• 🇳🇿 🇲🇲 🇯🇵 🇨🇳 🇦🇺 🇦🇶 🇮🇳
    Australian & Asian
    Drug Discussion


    Welcome Guest!
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
  • AADD Moderators: swilow | Vagabond696

Working in a government job and giving real information about drugs.

Splatt

Ex-Bluelighter
Joined
Sep 25, 2001
Messages
9,112
If you were to say, work for a government agency which deals with heplines and information about drugs, mostly ICE at the moment. Would you read the script or would you tell them the truth.

Meth IS a dirty evil drug and i dislike it and what it does to people, but some of the "facts" the govt. gives out is just plain bullshit.
 
Tell the truth, meth is one drug you shouldn't need to lie about, there's more than enough fucked up shit you can say about it that is 100% true. And I say this as a current user.
 
Interesting topic. I think its very important for the people working in those kinds of jobs to have a factual but unbiased opinion of the drug/s. It would be preferable to have used/abused the drugs in question before, so that one can better relate to the person seeking help.

I think those seeking help would also be more inclined to speak openly to someone that admits they've shot up ice before rather than some clueless religious / moralist type than has no idea about the substances apart from the propaganda that the government gives them.
 
the australian government drugs "fact" pack
that went around midway through last year.

was the BIGGEST steaming pile of dogshit i've ever gazed upon.

classifying lsd as being basically the same thing as psilocybin.
reporting all the dangers of using mdma, most of which were bullshit.

it's all a load of biased scaremongering.
but in the world of politics / government

admitting that you have first hand knowledge of drugs, and what they actually do to you...
well that's really just career suicide.

i'm sure they would have some random excuse to fire you within a few days.

look at the price of cigarettes, tobacco and petrol.
let's just be happy that the government keeps the good kind of drugs illegal.
if they legalised it, if they stop demonising them
the prices they would impose on them.
all the tax,

and just imagine manafacturing your own shit.
i may be wrong, but i'm under the impression that if you get caught growing tobacco, you can get in more shit from the law
than if you had a nice big hydro setup.
 
admitting that you have first hand knowledge of drugs, and what they actually do to you...
well that's really just career suicide.

Yeah, that's true. My only real exposure to people giving out information about drugs has been from volunteer workers, who presumably would have a lot more freedom about what they say than compared to a government organization.

and just imagine manafacturing your own shit.
i may be wrong, but i'm under the impression that if you get caught growing tobacco, you can get in more shit from the law
than if you had a nice big hydro setup.

It would be interesting to see whether (assuming drugs were ever legalized) they follow the extreme punishments as with tobacco, or if they are more lenient as with home brew alcohol.
 
brewing alcohol is legal, making money off at home isnt.
dont know about growing tobacco but they smash big importing rings all the time
 
alot of counsellers do a course at uni, which tries to be objective and information based about drugs, unlike government politics..
 
Crankinit said:
Tell the truth, meth is one drug you shouldn't need to lie about, there's more than enough fucked up shit you can say about it that is 100% true. And I say this as a current user.

Out of interest as a current heavy user, I am interested in your "fucked up shit".

It is the money you realize you've blown or have you had bad health effects from being up 4 days ion a row...or done some really stupid and regretful things on it? (like get ultra horny and cheat on a partner for example)...or all of the above lol?

I guess I just answered my own question.

As for the topic. I wouldn't be able to do the job. The real answers would get me sacked and I couldn't in all honesty sit there and spout off bullshit to someone who called.
 
And yeah the calls would be monitored by an "expert" who just had the same information as you do.
 
Last edited:
My friend is a call worker at lifeline, which is a free helpline for anyone with any issues ranging from domestic problems, drug problems, depression problems and suicide ideas etc... We have talked about the benefits of his occasional drug use (although its obviously best that the organisers of the line dont know), namely the fact that having tried a drug means you know where a person is coming from when they say they have a problem with drug x becuase of reason y.

