I found this really great article discussing opiate addiction treatment

I know this isn't drug in the media forum but I really want to have this discussion in the recovery forums. The article investigates state drug rehab system but having been to a number of programs I think it's conclusions and criticisms are valid for many programs all across the country. After all I can't tell you how many times I have known someone who died from an overdose soon after leaving treatment. The halfway house my friend went too had 2 deaths in the 4 months he was a resident and that didn't seem to phase the staff. They said that's totally normal. I find that unacceptable.

The system is failing many addicts. If the 90-95 percent relapse rates are not bad enough the deaths right after treatment are. We are in the middle of a heroin epidemic and a deescalation in the ar on drugs with both of those come promises of more money and people going into drug treatment. The question is what kind of treatment will it fund? Red the article and comment. I'm gonna wait and let that happen collect my thoughts and write up a long response. But you should read it really is a fantastic article.

http://projects.huffingtonpost.com/dying-to-be-free-heroin-treatment

I have to admit I haven't finished the article.

First I do have to say this quote from the article "Standard treatment in the United States, however, emphasizes willpower over chemistry." Is just flatout wrong. Its the exact opposite actually.

And this is just fucking laughable "According to Deitch, the Synanon-style approach continues to be particularly popular among administrators of prison treatment programs." Synanon was a straight up abusive cult led by a charismatic leader and something that could have only occurred in the climate of the 70s. It is not like treatment at all, especially today. Its an extremely interesting story.

"Central to drug treatment in Kentucky is the idea that addicts must not just confront their addictions, but confront each other. " Maybe in Kentucky but I doubt it. Treatment is about learning how to resolve conflicts with others without blowing up/using. That is also what halfway houses are for. Sometimes honesty gets taken the wrong way and its also emphasized to be humble. I basically keep my mouth shut today, the only time I confront somebody is if it is directly harming me.

Sadly, that is what the relapse rates are and death tends to come. I wouldn't blame treatment (though some do suck) as much as I would the disease. I know people that died in halfway houses, one in treatment itself. It basically comes down to this, the large majority of people who need treatment will not get it and among those that do they are still facing a relapse rate that is that high. Lots of people die from this disease, including those who are in treatment. In my hometown, overdose and drinking related deaths has surpassed car accidents.

Treatment and halfway homes can only take someone so far, its really up to them to apply what they have learned. Treatment is really only meant to "interrupt" the pattern of using. Suboxone works like the article said, but only if the person wants to quit. Is it a help? Sure.

Next we get into funding: First and foremost, funding for treatment is being cut, not expanded. In my state alone, addiction treatment is facing a 20 percent slash across the board. I am in the treatment field and I can tell you we are overworked, underpaid and under appreciated. Then you get into the whole deal of the the average public not understanding addiction. Treatment centers are chronically underfunded, especially in the conservative south (Like Kentucky). Plus the VA just throws out opiates, they need doctors to take addiction classes.

23.5 Million Americans need treatment a year, only 2.5 receive it. I really think we need to just focus on getting more people into treatment and out of jail/the streets. Also, Doctors are not required to take a single credit of addictions specific classes in med school. That needs to change. Do treatment centers need to be reformed? Sure. But we also have evidence that treatment works. And I can tell you the current trend of education when it comes to addiction professionals is changing dramatically.

Anyways, the article makes some good points but I do get sick of these 12 step/treatment horror story articles. Its also extremely sensationalized. Parents who lose children to addiction always want someone to blame and it always becomes the treatment facility and the 12 steps. Its hard for them to fathom that they themselves might have had a huge role in their kids death through enabling.

I would love to see an article that puts it like it is "The disease is chronic, incurable and fatal. It kills daily. This is a major HEALTH (not criminal) issue. Lets start treating it as such, start funding treatment, upgrade facilities, pay staff etc etc rather then sayings "Its x fault this happens, Its y fault this happens". The hardest part about addiction is that it effects humans in profound ways and many just do not get it before its too late. What worked for me (and many others) is a combination of suboxone, treatment and meetings. Now I only do the meetings, but it took me a good decade to finally get clean. Yes, it took me 10 years to finally start really dealing with it on face value. That is not uncommon, living in active addiction for years is going to kill lots of people.

