• DPMC Moderators: thegreenhand | tryptakid
  • Drug Policy & Media Coverage Welcome Guest
    View threads about
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Drug Busts Megathread Video Megathread

Why do we still believe that letting drug addicts "hit rock bottom" is a good thing?

LogicSoDeveloped

Bluelighter
Joined
Oct 12, 2010
Messages
3,429
Why do we still believe that letting drug addicts "hit rock bottom" is a good thing?

Our densely populated, low-income neighbourhood of the Downtown Eastside in Vancouver has 16,000 residents and about 6,000 injection drug users. Day after day, I’ve seen kind, funny and gentle people lose their families, get sicker, become more isolated and die.

Including people living with addiction into society should not be revolutionary thinking in 2013. However, in many ways the addict is the modern-day “nigger”, a term used to dehumanise, alienate, torture and abuse a group of other human beings. Today, people who use drugs – “junkies” – are expected to suffer, then blamed when they do, and if they die there is almost a collective sigh of relief.

Understanding the work that my organisation, PHS, does with addicts on the streets in Vancouver can best be explained by introducing you to one of my teachers. Tilly was a waif-like, 40-year-old aboriginal woman who I met in my early twenties. Her hollow cheeks and deep-set dark eyes were childlike, imploring and innocent – in spite of her “experience”. Locked in a room and malnourished as a child, Tilly was addicted to prescription pills by the age of 11. By the time she was 15 she had tried to end her life by slitting her throat with a kitchen knife.

When I met Tilly she was working in the sex trade, injecting heroin and cocaine, and drinking. One night she was raped and beaten, and as I held her in my lap, bloodied and broken, I rocked her like a tiny bird. She told me through her sobs that it was her fault. I felt her emptiness and I understood her cries. Hers were not the cries of a criminal but of a wounded soul who felt her life was worthless.

Our densely populated, low-income neighbourhood of the Downtown Eastside in Vancouver has 16,000 residents and about 6,000 injection drug users. Here, I started running a 70-room housing project in 1991, and for 23 years I have seen the human fallout of our collective ignorance. Day after day, I’ve seen kind, funny and gentle people lose their families, get sicker, become more isolated and die.

The people I have come to know and grown to love have helped me heal myself. My own white, privileged family was not unfamiliar with tragedy. My mother suffered her own pain and left us when I was a child. I knew what it was like to feel empty and alone.

We hear all the time how addicts are selfish liars who steal from their families, cause pain, smash car windows to steal things and get into fights. We have created brutalising conditions that result in addicts being vilified and that cause enormous harm. However, I have also experienced a unique window into the resilience, humanity and strength of people trying to survive while actively addicted.

Throughout the 1990s, alongside my partner and my colleagues, I had to go against the common logic of the day as we wrestled over how to help. We intuitively gravitated to the belief that people might be able to do better if survival wasn’t so hard, and over the years we have succeeded in creating spaces that are tolerant, respectful and inclusive – where people struggling with addiction can live, find social membership, a sense of belonging and the basics.

This flew in the face of the received wisdom that said people had to “hit rock bottom” or society was somehow “encouraging them”.

As the death toll from drugs mounted in 1997, we rebranded our community “the Killing Fields”. The number of drug users developing HIV was on a par with Botswana; meanwhile, more than 400 drug overdoses happened in our province in just one year. The level of grief was profound, so we flew in experts from around the world to talk about things that we could try: supervised injection sites, heroin maintenance, harm reduction.

Drug users themselves used their voices and parent groups spoke out. Brave politicians stood up and some lost their careers. Gradually the public became educated through extensive media coverage and community debates. By 2003, the tide had shifted and on 21 September we opened North America’s first legally sanctioned supervised injection site, or “Insite”, as a partnership between our non-profit organisation and our local health authority. We saw people come in to what felt like a sanctuary – out of the back alleys to indoors, where users could inject their drugs under the supervision of a nurse.

