we continue to pay gang thugs, or pay a lot less to pharmacists?

Think about that. We are going to be paying for shelters and housing for many addicted people. We are paying anyway. Either we do that, or businesses/residents have to put up with trashed parks and doorways etc.

Then we get to pay again as our stuff gets stolen.

It isn't molly coddling. It is looking at things realistically.

[dirtybiker]

I never looked at it as a overdose crisis, just the ultimate cure !

Fear may only work as part of the education to never get caught up in it.

For those already caught up, not so much.

[Loki2u]

Every addict makes a choice, to either actually get clean (only if they are serious) or get there next fix. If it's the latter one they really don't care if it kills them or not, they just want that high.

Meanwhile the government is spending huge amounts of money on people, who just turn around and do it again to themselves.

If you think that "addiction" is a choice then you clearly do not understand the meaning of addiction and further discussion with you is pointless.

You prove my point with your second statement. Why do you think they do it over and over again?