-
🇬🇧 🇸🇪 🇿🇦 🇮🇪 🇬🇭 🇩🇪 🇪🇺
European & African
Drug Discussion
Welcome Guest!
Posting Rules Bluelight Rules -
EADD Moderators: Pissed_and_messed | Shinji Ikari
Should heroin addicts be forced to pay for their own 'treatment'?
- Thread starter Free Proletariat
- Start date
Eveleivibe
Ex-Bluelighter
Not read much in this thread yet. I'm in the pharmacy - collecting my suboxone - am interested in why the question is about heroin addictions alone as opposed to simply all drug addicts?
Side note: drug addiction is both psychological as well as physiological. As a side note think of the question why do we need medication for many MH conditions?
Evey
Side note: drug addiction is both psychological as well as physiological. As a side note think of the question why do we need medication for many MH conditions?
Evey
F.U.B.A.R.
Bluelight Crew
Heroin addicts paying for their treatment? What fuckin retard came up with that idea? They/we/I would rather spend the dosh on more gear. Some people need to just fuckin wake up.
Eveleivibe
Ex-Bluelighter
I didn't look at thr OPer of this thread now I look a right hypocrite for replying. I was at the pharmacy when I replied no joke.
It does open up an interesting discussion, however, in that there is a discrimary stereotype towards specific drug users (Heroin addicts) than other drug users (addicts of prescribed Medications). I was able to get in my DSP because my drug use was not entirely OTC n prescribed n cause I used illegal online pharmacies to purchase 60 mg my DSP classed thus as "illicit use" so I was allowed on their books (or some shite along these lines) but why would this make me more entitled to free maintenance n a Heroin addict have to pay? I'vr abused my script in ways. Its what addicts do. Reasoning is absolutely ludicrous.
If a patient suffering from depression, continued to suffer symptoms on a prescribed treatment should they be made to pay as its costing the NHS money?
Then why pick on addicts? People don't choose to be addicts n anyone who believes someone chooses so, obviously has never suffered any form of addiction.
That's the last I'm saying on this thread as I feel like a right hypocrite now.
Evey
It does open up an interesting discussion, however, in that there is a discrimary stereotype towards specific drug users (Heroin addicts) than other drug users (addicts of prescribed Medications). I was able to get in my DSP because my drug use was not entirely OTC n prescribed n cause I used illegal online pharmacies to purchase 60 mg my DSP classed thus as "illicit use" so I was allowed on their books (or some shite along these lines) but why would this make me more entitled to free maintenance n a Heroin addict have to pay? I'vr abused my script in ways. Its what addicts do. Reasoning is absolutely ludicrous.
If a patient suffering from depression, continued to suffer symptoms on a prescribed treatment should they be made to pay as its costing the NHS money?
Then why pick on addicts? People don't choose to be addicts n anyone who believes someone chooses so, obviously has never suffered any form of addiction.
That's the last I'm saying on this thread as I feel like a right hypocrite now.
Evey
Philosoraptor
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2014
- Messages
- 112
How is it even logical that the taxpayers that aren't addicted to heroin should have to pay for their treatment?
If addicts can buy the drugs they should be able to pay for their own treatment to get off the drugs. Or if they can't afford treatment, then cold turkey it. It's honestly not near as bad as people make it out. Like a very severe flu, then getting over the psychological aspect of the addiction.
The strong survive in this world. You can call me an asshole or whatever, but when I chose to cut the opiates I fucking got off the opiates.
If addicts can buy the drugs they should be able to pay for their own treatment to get off the drugs. Or if they can't afford treatment, then cold turkey it. It's honestly not near as bad as people make it out. Like a very severe flu, then getting over the psychological aspect of the addiction.
The strong survive in this world. You can call me an asshole or whatever, but when I chose to cut the opiates I fucking got off the opiates.