Over these past ten years almost two million injections have happened here, and 14,000 individuals have come in. Each year, 400 referrals are made into treatment. The staff revive, on average, 40 people a month who overdose and not one person has died.

Today, we have a more sophisticated understanding that an individual, while addicted, still has the right to live. We have created places like our dental clinic, art gallery and bank, and social enterprises that are reshaping the landscape. For example, with over 4,500 members, our community bank (a partnership with Vancity Credit Union) offers savings and checking accounts to people who are unwelcome, banned or followed by security guards in conventional financial institutions. New units of housing have been funded by our provincial government, targeting the most vulnerable homeless and addicted.

Health-care services have been established that are relevant to people actively using drugs. Social enterprises have been created to give people – addicted or not – jobs, at the vintage clothing store, chocolate and coffee roasters, art studio and retail store, commercial laundry and pest-control company.

For those of us who remember how dark it felt 20 years ago, there is much to celebrate in Vancouver in 2013. People in our community are living ten years longer.

Tilly was kind, sensitive, gentle and generous, but in the end she died of Aids because no one had cared enough to make sure she had access to a clean syringe. As a society, we told her that her life didn’t matter and she believed us.

It’s time to stop punishing and start creating solutions to the walls of intolerance and hatred we’ve built. These steps, though seemingly small, can create a new social context, one that redefines the addict from a non-person to a person, a criminal to a citizen, someone “diseased” to someone who just needs love, belonging and a community, just like me.

Liz Evans is the founder and executive director of PHS Community Services Society, which helps drug users in Vancouver


Source: http://www.newstatesman.com/lifestyle/2013/10/killing-unkindness
 
A very good read. Amazing what a little education and willingness to allow a shift in perception can do.
 
Great read! The way society treats addicts is criminal
 
Why do we still believe that letting drug addicts "hit rock bottom" is a good thing?

Because AA has such a firm nut-grip on our culture that their cliches are more highly regarded than science.
 
Hey man, for some people it takes seeing what rock bottom is like until they finally realize its time to put their faith in the Lord.


I'm sorry, I'm just kidding, but AA isn't when they say it.
 
Because it allows people who feel that they should have responsibility for an addict's behavior to void themselves of that responsibility. If Little Johny's mum thinks that Johny has to hit rock bottom before he can put down the pipe or stop shooting up, then she can sit back and just let him get worse, or actually do things which will actively make his life harder, under the guise of 'letting him hit rock bottom.' It allows you to portray the abandonment of someone who needs you as doing them a favor.
 
Some hit rock bottom and bounce. Then hit rock bottom and bounce. Somewhere I think is the failed notion that I won't stop unless I suffer. This may be true of some actions, but treatment people forget the euphoria of a drink or drug. Still get a reward regardless of the consequences. Suffering doesn't create character, generally suffering creates more suffering.
No other field of medicine allows a person to suffer except addiction treatment.
 
Because we are the scum of the earth and deserve to suffer. If they were helping us they would be aiding something they don't see as right which would be crazy to do.

Obviously we all use for a reason and while some of us struggle more then others we could all use a little help and definitely shouldn't be allowed to ruin our lives just to build up a shitty drug free life from the rubble where are friends and family no longer want anything to do with us.

That's like letting a kid struggling with his math home work either sink or swim. Once he's failing out he'll get smarter right.

Don't know how aa got so ass backwords but its messed up. Addicts should be aloowed real treatment before they've lost everything.

I don't see hospitals turning down patients because they got sick and can't get better them selves. I hope all the people who judge us and use these methods to be touched by true addiction some how no matter what its to so they can understand how miserable and out of control it can get long before the bottom.

Good post very interesting article. All some need is a little help and to see some one cares. Not to be shown they are meaningless and that people could care less if they struggle or make it or not.
 
Because it allows people who feel that they should have responsibility for an addict's behavior to void themselves of that responsibility. If Little Johny's mum thinks that Johny has to hit rock bottom before he can put down the pipe or stop shooting up, then she can sit back and just let him get worse, or actually do things which will actively make his life harder, under the guise of 'letting him hit rock bottom.' It allows you to portray the abandonment of someone who needs you as doing them a favor.