But there is hope, people do get clean, people do live great lives after drugs, people do get clean and then give back to other recovering addicts. Speaking of, I have a beginners meeting to attend, I like sharing that it can work if you give it a try.

I read this article before and re-skimmed it now. I think it is a great article. Remember that they are looking at one state for a lot of the article and then sometimes broadening out to talk more generally and this can be confusing.

They said Synanon style not Synanon per se and they also said these were mostly used in prisons. This comes as no surprise to me since humiliation was a hallmark of that cult and that is prevalent in prisons. My brother was ordered to a Synanon style "bootcamp" where they used total humiliation, in lieu of prison, and that was in Colorado--it is still operating the same way today.

I do believe that AA/NA need to get their shit together as far as methadone and suboxone are concerned--they need to come out with a national policy that includes people that need to go (and choose to go) this route. Replacement or maintenance does not need to be for everyone. But then again, why have a one-size-fits-all prescription about anything? IMO this is one of the greatest failures of the recovery movement altogether and it reminds me of the education system. When something is deemed good it gets forced on everyone and when it gets deemed bad it is denied to everyone. But what if it is good for some and not for others? Or bad for some but not for others? Not all kids learn the same way and all addicts are not alike. Yes, addiction means that many share common traits and experiences but not so much so that every single person must do things one way.

That would be my one criticism of the article--I think it turns the tables and makes people think that everyone needs to do this when not everyone does. Maybe lots of people do, I couldn't say--but what do numbers really matter? If one person does then don't deny it to that one person. We want to quantify everything and we want simple answers. Addiction is so hard to beat because it is anything but simple. It has psychological, physical, and spiritual components not to mention all the social components of environment, class and culture. I just think we need challenges to what is but with the caveat that the challengers must also recognize the complex nature of recovery and have the humility to say, this could be beneficial to some rather than this is the way to go for everyone.

After all, if we do not fully understand what addiction is (and as of now we do not) then how can we claim to understand how to fully and holistically treat it?

herbavore said:

I read this article before and re-skimmed it now. I think it is a great article. Remember that they are looking at one state for a lot of the article and then sometimes broadening out to talk more generally and this can be confusing.

They said Synanon style not Synanon per se and they also said these were mostly used in prisons. This comes as no surprise to me since humiliation was a hallmark of that cult and that is prevalent in prisons. My brother was ordered to a Synanon style "bootcamp" where they used total humiliation, in lieu of prison, and that was in Colorado--it is still operating the same way today.

I do believe that AA/NA need to get their shit together as far as methadone and suboxone are concerned--they need to come out with a national policy that includes people that need to go (and choose to go) this route. Replacement or maintenance does not need to be for everyone. But then again, why have a one-size-fits-all prescription about anything? IMO this is one of the greatest failures of the recovery movement altogether and it reminds me of the education system. When something is deemed good it gets forced on everyone and when it gets deemed bad it is denied to everyone. But what if it is good for some and not for others? Or bad for some but not for others? Not all kids learn the same way and all addicts are not alike. Yes, addiction means that many share common traits and experiences but not so much so that every single person must do things one way.

That would be my one criticism of the article--I think it turns the tables and makes people think that everyone needs to do this when not everyone does. Maybe lots of people do, I couldn't say--but what do numbers really matter? If one person does then don't deny it to that one person. We want to quantify everything and we want simple answers. Addiction is so hard to beat because it is anything but simple. It has psychological, physical, and spiritual components not to mention all the social components of environment, class and culture. I just think we need challenges to what is but with the caveat that the challengers must also recognize the complex nature of recovery and have the humility to say, this could be beneficial to some rather than this is the way to go for everyone.

