Is it wrong to treat addicts?

[OldWiseGuy]

If drug users 'facilitate' drug production and sales doesn't treatment also facilitate the continued use of drugs? So in fact doesn't the drug 'pipeline' lead directly to those who treat addicts, and doesn't end with the users.

Isn't Narcan the heroin dealers best friend as it saves the lives of their customers, who will no doubt continue to buy heroin from them?

So shouldn't we put a stop to the drug epidemic by allowing addicts to just 'use' until they see the light, or kill themselves with their drugs? How much time, money, and heartache should we toss down the black hole of drug addiction treatment?

 

[DaisyDay]

No, it's not wrong to treat addicts humanely or to save their lives. They are still people and they may recover; even if they remain addicted, they may live productive lives. Each person is an individual.

Of course, we could go the Rodrigo Duterte route and shoot them in the streets, tidy up the cities that way.

 

[LutheranGuy123]

Addicts aren't some kind of street trash who decide to take up heroin. They're people just like you or me who get injured and take medicine for the pain. Then their prescription runs out and instead of being weaned off they are forced to go cold turkey. They get physically sick and buy street heroin to feel better, and it all spirals down from there.

Most people on heroin would love to quit heroin, but it takes a lot of help and support that not everybody has.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Aren't many 'recreational' users who become addicted? And those who have 'pain', is the pain gone when they are clean? If we can't remove this 'pain' won't they continue to use? Or do we have to babysit them the rest of their (and our) lives?

How many more worthy social needs have to sacrificed while we care for those who don't care at all for themselves?

 

[Icewater]

Didn't you already make a thread about this?

 

[Agueli]

If drug users 'facilitate' drug production and sales doesn't treatment also facilitate the continued use of drugs? So in fact doesn't the drug 'pipeline' lead directly to those who treat addicts, and doesn't end with the users.

Isn't Narcan the heroin dealers best friend as it saves the lives of their customers, who will no doubt continue to buy heroin from them?

So shouldn't we put a stop to the drug epidemic by allowing addicts to just 'use' until they see the light, or kill themselves with their drugs? How much time, money, and heartache should we toss down the black hole of drug addiction treatment?

So are you making the implication that the way to end addiction is to just let addicts die off?


No! The point is to help people, to save lives, if someone overdoses and dies it's over. If they're given narcan and survive they could clean up and lead a healthy, decent life.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Didn't you already make a thread about this?

Yes, but this one has a slightly different twist, that of placing responsibility on over enthusiastic (and costly) treatment as a facilitator of continued drug use. For example many heroin users have been revived multiple times by the police administering Narcan. If they are trying so hard to die why interfere?

 

[OldWiseGuy]

So are you making the implication that the way to end addiction is to just let addicts die off?

Not all but some certainly.

No! The point is to help people, to save lives, if someone overdoses and dies it's over. If they're given narcan and survive they could clean up and lead a healthy, decent life.

I would put a limit on Narcan revivals at......three (as in three strikes and yer outta here).

 

[Desk trauma]

I would put a limit on Narcan revivals at......three (as in three strikes and yer outta here).

Thinking practically, how would that work? Would the priority of first responders become checking ID against the narcan score card database? Would overdose cases not be treated if the person wasn't carrying ID just in case they are over their limit? Would privacy be out the window for anyone who was treated for an opiate OD?

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Thinking practically, how would that work? Would the priority of first responders become checking ID against the narcan score card database? Would overdose cases not be treated if the person wasn't carrying ID just in case they are over their limit? Would privacy be out the window for anyone who was treated for an opiate OD?

Local police are very familiar with individuals who repeatedly overdose on heroin. When the 911 call comes in the name of the 'victim' is requested of the caller.

 

[Agueli]

Not all but some certainly.



I would put a limit on Narcan revivals at......three (as in three strikes and yer outta here).

Why such an arbitrary number? What's your logic behind this?

 

[Desk trauma]

Local police are very familiar with individuals who repeatedly overdose on heroin. When the 911 call comes in the name of the 'victim' is requested of the caller.

Police veto over if medical aid is rendered based just on alleged name than?

 

[Agueli]

Local police are very familiar with individuals who repeatedly overdose on heroin. When the 911 call comes in the name of the 'victim' is requested of the caller.

You want to give cops an arbitrary veto over life and death? Cops can barely keep themselves from ending the lives of innocent, conscious black people, and you want them to be empowered to let a person die from overdose because they've decided that they don't deserve to live? Are you insane?

 

[DaisyDay]

Especially when you consider that an awful lot of people have the same name without being the same person.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

You want to give cops an arbitrary veto over life and death? Cops can barely keep themselves from ending the lives of innocent, conscious black people, and you want them to be empowered to let a person die from overdose because they've decided that they don't deserve to live? Are you insane?

You nailed it. Police can barely keep from killing innocent people as it is. Heroin addicts aren't 'innocent'. Heroin use is a crime. Why should the police facilitate continued drug use by saving these addicts? And since when are police commissioned to be EMT's.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Especially when you consider that an awful lot of people have the same name without being the same person.

How is the 'wrong' person harmed if the police don't come to their aid? The police will go where the call came from and administer help to the person who needs it. How would 'mistaken identity' be an issue here?

 

[bhsmte]

Wow!

I wonder what Jesus would say about this?

 

[Agueli]

Wow!

I wonder what Jesus would say about this?

He would be pretty disgusted at the arbitrary devaluing of the lives of the less fortunate.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Wow!

I wonder what Jesus would say about this?

He might say something like this,

"In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ,
To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus." 1 Corinthians 5: 4-5

 

[bhsmte]

He might say something like this,

"In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ,
To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus." 1 Corinthians 5: 4-5

And what does this mean to you?