While that may be very true in many cases, I see something a little more sinister at work here.

My opinions might be cynical, but I think that societies old and new have been conditioned since the beginning of humanity into taking great pleasure seeing others suffer - particularly minority groups, and especially minority groups who are blamed by a governing body for degrading their quality of life.

For example, the US government has been trying - unsuccessfully - for at least over 4 decades to do away with recreational drugs which have no therapeutic value according to law enforcement (aka idiots), drug users and drug addicts ("epic fail" doesn't begin to describe what a colossal waste of "everything useful" it has been).

Other fundamentally similar examples (government vs unwanted minority group - regardless of the core motivating factors) would be the Nazis versus Jews, Serbians versus Albanians, etc.

The catalyst which is - as far as I can deduce - always the same in all these conflicts is a reason to hate the minority with a passion. Make no mistake, racially and politically motivated propaganda gave "normal" Americans a good reason to hate addicts (with a passion). Ratifying the UN Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs in '61 gave the other UN nations a good reason to hate addicts living on their soil.

And make no fucking mistake; just like the Jews, addicts are also slowly being systematically slaughtered (to the extent permitted by law).

How so? Well...

If we smoke weed, the government tells us that we're using "the gateway drug" and insists that it's how "hard drug users" started. It's promptly placed into Schedule I, alongside everything else so that we can be punished with ample amounts of prison time. BTW, the real "gateway drug" is booze IME.

If we only use pharmaceutical recreational drugs, the government puts in even more hurdles and limitations for doctors who wish to prescribe controlled meds. Or a new formulation designed to combat "abuse".

When former "pharma-only addicts" have switched to clandestinely manufactured drugs, many of us are unfortunately bound to come across a really bad batch. I know I have - countless times.

If the bad batches don't kill us, at least those of us who use and have to resort to sharing needles might wind up with (God forbid) HIV, Hep C, etc.

If sharing needles won't destroy us, perhaps some time behind bars, completely ignored by staff while in sheer agony due to full-on withdrawal might tempt us to commit suicide after we contemplate how many years we'll be rotting away in a 6 by 12 due to mandatory minimums.

If none of that works, well, generally, drug addicts don't have the best of health insurance coverage (and not everyone can afford methadone maintenance). And we're scared of calling 911 during an overdose out of fear of prosecution. Hopefully something gets us. At least it may end up severing families apart.

And lets not forget those brainwashed neighbors of ours who will not hesitate to turn us in if they see us using.

Pretty much the only thing that I see that we have going for us is the empathy and/or sympathy of too few who believe its better to try to help instead of hoping we cease to exist. Thankfully, it appears the number of individuals who do not use recreational drugs, how want to help us, is increasing by the day.

Believe it or not, there were also Nazis during WWII who helped shelter Jews from death squads.

In many ways, history is repeating itself. I hope we come out on top, but the damage has already been done.

These disgusting excuses for human beings who profit from our demise, who call or consider themselves the good guys deserve to be treated like war criminals. That includes cooks/dealers who know they are manufacturing and selling a dangerous product (e.g. PMA, levamisole-tainted cocaine). I know this last paragraph sounds ironic, contradictory, perhaps even hypocritical - all because no drug use is 100% safe. However, there's a huge difference between buying/using the real deal and being deceived, ripped-off, lied to, and placed in a possible life and death situation because you were knowingly sold inherently dangerous bunk. All the more reason the market requires regulatory intervention.
 
Last edited:
Because it allows people who feel that they should have responsibility for an addict's behavior to void themselves of that responsibility. If Little Johny's mum thinks that Johny has to hit rock bottom before he can put down the pipe or stop shooting up, then she can sit back and just let him get worse, or actually do things which will actively make his life harder, under the guise of 'letting him hit rock bottom.' It allows you to portray the abandonment of someone who needs you as doing them a favor.

