Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Sam W's avatar

Drug policy has lagged behind the times- and well behind the science- for decades.

We know what methods are proven to work; a program of medical treatment, replacement drugs and psychiatric care combined to build up a solid rate of recovery. When you identify substance addiction as a medical issue and you treat it accordingly, people get their lives back on track.

But for a lot of people, substance abuse disorders are still viewed as a moral failing rather than an illness. When those people are in power, any assistance- even those forms of it that we know for a fact will solve the problem- is seen as being lenient on people who are a 'burden' on society.

They prefer programs that punish addicted persons rather than helping them get better.

It's a stunning lack of empathy that reveals a sick mindset. That kind of worldview doesn't belong anywhere near elected office. If your job is to be a public servant, then you should be serving the public, not going out of your way to be a complete bastard to people who need help.

Expand full comment
Frank Innocence's avatar

The trouble with safe consumption sites is that they are sites. I live in a city of a million people and we have one consumption site and five hundred pharmacies. No-one objects to a pharmacy opening in his neighbourhood. Approaching a safe consumption site is like descending the circles of hell. Dispersion gives a better view of the problem. That is not intended to hide the problem. Rather, it makes it more manageable in all the neighborhoods affected.

Expand full comment
3 more comments...

No posts