After all, if we do not fully understand what addiction is (and as of now we do not) then how can we claim to understand how to fully and holistically treat it?

Click to expand...

Herbavore
I think the point the article is trying to make about maintenance is that it should be offered as a viable treatment to everyone who goes through the rehab system. Instead as the interviews in the article indicate it is being demonized by the very professionals who should be advocating its selective use. One of the most irritating parts of the article is when the drug court judge who forbids opiate maintenance admits that she isn't an expert on drug addiction and cant be bothered to learn the science and statistics behind maintenance therapy. This is a person who makes the decisions about peoples treatment options.

Me and you are in agreement that one size treatment will never fit all. In fact in a perfect world each class of drug would have its own treatment protocol. After all What a user of meth experiences and needs is different than a user of heroin. Of course we are so far away from that its not productive discussion.

Phactor- There are still elements of syanons philosophy in some treatment centers. The last place I went practiced "confrontation therapy" Which was just a slightly tweaked version of syanons "the game". We would go around the circle someone would be picked and the other clients would tell the person everything that was wrong with them and why he would relapse. The worst part was the staff running the exercises where just ex addicts with no mental health training. I am not saying the whole program was that rigid but I have heard of places which are. And the state place described in the article does sound very behavior modification like. Not to mention the interview with the guy who ran the place illustrates the absolute worst of the whole industry.

Greenwell conceded that Lillard’s fate was not unique. Two-thirds of addicts drop out or get kicked out of his program, he said. He estimated that only about 1 in 5 who complete the program have a “real shot” at staying off drugs. And that’s being optimistic, he said. He later compared Grateful Life to the Marines: “Only the top 15 percent make it long term.”

Might Suboxone have saved Lillard?

“Could have,” Greenwell said. “But it’s not sobriety.”

Greenwell underlined his point. “It’s being alive,” he said dismissively. “But you’re not clean and sober.”

That guy runs a rehab. What sucks is in my dealings the attitude is not unique. The entire industry has accepted failure and even taking it a step farther failure has become a business model. In no other industry is failure seen as a failing of the patient and not the treatment. "Oh you relapsed?" "well come back and try the same thing again" its insanity by definition.

I cant read that article without getting emotional. A mix between sadness, rage, and disgust. So many of my friends have died. I want to do something but I don't even know where to start.

I don't blame you for feeling emotional when you read this article, CJ; you are living it, not just reading it.

I do understand that the article was advocating maintenance being offered as a treatment in rehabs, not dismissed by courts etc and that is why I still think it is a very good article--a necessary component of a conversation that should be taking place but rarely does.

As far as what we can do, I have been feeling for a long time that I would like to approach my local drug court and ask for two things: one, that people have a choice in what kind of meetings they are sentenced to attend (this would entail the county proactively offer SMART recovery meetings as well as secular 12-step meetings to support those who have a problem with traditional AA/NA--especially if this is die to the constituents of those meetings being unwilling to accept psychiatric medications or maintenance as a part of recovery). I feel like in my exposure to drug court I saw a lot of caring judges but they were completely ignorant of the lack of options for addicts as well as the role of maintenance. I never really feel ready or qualified to do this. Maybe you should move to my town and we can team up and start a joint campaign.

That's a really good idea herb. I have a very similar experience - great judge, ended up dismissing everything early actually because the whole situation was a little ludicrous, but he clearly didn't have much of idea what was out there. And frankly none of them do. Some of them think they do, and do the whole preaching AA thing, which is even more of a problem, but of course don't have a clue.

I'd love to start something out here to get drug court/diversion judges more informed. I know that a lot of them would be really receptive. Do you know if anything like this is already out there, somewhere in the world (particularly the UK or US)?