I don't know man, there are some people you just can't help anymore. Why would you keep trying to help someone who will pick your pockets for you keys when near you and then break into your house and steal all your jewelry? That's what a "friend" of mine did. He also told his mom he had HIV so he could crash at her house before doctor visits, and then he stole a TV and shit like that. Should she keep paying for rehab again and again? When help is offered, then refused, is it responsible for family to let their own lives be destroyed for the addict.

I believe that letting people hit rock bottom on purpose is not good, at all, but there is a level in which no amount of help can do anything but hurt the helper.
 
I don't know man, there are some people you just can't help anymore. Why would you keep trying to help someone who will pick your pockets for you keys when near you and then break into your house and steal all your jewelry? That's what a "friend" of mine did. He also told his mom he had HIV so he could crash at her house before doctor visits, and then he stole a TV and shit like that. Should she keep paying for rehab again and again? When help is offered, then refused, is it responsible for family to let their own lives be destroyed for the addict.

I believe that letting people hit rock bottom on purpose is not good, at all, but there is a level in which no amount of help can do anything but hurt the helper.

No, obviously there's a point at which it isn't reasonable to expect people to keep offering certain degrees of help. Someone who constantly steals from you, say, or is violent, and gives no indication that their pattern of behavior has changed, I'd say it would be reasonable to refuse to help them. But be honest about why you're doing it, don't frame it as something it isn't to help you deal with your own guilt.

If you aren't letting your addict relative crash at your house anymore because you've done it twice and both times he stole shit from you and he's never offered any kind of remorse or restitution, then that's fine, but don't pretend you're refusing them shelter as some kind of favor. It's not for their own good, it's for your good, that's fine, but admit to it.
 
If you aren't letting your addict relative crash at your house anymore because you've done it twice and both times he stole shit from you and he's never offered any kind of remorse or restitution, then that's fine, but don't pretend you're refusing them shelter as some kind of favor. It's not for their own good, it's for your good, that's fine, but admit to it.

That's a very good point.
 
The collective philosophy on hitting rock bottom is misguided and convenient, but on an individual level it's not. Some people are on a one way mission to slow suicide and they reject all help. It's no different than forcing someone into recovery who doesn't want to be there. The addicts who just happened to get hooked are one thing, but people who are covering up mental health issues or years of personal traumas often use their addiction as a crutch. It's co-dependence.

The system's approach should not be rock bottom for everyone, just the ones who are on a mission to self-destruct, and especially those who are trying to take whoever they can with them. But rock bottom is not medicine for everyone, nor should it be.

I really respect the people who work in the DTES in Vancouver. It's wall to wall there and I don't know how they do it. At the same time, the ignorance is still stifling. The city is just trying to gentrify the problem away and all these people with addiction problems are being shoved out to the suburbs, or to my neighbourhood. The strategy at this point seems to be to gentrify, and if you can't afford to live away from addicts, thieves, and crazy people, then that's your problem. And the conservative government's strategy seems to just be prison.

And of course, the story has two sides. I don't have much sympathy for the addict who broke into my apartment 2 years ago and threatened me with a knife. They had free will. But I also blame the government for not healing this situation. They started it when they closed Riverview in Coquitlam, and it's been a shitstorm ever since.
 
The addict who steals everthing in sight is direct result of prohibition. If street drugs were affordable we wouldn't even be having this discussion. Until then as an interm measure we could decrease the number homeless addicts by putting them in government housing where they don't pay their own rent from welfare cheque. Just pay it for them. They will spend rent money on drugs and be homeless if given choice so don't give them that choice. The system now is almost set up to ensure the serious addict (of illegal drugs anyway) ends up homeless.
I liked that article I have been thru that neighbourhood many times it's very sad. But some of the people are just awesome
 
No, obviously there's a point at which it isn't reasonable to expect people to keep offering certain degrees of help. Someone who constantly steals from you, say, or is violent, and gives no indication that their pattern of behavior has changed, I'd say it would be reasonable to refuse to help them. But be honest about why you're doing it, don't frame it as something it isn't to help you deal with your own guilt.

