A Discussion: Needle Exchanges

[DrYouth]

I am neither progressive nor a conservative.

I care about what works and I actually care that people don't die on the streets. If this thread hasn't convinced you yet that both conservatives and progressives (both being liberals) are perfectly willing to allow drug addicts to die on the streets, then I don't know what else to tell you.

Liberalism is not synonymous with government solutions. That's a ridiculous canard presented by conservatives (who I might add are liberals too, but applied to economics) to differentiate themselves from their cousins, the progressives. This whole government or no-government discussion is just silly.

But if you don't want the government to deal with it, then allow the churches to run it, and empower the prosecutors to institutionalize people in those facilities.

Just stop enabling it and maybe give a shit about your fellow humans. Throwing heroin and free needles at drug addicts is evil. Walking on by while drug addicts die on the streets is also evil. Fuck liberalism.

Institutionalizing sounds convenient and can make us feel like we are caring....
But institutionalizing is technically locking people up.... out of sight out of mind...
What happens in those institutions is what matters.

Institutions are super expensive and very often lead to hostile dependence just as much as any other "welfare" system.

Lock 'em up in institutions is not a recipe for anything good, all on it's own...

We want to bring in the natural communities that these addicts spring from... their families most of all to participate in the solutions... and institutions alienate people from these communities.... replacing them with "civil servants" that have no attachment to the outcome. This has been the key downfall of liberalism... something you should be aware of. (See daycares, schools, old age "facilities" etc)

[Speaker to Animals]

I am neither progressive nor a conservative.

I care about what works and I actually care that people don't die on the streets. If this thread hasn't convinced you yet that both conservatives and progressives (both being liberals) are perfectly willing to allow drug addicts to die on the streets, then I don't know what else to tell you.

Liberalism is not synonymous with government solutions. That's a ridiculous canard presented by conservatives (who I might add are liberals too, but applied to economics) to differentiate themselves from their cousins, the progressives. This whole government or no-government discussion is just silly.

But if you don't want the government to deal with it, then allow the churches to run it, and empower the prosecutors to institutionalize people in those facilities.

Just stop enabling it and maybe give a shit about your fellow humans. Throwing heroin and free needles at drug addicts is evil. Walking on by while drug addicts die on the streets is also evil. Fuck liberalism.

Institutionalizing sounds convenient and can make us feel like we are caring....
But institutionalizing is technically locking people up.... out of sight out of mind...
What happens in those institutions is what matters.

Institutions are super expensive and very often lead to hostile dependence just as much as any other "welfare" system.

Lock 'em up in institutions is not a recipe for anything good, all on it's own...

We want to bring in the natural communities that these addicts spring from... their families most of all to participate in the solutions... and institutions alienate people from these communities.... replacing them with "civil servants" that have no attachment to the outcome. This has been the key downfall of liberalism... something you should be aware of. (See daycares, schools, old age "facilities" etc)

When the Church still was in charge of some of these things in Europe, they took in a batshit crazy painter and cared for him, provided him with canvases, paint, etc., and he went on to paint works like the Starry Night. He discharged himself and later placed himself in the care of a homeopathic quack, and subsequently shot himself to death.

That asylum in those days, I am sure, was horrific to our contemporary sensitivities, but it was infinitely better than the alternative, which cost humanity God knows how many beautiful works of art. Further, there is no reason these places have to be prison-like or depressing at all.

Give me a living Van Goph in a humane institution rather than one on the streets, dead from a self-inflicted gunshot wound.

[DrYouth]

When the Church still was in charge of some of these things in Europe, they took in a batshit crazy painter and cared for him, provided him with canvases, paint, etc., and he went on to paint works like the Starry Night. He discharged himself and later placed himself in the care of a homeopathic quack, and subsequently shot himself to death.

That asylum in those days, I am sure, was horrific to our contemporary sensitivities, but it was infinitely better than the alternative, which cost humanity God knows how many beautiful works of art. Further, there is no reason these places have to be prison-like or depressing at all.

Give me a living Van Goph in a humane institution rather than one on the streets, dead from a self-inflicted gunshot wound.

Maybe our institutions were once reasonable...
But we in the west have been f*ing up institutions for some time now.
Before we propose institutions as a solutions we best be very, very careful about how those institutions are going to be run.
How are they going to include families rather than alienate them, how are they going to reintegrate those that are institutionalized to their communities rather than keep them languishing out of sight and out of mind...