SquidInSunglasses
Bluelighter
Because we don't demand that other self-inflicted conditions be paid for by the sufferer. If I stick a novelty garden gnome up my arse in the misguided pursuit of sexual pleasure, they don't just give me a crowbar and tell me to sod off out of A&E because it's my fault. The whole point of the NHS is to provide medical care to everyone, whether for mental or physical conditions, self-inflicted or not. I don't see why addiction should be treated any different.
BecomingJulie
Bluelight Crew
Because we live in a civilised society, where the weak and vulnerable are protected from the strong and powerful. You might ask "How is it even logical that non-car-owners should have to pay for the treatment of motorists"?
It's logical because we recognise that there but for the grace of assorted minor deities and a hefty dollop of sheer, blind luck, go all of us.
mr 'taxpayer', you should direct your vitriol at the people responsible for creating the socioecomic conditions that cause heroin use to proliferate in communites, i.e the politicians and their policies, not the victims of those policies
I'm sure you've heard the expression 'divide and conquer' right? Well you are doing exactly want they want you to do, filling your head with crude propaganda and myths, scapegoating some of the most vulnerable people in society, so you try and fuck with the people one rung of the social ladder below you, in order to feel good about yourself, while completely fucking ignoring the bigger picture.
I know people like you can't be persuaded to listen to rational voices, you are just someones pawn in a vicious game you haven't the slightest awareness of or insight into, you're living an inauthentic life, you're damaging society more than any heroin addict and you have my deepest sympathies; perhaps you should open your mind and find the humanity inside you. *shrug*
I'm sure you've heard the expression 'divide and conquer' right? Well you are doing exactly want they want you to do, filling your head with crude propaganda and myths, scapegoating some of the most vulnerable people in society, so you try and fuck with the people one rung of the social ladder below you, in order to feel good about yourself, while completely fucking ignoring the bigger picture.
I know people like you can't be persuaded to listen to rational voices, you are just someones pawn in a vicious game you haven't the slightest awareness of or insight into, you're living an inauthentic life, you're damaging society more than any heroin addict and you have my deepest sympathies; perhaps you should open your mind and find the humanity inside you. *shrug*
Eveleivibe
Ex-Bluelighter
Whst you are focusing on is physical addiction. What aboit the psychological addiction? I do love how evetyone automatically assumes that maintemance just helps with thr physical.
I do see your points re addicts n purchasinf drugs n purchasing treatment mlet me address this. First off, Philosopher, not sure if you're in the UK but here we have the National Health Service (HNS) where we all pay into this from employment (stamp) n for the most paer it's free for ECERYONE. I like Squidy's example for 1 it gives me a laugh for 2 it is true the Accident n Emergency separtment would not send them packing they woulf attend to them as they promise on their Hippocratus oath they would.
Can I ask are you an addict? Reason I ask this is because when it comes to "buying" drugs it isn't like buying something you like in the shop window "oh I like that, let's see if I have enough in my budget." When addicts drugs become a NEED like food, drink n sleep n psychologically it's a pure need that people will spend everything they have on then; will either ger into debt, steal or wjatever in order to get their OoC so, when you consider drug replacement therapy also aids psychological addiction it is aiming to stop this behaviour (sorry I've a headache so no explanating this well).
Just to note that I agree with Squid on the NHS is to help both physical n psychological issues. The only reason I keep emphasizing psychological issues is that when addicts n maintenance is criticised, the psychologicak is often not thought of by many.
Evey
Tangerine Dream
Bluelighter
qft.
Philosoraptor
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2014
- Messages
- 112
You give the ones that are actually putting up valid points a bad name. I am open minded and willing to read and consider opinions, as I did the previous couple of posters before you. However you just seem ignorant. I'm glad you know "people like me".