If you aren't letting your addict relative crash at your house anymore because you've done it twice and both times he stole shit from you and he's never offered any kind of remorse or restitution, then that's fine, but don't pretend you're refusing them shelter as some kind of favor. It's not for their own good, it's for your good, that's fine, but admit to it.

I agree, I was just thinking... some parents and stuff will not stop trying with their kids and ruin their own lives in the process. That example is not about me, but about my "friends" mom. really sad situation. Violent, has stolen things at least a dozen times. One of the worst things he does, and she fell for it a couple times, is make it look like he's getting help or has gotten some help to gain some trust from a mom who obviously wants to see her son better. Then, like always, he steals more shit. At this point I think she has to just be honest with herself and wait till he is fully clean before she can do anything. Even then, destroying trust on such a massive scale, will take years of sobriety to get back.
 
The addict who steals everthing in sight is direct result of prohibition. If street drugs were affordable we wouldn't even be having this discussion. Until then as an interm measure we could decrease the number homeless addicts by putting them in government housing where they don't pay their own rent from welfare cheque. Just pay it for them. They will spend rent money on drugs and be homeless if given choice so don't give them that choice. The system now is almost set up to ensure the serious addict (of illegal drugs anyway) ends up homeless.
I liked that article I have been thru that neighbourhood many times it's very sad. But some of the people are just awesome

dont forget the piss test that has made it hard for them from working anywhere... and the arrest records, they make living a good life easy..
 
Last edited:
I got pretty bad with my addiction and I got to a point where rock bottom seemed like it was a strong possibility if I didn't get help when I did. I basically had a choice between becoming a homeless addict or get into MMT. If I got help I would have a place to live, food to eat, and my loving parents to take care of me and keep me on the straight and narrow. I did not hit rock bottom, but in my own life it was one of the lowest points. I got my truck stolen, my girlfriend left me because of my addiction and I damaged many of my close friendships because of my addiction. I didn't kill anyone or do jail time or end up sucking dick for a fix. But at that point, my life was in shambles and it sure felt like rock bottom. I could have gotten much worse, I could have alienated my family and friends completely to where they would never help me. I could have got into trouble with the law and gotten locked up. It could have been much worse but it was low enough for me to accept the help that was offered.

Its different for everyone. Some people will burn all their bridges and get to a point where its clean up or die. For some people just losing a relationship to addiction is enough to clean up. Some people unfortunately never clean up and we should not forsake those people just because they have no rock bottom. Some people will keep going no matter what. Those people need help and compassion the most, not rejection and scorn. Those kind of people either have had terrible trauma or mental illness and usually both. These things wont go away without years of intensive care and assistance. Putting people like that in prison does nothing, they get drugs in prison and learn how to be better criminals. Abstinence doesn't help those people because their life is so chaotic they have no norms. They need to get stabilized and get back into the routine of having a life before they can stop using.

Abstinence recovery is bullshit IMO, it treats addicts like the only problem is the drug and their own moral failure. It treats addicts like they have total control over what they are doing and they just choose to use drugs and be assholes. As an addict you cant just flip a switch and love god and everything will get better magically on its own. To conquer addiction you have to deal with why someone is getting high all the time, not just that getting high all the time is causing problems. That is the fundamental thing that non-addicts don't understand. You are not in complete control of yourself when you are in the midst of addiction. You may have some control, but you are not completely in control of what you do.

I don't think NA and AA should be forced on people and I don't think those programs should be held in the esteem they are. The whole religious angle is crooked and demeaning. It feeds in to the addicts sense of worthlessness and emptiness. They tell people they cant get better unless the give up on themselves and accept a higher power. They are told they cant do it alone and they need a god to do it for them. That is just bullshit. There is no god or gods. There are only humans and their imaginary constructions and myths. I feel like telling people they don't have the power to get better with out god is terrible. You do not need a belief in god. You need love and support and time. Those three things allow people to heal themselves. If god cured addictions there would not be any addictions.