I happen to be the medical director of an institution for teenagers, many of whom have substance problems and have a front row seat, working against the institutional grain to make sure we make things better rather than worse....
And believe me, for the most part I see many institutions like mine making things worse rather than better... and it's only due to constant effort on my part that I keep my institution from doing so... (to be honest I'm getting tired of the effort and every day dream of giving this up... but I'm not quitting just yet.)

Just proposing institutions is not a solution unless you are prepared to tackle these questions... which very few people bother to do.

[MilSpecs]

And believe me, for the most part I see many institutions like mine making things worse rather than better... and it's only due to constant effort on my part that I keep my institution from doing so... (to be honest I'm getting tired of the effort and every day dream of giving this up... but I'm not quitting just yet.)

Don’t give up 5 minutes before the miracle happens.

Seriously, have you kept in touch with any of your success stories? You should. Even if 1 out of 100 makes it, that person will start a snowball effect, and seeing the results of that snowball will prove that your efforts are more than worth it.

[DrYouth]

Don’t give up 5 minutes before the miracle happens.

Seriously, have you kept in touch with any of your success stories? You should. Even if 1 out of 100 makes it, that person will start a snowball effect, and seeing the results of that snowball will prove that your efforts are more than worth it.

Pretty sure I'm batting better than 0.01... lol
It can definitely be rewarding... but also exhausting.
What frustrates me the most is that I have to work hard to undo the harm done by the rest of the system...
And that system keeps on steamrolling kids and families... breaking them apart and dropping them on the hospital doorstep.

Sure maybe the kids I help will start a virtuous cycle that eventually build up and reverse these trends...
I suppose it's not completely outside the realm of possibility...
But that does seems like very wishful thinking.

[DBTrek]

Except that in one of the studies I posted, the exchange program got back far more needles than it handed out and there are no needles, nor shit, in the streets. So, I fully acknowledge that it doesn't work everywhere. Agreed with you on that yesterday and still agree today.

I'm challenging the notion that because it doesn't work everywhere, it can't possibly work anywhere.

If by some miracle needle exchange systems are miraculously working in one area, then that area should keep going with it.
Same with segregation, rent control, Indian schools, and using psychics to solve crime, I suppose. If your town exists in some reality vortex that manages to wrangle success where everyone else has found only failure, then by all means, continue.

Other areas would still be wise to look at the average results instead of the outliers before jumping on the bandwagon.

[MilSpecs]

Don’t give up 5 minutes before the miracle happens.

Seriously, have you kept in touch with any of your success stories? You should. Even if 1 out of 100 makes it, that person will start a snowball effect, and seeing the results of that snowball will prove that your efforts are more than worth it.

Pretty sure I'm batting better than 0.01... lol
It can definitely be rewarding... but also exhausting.
What frustrates me the most is that I have to work hard to undo the harm done by the rest of the system...
And that system keeps on steamrolling kids and families... breaking them apart and dropping them on the hospital doorstep.

Sure maybe the kids I help will start a virtuous cycle that eventually build up and reverse these trends...
I suppose it's not completely outside the realm of possibility...
But that does seems like very wishful thinking.

If more than 1 out of 100 addicts get clean who are introduced to recovery, that’s pretty good! You’re doing good work.

It’s your job to look at the entire system so that’s your focus, but that’s why maybe you should spend some time with your success stories. If you’ve been at this for awhile, then there will be former patients who went on to happy, productive lives and have children of their own. You should see that.

[DrYouth]

If more than 1 out of 100 addicts get clean who are introduced to recovery, that’s pretty good!

The spontaneous remission rate for addiction is well over 1%.
If only 1% of the people you follow get better, then you are probably making it harder for them to recover than if you left them alone.
This is entirely possible. It's actually easy to get in the way of people getting better AND get paid for doing that.
It happens all too often... these institutions then look at the few people that got better despite their unhelpful interventions and pat themselves on the back.... much of the pharmaceutical industry works on this basis I would wager.

[DBTrek]

It's actually easy to get in the way of people getting better AND get paid for doing that.
It happens all too often... these institutions then look at the few people that got better despite their unhelpful interventions and pat themselves on the back....

Ouch!

Right in the sacred cow.
The political left is going to boot you out, you keep taking shots like that.

[jediuser598]

Since our primary "pro" arguer has apparently left the thread (maybe it's his scheduled shoot-up time, who knows? )