Regards,
The Taxpayer
Vurtual
Bluelighter
Our? We? Who is this geezer again? Is it that same vigilante dude who was on before? Drugs (or Hugs), not Thugs i say
. How electorally successful does he think the 'nobody have a party party' will actually be? I shudder to think what the rest of the programme is (though if an alt comes back i'd be well up for some detailed discussion of his fiscal policy (as a drooling brainless druggie obviously)). Personally i vote not having some self-appointed vigilante dishing out village justice on anyone who isn't judged pure. I may think the drug law is 'a ass' but i'm glad of the police to protect me against that sort of thing (if you're not said vigilante, apologies again 
)If he was interested in the problems of proletariat i suppose he should know that the key factor is the economic deprivation - the problematic and chaotic drug use is a downstream social symptom; better off drug users have less of these issues as a rule, or at least they impact less on wider society. Proper redistirbution of wealth should be the key aim of anyone who wants to 'free the proletariat'.
How would you feel if people who shoved novelty garden gnomes up their arse were sent on six month holidays at a cost of 12 grand, only for them to continue shoving novelty garden gnomes up their arse once the holiday had finished?
Vurtual
Bluelighter
If you start to break the principle of the NHS because of some spurious lack of money (in the 5th richest country on earth) you won't get it back off those bastards - they've nearly got rid of it already with the help of the bbc - don't let the bastards sell it off using this sort of divide and conquer shit, where they get us to fight it out between ourselves for pennies because 'austerity' while the richest people's wealth has doubled since the crash. Saving the NHS is the more important issue for me than making sure no druggies benefit from my taxes (yes, i pay taxes too).
EDIT - i forgot to add my response to the OP: they already do to a greater or lesser extent through tax; just like we all pay for the services we use to a greater or lesser extent - that's just the way public services have to work, because they have to be there before the bad thing happens, and they have to be for everyone, whatever they can contribute.
EDIT - i forgot to add my response to the OP: they already do to a greater or lesser extent through tax; just like we all pay for the services we use to a greater or lesser extent - that's just the way public services have to work, because they have to be there before the bad thing happens, and they have to be for everyone, whatever they can contribute.
Last edited:
SquidInSunglasses
Bluelighter
If gnome-arsing is best treated by sending people on holiday (as determined by properly conducted medical research), then that's what we should do, although we would do well to look into treatments that are more effective or less costly, if the current treatment is not helping. I'm sure someone could come up with a maintenance elf-shaped buttplug or some such...
I'm happy to be corrected, but I don't think the research shows that gnome-arsing is best treated by six month holidays. I think most carry on gnome-arsing after the holiday, and the 12k is wasted.
One Thousand Words
Bluelighter
Should the NHS pay for psychological damage from an illegally authorised war? Should drink drivers have to pay for their treatment or smokers who get lung cancer? What about parents who choose not to have an abortion after they find out their child to be has down syndrome or another expensive medical condition?
Unless you would prefer to create even more of a class divide in Britain it is in the nations best interests to at least try and provide universal health care for all.
Besides education and health should be the last places a civilised society tries to cut expenses from, especially a society currently building billion dollar naval craft to fight future wars where navies will become irrelevant
Unless you would prefer to create even more of a class divide in Britain it is in the nations best interests to at least try and provide universal health care for all.
Besides education and health should be the last places a civilised society tries to cut expenses from, especially a society currently building billion dollar naval craft to fight future wars where navies will become irrelevant
SquidInSunglasses
Bluelighter
Hence why I said we should be researching what is an effective treatment if the current measures are not working. Of course, unless our current approach is causing harm, we should keep on doing what we do until we have something provably better.
Community Justice
Ex-Bluelighter
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2016
- Messages
- 31
I don't think that the OP is arguing for an abandonment of the priciple of the NHS. It's more about revising our idea of what constitutes 'treatment'. If any other programme had the appalling failure rate of methadone maintenance, and was associated with as many social ills, it would have been discontinued long ago. I believe that even a system of quasi-legalisation - where addicts were able to purchase state-controlled heroin at zero subsidy from the taxpayer - would be preferable to the system which is currently in place. Certainly the principle of medicalised maintenance has been shown up as a dismal failure and a safety net for community-wrecking petty criminals.
consumer
Bluelighter
Do not feed the troll!