The sooner we grow up as a species and let go of the childish ideas of early humanity, the sooner we will grow closer together as a people. We can get past the idea that addiction is a moral failure and look at it as a disease and a social failure. The lack of community and social belonging is a strong contributor to addiction. People who feel lost and alone and unloved are at a high risk for addiction. Add to that poverty and a society that values material goods, conspicuous consumption, and equates wealth with success and happiness. Then add mental illness. With all these factors together, its no wonder we have such a problem with addiction.

We are bombarded every day with images that tell us to be better, thinner, faster, wealthier, more attractive, more outgoing, more likeable, more interesting. We are feed a completely unrealistic set of goals and then we come down hard on people when they don't want to feed into this mentality. When people do buy into this mentality but they inevitably fail because this idealized notion of reality is laughably unattainable, then when they seek comfort in escapist behavior, like drugs, we give them hell and treat them like they don't deserve to live or be a part of society. It is this pattern of exclusion that makes addiction much worse. People who already feel worthless are treated that way and the negative feedback loop just keeps on going.

The drug war criminalizes addicts and creates an underclass of people who are further excluded from society. They cant get jobs cause they have felonies. The get felonies because they cant afford a good lawyer to defend them, many public defenders are over worked and under qualified. They often just tell their clients to plead guilty to reduce their own work load and avoid having to go to trial. Public defenders should have their clients interest at the forefront, not as an afterthought.

As ro4eva put it, the treatment of addicts is in many ways a unstated campaign for the elimination of people that are seen as undesirable by the establishment and the government. Why else would drugs be so widely available in poor areas. The 5to500 law is a perfect example of this phenomenon in drugs laws. You get the same prison term for 5 grams of crack as 500 grams of powder cocaine. This targets poor, minority drug users much more harshly than their wealthy, often white counterparts.

Additionally, access to treatment is unequal as well. People who are well off or rich can afford to go to rehab or a detox or to be hospitalized. They can afford private doctors who will work with them and prescribe the latest addiction medicines and suggest the latest therapies. They can afford expensive prescriptions and new treatments that can be personally tailored to their needs. They are often offered treatment instead of jail time when caught for possession. this same offer is rarely given to poor minorities struggling with their addiction. When offered this option often comes with very harsh and immediate penalties for the smallest mistakes.

Poor people are stuck with what is free or charity. I've seen people turned away from my methadone clinic cause the cant pay the weekly fee. Many people faced with this fee would rather just spend that money to get high instead of have to go to a clinic everyday and answer a bunch of questions and take drug tests all the time.

Getting help is not cheap, I went with one of the cheapest routes but it still costs a few thousand bucks a year. When you are fighting for every dollar for a fix this seem like and impossibly high barrier to entry. I know there are government funded programs but they often have long waiting lists and you are treated like a criminal at those facilities. They make you go into a tiny locked area and you get your dose thru a small opening in a bullet proof glass window. There is an armed POLICE officer there all the time and the whole vibe of the place is unwelcoming. If you don't pay one week they drop your dose down to almost nothing and basically make you suicidal until you can come up with the money or just go get high. The county run clinics are really awful at actually helping people get better.

Getting help is a tough thing to do. It takes a lot of courage. I say it takes courage because you need courage to completely rebuild your own life. You need people to help support you and help give you the confidence to learn that you made the right choice to get better. It is scary as hell going into treatment. You have to completely relearn how to deal with pain and unhappy feelings and everything else. You have to find the strength in yourself to want to get better and find the good things about yourself again. Most of all you have to learn and believe that you are someone worth saving, that you are a good person no matter what you have done in the past and that above all else you deserve to live and you god damn deserve to be happy. It may take a damn long time but that first time you feel happy and its not because you just hit a big line or did a great shot or scored a fat sack, that first time you feel happy just cause the sun is shining and its not raining, that day is a damn good day and its just the first of many more to come.
 
