chicpoena said:
Are your tax dollars REALLY worth more going into a railway system instead of a program that will save hundreds of people's lives? How much is a human life worth to you? By labeling someone an addict you can dehumanize them. We're talking about people who are addicted. They have a medical problem and are physically dependent on a drug.
I believe that human life is priceless and that it shouldn't be an issue to spend money on saving people's lives. How much is a human life worth to you Mariposa? How much of your tax dollars would it be ok to spend to save someone from an overdose? None?
I've got to say that I'm quite shocked at your cold and callous view on this issue. Especially for someone volunteering her time at a harm reduction website.
You should read the article by Benedickt Fischer titled Drugs, Communities and "Harm Reduction" in Germany: The New Relevance of "Public Health" Principles in Local Responses. Journal of Public Health Policy, Vol. 16, No. 4. (1995), pp. 389-411.
It will probably change your mind when you see how much money is saved through reduced deaths, ambulance calls, hospital visits, etc. For me, saving lives is enough but maybe seeing how much money is saved will change your mind as well.
Alright. I saw your subsequent post, and there is no reason to apologize to me for stating an opinion that disagrees with mine. You definitely had me pegged wrong on the money issue, though. Would I rather have a valuable, well-intentioned resource than a fancy building? Absofuckinglutely. Would I rather have a building that provides a supportive residence for individuals and families to reside and thrive in a safe environment than use that same building as a place for addicts to have a temporary respite from shooting up in an alley? Who wouldn't?
I'll tell you a little story about my city.
In my city, there is a neighborhood called the Tenderloin. The Tenderloin is home to the majority of IV-drug related activity in my city. The Tenderloin is full of a lot of other things, like really fun restaurants serving inexpensive, excellent food from every place you can imagine. But what it is known for is crime and much, if not most, of this crime is drug-related. Efforts to "clean it up" have proven pretty fucking useless - crime hasn't gone down, people are still going hungry, and needles still line the streets.
See here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Care_Not_Cash
The Tenderloin is where it is proposed such a facility be built. On one hand, this will make it easy for users to gain access to resources that can help them. On another hand, it will make it easier for users to gain access to connections for not only more drugs, but a sanctioned place to use them. Those are not exactly disincentives to using. It is possible to provide IV drug users with safe equipment and education without providing rooms in which to use. Also, we on Bluelight can examine this from a logical perspective based on the premise of harm reduction. Those who do not have the benefit of computers and information who are concentrated on getting their next fix don't have the resources we do.
I place value on ALL life - yes, including drug users' lives. I'm far from removed from the reality that drugs will be used. But I am still not inclined to believe that this is the solution. We have a very good needle exchange program in SF - and I see more benefits to expanding what we already have than to build a facility such as the one suggested. Guess how awesome our needle exchange is? Our needle exchange provides many things - not the least of which is a set of educational seminars for users, prescriptions for Narcan (biggest direct example of a lifesaver of all), treatment of absesses/other IV-related injuries, and the best resource of all - nonjudgmental volunteers and counselors who undergo continuous training in safe injection practices and referrals to resources for help.
Regarding the legalization of all drugs - I have mixed emotions. I don't think simple possession of a personal amount of a drug should be a criminal offense. I do think high-level dealing should be. I'm not sure that legalization would even eliminate the black market. If you want to smoke marijuana legally in California, you're put in a statewide registry. The pot you get costs MORE than street prices, and it's taxed. If someone is scrounging for their next meal, it's unlikely they'll be able to afford to buy dope this way. So the black market will almost assuredly continue - and all the crime that comes with it. As uncomfortable as the thought may be, there are many addicts who engage in robberies, theft, and other acts that harm all of society in order to support their habit. I doubt I'd feel much sympathy for someone who broke into my house and either threatened me, anyone in my home, or my property to get money to buy drugs. Do you have any idea of the cost of living in San Francisco? It sure does hurt to write that rent check every month - we're at about 177% of the national average. 75%+ of us rent, because we can't afford to buy. In California, we pay a ton of state tax in addition to our federal income tax. Seeing 1/3 of your paycheck disappear tends to bring out an interest in where it's going.
I absolutely, unconditionally support the needle exchange program in SF - to the point where I was at one time on a waiting list to volunteer for them, and when they called, I was studying for a big exam and dealing with personal issues so I could not give of my time that way. I'm still busy, but maybe I should make the time. Thanks for reminding me that harm reduction is not just education and personal philosophy - perhaps I can be of better service to the mission if I take a more active role in my own community.
We're having a very big problem (and have had for a long time) with users of IV drugs scoring and using in our very own Golden Gate Park. Why not take these folks off the street and empower them with educational and job resources so that they have something to be proud of rather than providing them with a little temporary room in which to use? That doesn't mean forcing anyone into any programs. It means creating a culture in which personal responsibility (note I did not say sobriety) is rewarded and opportunity is given to those who need it most. And I mean opportunity to work, feed your family and yourself, to educate yourself and your children - not opportunity to go to what will probably not end up being a safe haven to continue a habit with a huge social cost, most of all. If it requires being abstinent from drugs to put a roof over your head, we have to accept that we do not live in a Utopia and that while we can provide resources to help, we should not provide what essentially amounts to incentives to continue using and the desperate behaviors that go along with it for many users.
And I don't have an easy answer for how to do that - the public policy mavens are doing a piss-poor job. See
here for an article I read recently that addresses how even attempts to get low or no income San Franciscans safe housing and resources has resulted in such charming things as extortion, loan sharking, prostitution, and drug dealing. It's hard to find a safe place here, because the places that are supposed to be safe havens for people that want to better themselves are located in the neighborhoods that make that all but impossible and run by inept policy mongers on paper and exploitative criminals in practice.
There has to be a happy medium here. I think the closest we'll get is to fund organizations that are proven to save lives (such as the needle exchange) and a more deliberate effort at educating our citizens, not just about how to shoot safely, but how to live consciously and value their own lives through job opportunities, education, child care, and treatment for the medical and social (not legal) problem of IV drug addiction. I never argued for taking addicts off the streets and throwing them into prison. Talk about a way to fuck up someone's chances at a job and an apartment. Give them clean rigs, education, and a plan that gives hope for a viable future. Not a room in which to feed desperation, all sanitized by the presence of nurses and counselors on the inside but which fails to address the ugliness outside. What happens when the user leaves?
I hope this now clarifies both the issues my city is facing and opens a discussion on how we can best address them.
To address one last point (I have rambled enough!) I do want to point out that I know of no study nor any evidence that indicates that the use of marijuana is as deadly or destructive as the use of IV drugs. I make no moral judgments either way. Nonetheless, I have yet to hear of the ambulance being called in response to a marijuana overdose. I don't know of any cases in which someone caught HIV or hepatitis from smoking weed. I don't know of any circumstances in which someone prostituted themselves for weed. All of these problems occur with frequency among IV drug users who lack access to education and clean equipment.
chicpoena - Do you have a link to the study you refer to in your last post? I didn't take anything you posted personally. I don't practice harm reduction through a blanket-tolerance policy for dangerous behavior. I would like to read the study if you will provide me the opportunity to do so.