Well, I got really excited about two developments where I live (CA) drug courts and mental health courts because I very naively believed that they would be staffed by people that bothered to educate themselves about both addiction and mental health--was I ever wrong! The idea behind drug court was to acknowledge that people are struggling with addiction and to make them accountable not just for the crime committed but for their recovery. All well and good on the surface, right? But in fact, because they never took into account the heinous lack of resources for the people that they were holding responsible for overcoming addiction they simply serve as one more giant load of shame and punishment being thrown at people that cannot find medical treatment, cannot afford rehab, cannot find sober living housing (or any housing for that matter!). I tell you, it was one of the most heartbreaking things I have ever had to do was to go sit and wait for drug court to start. Every week, no matter what was happening in these people's lives, whether they lived on the street or had no chance in hell of finding a job in their current condition, had no transportation or were in serious WD's, they had to show up with their little signed piece of paper saying they had been to 7 meetings in a week. If they didn't have that paper they were in contempt of court and got taken into custody if they didn't have a very good excuse or the judge was having an unusually forgiving day. When people would bring up these incredible hardships and stumbling blocks to doing what the courts required (including paying their own court costs) no one had anything at all to say and that silence basically said, "tough shit". But despite my bleak look I do believe that real individuals are responsible for changing things and sometimes it can be something small like getting a host of different kinds of meetings going to meet more people's needs.

I really don't know what things are like in the courts in the UK (I always assume they are better, LOL--so someone in the UK is welcome to come along and disabuse me of that notion if I am wrong.) I have this mental hierarchy that says Australia=best, UK and Canada=better, USA=worst. It is based on absolutely nothing but my own disillusionment with my country of birth, though.

I looked into becoming a SMART Recovery meeting leader because there is exactly one a week in the town where I live. You do it online and it costs $75.00 to go through the training. I had to make a choice between taking on more on Bluelight and doing that, though, and Bluelight won.

herbavore said:

Well, I got really excited about two developments where I live (CA) drug courts and mental health courts because I very naively believed that they would be staffed by people that bothered to educate themselves about both addiction and mental health--was I ever wrong! The idea behind drug court was to acknowledge that people are struggling with addiction and to make them accountable not just for the crime committed but for their recovery. All well and good on the surface, right? But in fact, because they never took into account the heinous lack of resources for the people that they were holding responsible for overcoming addiction they simply serve as one more giant load of shame and punishment being thrown at people that cannot find medical treatment, cannot afford rehab, cannot find sober living housing (or any housing for that matter!). I tell you, it was one of the most heartbreaking things I have ever had to do was to go sit and wait for drug court to start. Every week, no matter what was happening in these people's lives, whether they lived on the street or had no chance in hell of finding a job in their current condition, had no transportation or were in serious WD's, they had to show up with their little signed piece of paper saying they had been to 7 meetings in a week. If they didn't have that paper they were in contempt of court and got taken into custody if they didn't have a very good excuse or the judge was having an unusually forgiving day. When people would bring up these incredible hardships and stumbling blocks to doing what the courts required (including paying their own court costs) no one had anything at all to say and that silence basically said, "tough shit". But despite my bleak look I do believe that real individuals are responsible for changing things and sometimes it can be something small like getting a host of different kinds of meetings going to meet more people's needs.

I really don't know what things are like in the courts in the UK (I always assume they are better, LOL--so someone in the UK is welcome to come along and disabuse me of that notion if I am wrong.) I have this mental hierarchy that says Australia=best, UK and Canada=better, USA=worst. It is based on absolutely nothing but my own disillusionment with my country of birth, though.

I looked into becoming a SMART Recovery meeting leader because there is exactly one a week in the town where I live. You do it online and it costs $75.00 to go through the training. I had to make a choice between taking on more on Bluelight and doing that, though, and Bluelight won.

Click to expand...

Where I live drug court has become a revenue source for the county. They charge a base fee of around 3000 dollars that has to be paid before you can complete the program. Then they charge 10 dollars per drug test of which there are 4-6 a month. Then they require you do outpatient rehab which you have to pay for. It goes on and on. That's not even going into the time requirements to stay in compliance. court every Friday,meetings,ect. Its crazy.