Last edited:
One thing i hate about recovery is all the soft language. As George Carlin always said its the soft, weak, watered down language that is the real killer. Even the word recovery is soft language. Recovery used to be called kickin the habit, getting high is now called "using". I really hate the term "use" when it is used to talk about getting high. You use to get high and if you dont get high anymore I guess then it makes some sense to drop the "get high" part and just stick with use, but I still hate that term. It makes getting high sound so pussyfied and medical and bad. It is just part of the politically correct, pussy-ass, ultra-liberal, feminist nazi new-speak that is coming to dominate mass media.

It renders language ineffective and sterile, everything sounds like a medical procedure or a court preceding. It lacks passion and makes everything boring. It also does not serve its purpose. Language is supposed to convey ideas, emotions, information, etc. This soft, new-speak makes everything seem hollow and distant. I subtly lulls people into mental apathy and physical submission. It homogenizes thought and communication and helps to foster mono-culture. It is drab and boring speech for a drab and boring life. I wish people were taught to love language and writing. In school I loved reading, I'm a slow reader but I still love reading. There is an active social hatred of reading. You even find people saying "reading is for fags and books suck."
The whole anti-intellectual, anti-nerd, anti-smart person thing is really the most disgusting thing about America.

I think it really contributes to addiction. Many smart, sensitive people struggle to find acceptance or a niche in society in which they are appreciated for their uniqueness. Creativity seem to go along with this as well, many creative people throughout history have been tortured souls that struggled with addiction to the drugs of their day.
Kurt Cobain, Edgar Allen Poe, the Beat Poets, so many musicians past and present, Emily Dickinson, etc. All these people had inarguable gifts but they all struggled because they felt like the didnt belong or were not loved. Each one had their own problems. However, they were all in some way geniuses and it seems that many times very unique people struggle greatly with fitting in with the rest of the herd. Additionally, drugs have helped many of the bright, creative people to better express themselves in their respective crafts and cope with reality.

We all need some help coping with reality and it should not be illegal to get high.

I think ending prohibition would do the most to help with addictions. If there was not criminal penalty for being and addict it would be so much easier to just say "I'm and addict, I need help."

Plus all the lives that would be saved from overdose due to unsafe drugs and the lack of knowledge. Total transparency in the drug world would make drug equally dangerous with sky diving, or hunting, or pretty much any activity that is currently legal and dangerous.
 
another aspect of the "treat addicts like assholes" mentality is the way it effects the medical treatment you get. once you have been labeled an addict, no doctor wants to prescribe you the appropriate medication because "you might abuse it"

i have not had to deal with this too much personally, but i know this will probably be an issue for me later. if i need pain meds for a legit reason a doctor is not going to want to give me ANY because i had a problem in the past. the "once and addict, always and addict" mentality here is a huge disservice to people when they need medical treatment. im basically healthy now but if i break a bone is the only thing im going to get will be a script for 800 mg ibuprofen?

the treatment of pain in general in this country is so inexcusably bad. i know a guy at my clinic who is there and taking methadone just because he is refused adequate treatment from regular doctors and pain management doctors. the clinic is aware of his situation but he cant get anything better. he is on disability and he is an old veteran. the system if failing him and he is being treated with undo suspicion and unnecessary regulation just to get relief from pain. all this unnecessary bullshit just because allowing people to get enjoyment from chemicals is seen as immoral in our backwards society. i dont know all the details of his situation but i know he is legitimately sick with real health problems and the only thing he can afford and get into is a methadone clinic. the whole purpose of the place is for people to get off opiates, but some people really do need to be on opiates all the time cause they have constant pain.

once pot becomes legal it will help out so much with people's pain management but until then so many people suffer pain needlessly just because our society is sorely lacking in empathy.
 
What exactly is "rock bottom"? It is a very subjectively theoretical location. One person might just end up broke from a habit and call it rock bottom, another person won't say they hit rock bottom until they are facing a 5 year prison term. I think everyone can agree that death is at or below rock bottom, and its a good idea to get clean before you hit that point.
 
Top