Splatt said:
And yeah the calls would be monitored by an "expert" who just had the same information as you do.

Not only is the line confidential anyway, but while on a call its important that the caller feels safe letting go and talking about themselves and their situation. That means there is no supervisor breathing down his neck and the calls are not recorded. If it isnt like this for drug help/info lines then it damn well shoud be.
 
I called the government hotline after reading that steaming pile of shit booklet about drugs, asking why my government was distributing such gross misinformation and propaganda. The dude at the other end of the line had nothing to say, except for giving me the address of the health minister so I could make a formal complaint. I expect he'd been trained to do nothing less than repeat the bullshit contained in the pamphlet.
 
^It made me angry! I knew it was pointless calling but better than just ranting about it to my mates. I also sort of wanted to see how the person on the hotline would respond.
 
You can't expect anything printed to be anything other than anti-drugs, can you imagine the old people calling up and complaining that a harm-reduction / FACTS based pamflet will encourage drug use (because you know it probably isn't that bad after all?)

Same sort of pressure on the pollies... and yeah... it just takes time for such drastic social change...
 
psycosynthesis said:
I called the government hotline after reading that steaming pile of shit booklet about drugs, asking why my government was distributing such gross misinformation and propaganda. The dude at the other end of the line had nothing to say, except for giving me the address of the health minister so I could make a formal complaint. I expect he'd been trained to do nothing less than repeat the bullshit contained in the pamphlet.

Yeah well thats a call center for you..........

The ONLY way to make a difference is to follow up and complain to the health minister...
 
^I wasn't going to waste my time writing a letter which would fall on deaf ears (or eyes).

And I don't expect harm reduction information, but I do expect FACTS. Then again, I got over expecting the truth from any politician or beaurocrat years ago....
 
as the national drug trend percentages have grown in recent years around methamphetamine and psycho stimulant use the discerning employer would be suspicious anyway. for me at all jobs i have been honest that i have in my past used drugs in a recreational manner.

depending on where you are going for employment, sometimes this frank honesty is helpful to your employment possibilities, i have always found it so ( but it does'nt necessarily mean it would for all)

Numeron said:
namely the fact that having tried a drug means you know where a person is coming from when they say they have a problem with drug x becuase of reason y.

this is actually a common misconception around knowledge around drugs, just because you have tried drugs that the "Client" has tried doesn't give you anymore credibility to that person, its just a link where you can identify better with them (for you're self).

Im sure the counseling course offered by life line is based in Rogerian counselling techniques which uses empathy to join with another person, rather than being the expert or holder of information that makes you know better.

its like saying a cancer doctor can only have credibility if he or she has had cancer
 
Last edited:
Ps its easier to remember the truth than a calamity of lies built upon lies
 
Most of the helplines are not run by "the government" per se - but rather by non-government organisations (NGOs) who receive funding from the government (state and/or federal). For example - the main telephone information and counselling service in Victoria (Direct Line 1800 888 236) is run by Turning Point - I've never rung them and asked for info about drugs, so I don't know exactly what you get. I'm willing to bet that it would be reasonably accurate though...

To some extent the kind of info you get from a service will depend on the nature of the service - you will get pretty accurate info on drugs from a needle exchange, for example. A fair few of the staff in any needle exchange will have past or current experience in injecting drugs too. This definitely does help - unlike the example above (you don't expect your docor to have cancer etc), there is a lot of prejudice and misunderstanding of drug use and drug users in the general community - some of that prejudice also exists in the health sector. Someone who's been there done that is unlikely to have that prejudice. To be fair - it is possible to give fairly accurate unbiased info about drugs without having taken them; it's just less common. From a harm reduction perspective, you want info on safer drug use from people who have at least some experience with that drug - would you take driving lessons from soemone who didn't drive?

Basically - the more restricted the access to the information is, the more likely it is to be fair and balanced. Any mass produced literature or media on drugs is going to emphasise the negatives, but any service targeting current drug users is more likely to be balanced.
 
Top