That is pretty intense. Are there different types of requirements for different offenses, repeat offenders and the like? I guess drug courts that have everything so organized charging defendants isn't too heinous (especially given the alternative sanctions, criminal I mean). Does the defendant still need a lawyer in drug court like the US, or some other kind of advocate - or does the judge/magistrate just tell them what is required?

herbavore said:

I read this article before and re-skimmed it now. I think it is a great article. Remember that they are looking at one state for a lot of the article and then sometimes broadening out to talk more generally and this can be confusing.

They said Synanon style not Synanon per se and they also said these were mostly used in prisons. This comes as no surprise to me since humiliation was a hallmark of that cult and that is prevalent in prisons. My brother was ordered to a Synanon style "bootcamp" where they used total humiliation, in lieu of prison, and that was in Colorado--it is still operating the same way today.

I do believe that AA/NA need to get their shit together as far as methadone and suboxone are concerned--they need to come out with a national policy that includes people that need to go (and choose to go) this route. Replacement or maintenance does not need to be for everyone. But then again, why have a one-size-fits-all prescription about anything? IMO this is one of the greatest failures of the recovery movement altogether and it reminds me of the education system. When something is deemed good it gets forced on everyone and when it gets deemed bad it is denied to everyone. But what if it is good for some and not for others? Or bad for some but not for others? Not all kids learn the same way and all addicts are not alike. Yes, addiction means that many share common traits and experiences but not so much so that every single person must do things one way.

That would be my one criticism of the article--I think it turns the tables and makes people think that everyone needs to do this when not everyone does. Maybe lots of people do, I couldn't say--but what do numbers really matter? If one person does then don't deny it to that one person. We want to quantify everything and we want simple answers. Addiction is so hard to beat because it is anything but simple. It has psychological, physical, and spiritual components not to mention all the social components of environment, class and culture. I just think we need challenges to what is but with the caveat that the challengers must also recognize the complex nature of recovery and have the humility to say, this could be beneficial to some rather than this is the way to go for everyone.

After all, if we do not fully understand what addiction is (and as of now we do not) then how can we claim to understand how to fully and holistically treat it?

Click to expand...

Nobody claims to able to know how to fully treat addiction. We do know that it is treatable and people with addictions can recover. We also know that something like 80-90 percent of people will relapse. Treatment or no treatment. Relapse is not a "failure" of treatment.

I worked with a lot of recently released prisoners and it was nothing like Synanon. Treatment jails are very similar to traditional treatment and other then those places the only options guys have are in facility meetings. I'd assume some of them get pretty confrontational but that is prison. I have been to my state's treatment prison many many times to help run meetings and have never seen anything close to "Synanon style". "Confrontational" does not equal Syananon.

Syananon was basically a cult run by a very sick man.

AA/NA will never come out with a national policy in regards to medication. It is an extremely de-organized group. Sure some old timers talk shit, but most people ignore it and just realize that its all outside issue stuff.

Treatment is never forced, you don't have to participate. Plenty of people do this, several times. AA/NA are not pushed in treatment, support groups are. AA/NA has a lot of success, lots of meetings and long histories. If people want alternatives, they are there. But I never understand why nobody puts work into volunteering for them, starting new meetings etc. There just are not that many alternative programs that are developed. Then people turn towards AA/NA and claim "its forced, there are no alternatives, I don't want to go", when in reality the issue doesn't have anything to do with NA/AA (both of which make it very clear there are many routes to recovery).


But please do not take the quotes from a few individual members and apply it to an entire group. Most people in NA are fine with Suboxone, we just do not make a big deal out of the issue because its personal. If someone is determining or judging someone else's program then they need to

Treatment simply is not anything close to a "failed" industry. The relapse rates would be the same or worse if it wasn't around. Treatment cannot make one "relapse". Relapse happens months in advance. If you want to get clean you can, and those that want to get clean do well in treatment. Recovery is all about finding out what works for you.

herbavore said:

I don't blame you for feeling emotional when you read this article, CJ; you are living it, not just reading it.

I do understand that the article was advocating maintenance being offered as a treatment in rehabs, not dismissed by courts etc and that is why I still think it is a very good article--a necessary component of a conversation that should be taking place but rarely does.

As far as what we can do, I have been feeling for a long time that I would like to approach my local drug court and ask for two things: one, that people have a choice in what kind of meetings they are sentenced to attend (this would entail the county proactively offer SMART recovery meetings as well as secular 12-step meetings to support those who have a problem with traditional AA/NA--especially if this is die to the constituents of those meetings being unwilling to accept psychiatric medications or maintenance as a part of recovery). I feel like in my exposure to drug court I saw a lot of caring judges but they were completely ignorant of the lack of options for addicts as well as the role of maintenance. I never really feel ready or qualified to do this. Maybe you should move to my town and we can team up and start a joint campaign.

Click to expand...

http://www.smartrecovery.org/courts/

Most drug courts do allow people to attend SMART meetings, same goes for treatment. Put like I said, there simply are no SMART meetings. IMO its better for people to attend some type of support group even if they may disagree with some of the principles (like not wanting to do the 12 steps). Hell, the large majority of people at 12 step meetings are not working a program at all. I went to some SMART meetings while I was in treatment myself. There just were not enough people there for me.

http://www.smartrecovery.org/meetings_db/view/

crimsonjunk said:

Herbavore
I think the point the article is trying to make about maintenance is that it should be offered as a viable treatment to everyone who goes through the rehab system. Instead as the interviews in the article indicate it is being demonized by the very professionals who should be advocating its selective use. One of the most irritating parts of the article is when the drug court judge who forbids opiate maintenance admits that she isn't an expert on drug addiction and cant be bothered to learn the science and statistics behind maintenance therapy. This is a person who makes the decisions about peoples treatment options.

Me and you are in agreement that one size treatment will never fit all. In fact in a perfect world each class of drug would have its own treatment protocol. After all What a user of meth experiences and needs is different than a user of heroin. Of course we are so far away from that its not productive discussion.

Phactor- There are still elements of syanons philosophy in some treatment centers. The last place I went practiced "confrontation therapy" Which was just a slightly tweaked version of syanons "the game". We would go around the circle someone would be picked and the other clients would tell the person everything that was wrong with them and why he would relapse. The worst part was the staff running the exercises where just ex addicts with no mental health training. I am not saying the whole program was that rigid but I have heard of places which are. And the state place described in the article does sound very behavior modification like. Not to mention the interview with the guy who ran the place illustrates the absolute worst of the whole industry.

Greenwell conceded that Lillard’s fate was not unique. Two-thirds of addicts drop out or get kicked out of his program, he said. He estimated that only about 1 in 5 who complete the program have a “real shot” at staying off drugs. And that’s being optimistic, he said. He later compared Grateful Life to the Marines: “Only the top 15 percent make it long term.”

Might Suboxone have saved Lillard?

“Could have,” Greenwell said. “But it’s not sobriety.”

Greenwell underlined his point. “It’s being alive,” he said dismissively. “But you’re not clean and sober.”

That guy runs a rehab. What sucks is in my dealings the attitude is not unique. The entire industry has accepted failure and even taking it a step farther failure has become a business model. In no other industry is failure seen as a failing of the patient and not the treatment. "Oh you relapsed?" "well come back and try the same thing again" its insanity by definition.

I cant read that article without getting emotional. A mix between sadness, rage, and disgust. So many of my friends have died. I want to do something but I don't even know where to start.

Click to expand...

Well that confrontational thing does sound fucked up, but then at other times people are very sensitive and they consider somebody suggesting they get it together as being "confrontational". Treatment is "behavior modification" though. The whole point is to stop the using, change behavior and hopefully the person continues to grow and change after treatment. However, most do not. That is addiction for you. That isn't the fault of treatment.

I have been to shitty treatment centers myself but oh well. When I found the one that worked it saved my life.

As for Synanon

The Synanon organization, initially a drug rehabilitation program, was founded by Charles E. "Chuck" Dederich, Sr., (1913–1997) in 1958 in Santa Monica, California, United States. By the early 1960s, Synanon had also become an alternative community, attracting people with its emphasis on living a self-examined life, as aided by group truth-telling sessions that came to be known as the "Synanon Game." Synanon ultimately became the Church of Synanon in the 1970s, and disbanded permanently in 1991 [1] due to many criminal activities, including attempted murder of which members were convicted, and civil legal problems, including losing its tax free status retroactively with the Internal Revenue Service due to financial misdeeds, destruction of evidence and terrorism.[2][3][4] It has been called one of the "most dangerous and violent cults America had ever seen." [5]

Click to expand...

From wiki. Synanon developed into a straight up cult. There is so much more to it then just the game. That is why I found the comparison so objectionable. "Confrontation" happens in treatment because denial is so strong. Yes, it can be uncomfortable but it is often needed.

I do have to completely disagree about separating treatment between drugs of choice. Drugs do not matter, addiction is addiction. There is much more in common between addicts of all types then there is not. It doesn't matter if someone used opiates or meth, addiction is still hell on earth and terrifying. The reason NA works for many is because it focuses on addiction being a thinking issue. You are encouraged to not share about specific substances. Addiction is a unique experience but it has many common traits. That is the very reason why former addicts are able to get through to active addicts. Because we know what it is like.

Stopping the use is very minuscule when compared to having to learn how to live without drugs. That is why people relapse, because recovery is really really hard.

I am compulsive, if I use things that change my mood I abuse it. I can also do it with certain behaviors (sex gambling, video games etc). I don't ever really think about using anymore but my addiction still manifests itself in different ways.

"In no other industry is failure seen as a failing of the patient and not the treatment. "Oh you relapsed?" "well come back and try the same thing again" its insanity by definition."

If someone doesn't attend chemo and dies from cancer, its not the fault of the medical industry. If someone eats incorrectly with diabetes, its there fault. There are plenty of health issues that need a strong individual effort to work. Also, "relapse" isn't a failure, its part of the process. The reason why it is considered so dangerous, serious and undesirable is because it kills.

toothpastedog said:

That is pretty intense. Are there different types of requirements for different offenses, repeat offenders and the like? I guess drug courts that have everything so organized charging defendants isn't too heinous (especially given the alternative sanctions, criminal I mean). Does the defendant still need a lawyer in drug court like the US, or some other kind of advocate - or does the judge/magistrate just tell them what is required?

Click to expand...

You do need a lawyer while going through the program but its mostly a formality as the judge is in control. Everyone is pretty much treated the same as far as requirements go. They wanted me to enter the program for a misdemeanor drug charge. I said no thanks. The main benefit of the program is that they drop the charges if you complete it. So it doesn't go on you record as a conviction.

Gotcha, so it's a bit like first offense felony diversion in my part of the US, except it sounds like the requirements are much more strenuous. Here you need to go to a certain number of "drug education" classes, for like six months I think, and attend something like 20 or 30 self help group meetings like AA. And then if you don't fuck up during a 12 month period you get the charged dropped and erased from your record (once you complete the program and everything you can get the same deal, if you get caught again it's like a first offense all over again). Thank got for Prop 47 in CA... I'll never have to go through that again (for a number of reasons actually, but prop 47 sure secures it for me).

phactor said:

Stopping the use is very minuscule when compared to having to learn how to live without drugs. That is why people relapse, because recovery is really really hard.

Click to expand...

QFT


Also, I agree with you Phactor that blaming any form of treatment for the failure to recover is probably equal to blaming addicts themselves. C'mon people--we can think more complexly than this simplistic duality.