Uk - lib dems want heroin given out free on nhs

E

edgarshade

Bluelighter
Joined
Aug 31, 2010
Messages
1,954
Location
UK
The Express

Sunday March 6,2011
By Ben Borland

With reader comments

http://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/posts/view/232924/Lib-Dems-want-heroin-given-out-free-on-NHS/

LIBERAL Democrat leader Nick Clegg’s keynote conference speech was overshadowed yesterday after Scottish party members called for heroin to be made free on the NHS.
The motion was passed ahead of speeches by the Deputy Prime Minister and Scottish Secretary Michael Moore at the conference in Perth.

Members voted for the introduction of “diamorphine maintenance treatment” instead of fines or prison for heroin users.
Click to expand...
 
I support ideas like this simply because it has a history of working.

However I do question if I personally would of quit using at all if given the option of free heroin..

Certainly a better idea then locking up addicts though.
 
^The addicts are already paying for their own (street) diamorphine.

I think this is the right idea all the way, if they have to pay for it, it should be at prices that are a fraction of street prices, otherwise there would be little incentive to stay with the NHS treatment scheme.

MUCH better than locking addicts up, though. ^^
 
Not to mention help lower the spread of infectious diseases, as well as put more addicts in the position to be able to get involved in other forms of help.
 
Like I said, I understand the logic behind the proposal..

It is just a hard pill to swallow when the UK had to raise tuition massively while cutting funding at the same time for the programs (completely eliminating some of them). Remember the protests from last month?

But they have money to give out free heroin to addicts?

I understand that it will likely save money in the long run but good luck getting the general public to agree.
 
"As long as the NHS continue to treat drug addicts and alcoholics like 2nd class citizens,as long as those of us who are in pain are marginalized,excluded and treated like criminals instead of patients
we will continue to self medicate,and "by what ever means necessary"
find a way to ease our discomfort
If the World Health Organization consider addiction as a disease
why are our jails full of unwell people,arrested and condemned for being
ill. as a tax payer I resent paying for street cleaning in only the "posh" streets,and wasting the time of a police force,stretched to its limits chasing poorly people.jail for sickness causes ,suicide and and a world of pain and its totally unnecessary,we have better things to spend our money on than banging up people for scoring smack or being drunk,as an addict i believe we must listen to the people who the government employ to advise them instead of shooting them down,medical experts are walking away from a situation made not only by conservatives but also labour,because they are not being listened to,egypt,greece,burma and Iran have stood up to the governments of there countries,we watch The X factor and keep our mouths closed,shout,shout and shout again we are dying and sorry mr scott heron the revolution,if it ever happens will be televised because shits like Rupert murdock and Fox TV stand to make good money from advertising that tells you you are not good enough,your teeth are not white enough your car is not fast enough,and your insurance policy is not broad enough,lets stop swallowing the fear and stand up for ourselves,or fuck it we might as well shoot ourselves now (feb2011)
B x
i quote my friend and love. bfromb

This is not a matter of taking money from one group of people to give to another. The money is there in this country to help every person who is ill, addicted, suffering, wanting to study, homeless or have any basic human needs. It is being wrongly and in some cases illegally spent. This system protects the wealthy and punishes the poor, setting one group against another, keeping us isolated, arguing, unsatisfied and angry, whilst the rich sneak off to their country pile/yacht/island....
Giving addicts the drugs they need, preventing them from needing to steel, prostitute, hurt others is a start and should be implemented along side offering treatment, councelling, looking at what ever the issues people had before they picked up drugs in the first place if they want it.
The cost to society, I would think would be less: I am thinking of long term health problems, the cost of incarcerating people, Insurance costs and claims, broken families (and many more things I cant think of right now)
bx
 
Last edited:
This is not a matter of taking money from one group of people to give to another. The money is there in this country to help every person who is ill, addicted, suffering, wanting to study, homeless or have any basic human needs. It is being wrongly and in some cases illegally spent. This system protects the wealthy and punishes the poor, setting one group against another, keeping us isolated, arguing, unsatisfied and angry, whilst the rich sneak off to their country pile/yacht/island....
Click to expand...

I agree the financial system is fucked but how can you argue the money is there when it simply is not?

Giving addicts the drugs they need, preventing them from needing to steel, prostitute, hurt others is a start and should be implemented along side offering treatment, councelling, looking at what ever the issues people had before they picked up drugs in the first place if they want it.
Click to expand...

Your not going to convince me anyone needs heroin. Even if they were to give out free dope counseling should be a requirement of the process.. not something you address if you want to.

The cost to society, I would think would be less: I am thinking of long term health problems, the cost of incarcerating people, Insurance costs and claims, broken families (and many more things I cant think of right now)
Click to expand...

As I previously stated it probably would save money in the long run but how are you going to explain to the public you have money to give away free heroin to addicts but not to give higher education to people who made the conscious choice to never get into dope? It seems you are rewarding people who made bad decisions and there lives and are punishing those who did not.
 
... they want you to beg for government once food and water gets too expensive, there will be chaos across the globe... and America already has laws for when it happens and how they will deal with the starving people that go rioting..
Click to expand...

huh?
 
However I do question if I personally would of quit using at all if given the option of free heroin..
Click to expand...
at least you'd be able to live your life relatively normally. ups and downs with withdrawals and highs isn't fun once you're an addict, as any addict will say. these programs can keep people steady, and once they gain stability, they can slowly reduce their dose (so slow that they barely feel the reduction) if they want to... that's the way we should be quitting drugs with such a hold.

actually, imo it's cruel and physiologically harmful to taper people off of benzos or opiates rapidly...
... said:
Why not reach a compromise and have addicts pay for their own diamorphine?
Click to expand...
giving it out free eliminates nearly all risk of crime. if the product isn't sent through the machinery of prohibition, milligrams of diamorphine can actually be in the pennies...
 
villian said:
I agree the financial system is fucked but how can you argue the money is there when it simply is not?



Your not going to convince me anyone needs heroin. Even if they were to give out free dope counseling should be a requirement of the process.. not something you address if you want to.



As I previously stated it probably would save money in the long run but how are you going to explain to the public you have money to give away free heroin to addicts but not to give higher education to people who made the conscious choice to never get into dope?.
Click to expand...

£400 million is already spent on Drug Treatment in the UK. What does it achieve, beyond serving as an employment agency for the middle-classes?

No more 'get clean' than did when 'treatment' consisted of a doctor to write your script and a receptionist to organise your appointments. Gullible drug-users may have been sold on the idea they cannot come off without layers of highly expensive rehab, but statistics and common sense both confirm that's a nonsense.

You can't turn back the clock but, in the days of the Rolleston System when GPs could write diamorphine scripts there were about 1000 addicts in the UK - when numbers went up over 100 in a years it was cause for concern. Unlike criminalised USA there was no organised crime, no super-rich traffickers, no drug gangs and no mass hospitalisations from heroin-induced septicemia.

Drug Treatment and its accompanying bureaucracies have conspired to obscure the obvious for decades. It just hasn't worked. Whatever the rights or wrongs of diamorphine treatment, it can do no worse than present, preposterous modalities. Drug users get precious little in the way of unbiased 'education' at the moment. Demystify heroin and watch the results. By way of example, Holland,with its diamorphine prescribing and liberal drug laws, reports a sharp drop in younger user numbers. Sweden, with its draconian prohibition, reports a sharp increase.

Common sense. Not too much of it about. Bravo the Lib Dems for starting the ball rolling.
 
What_The_Shit.jpg
 
Demystify heroin and watch the results.
Click to expand...
medicalizing heroin and giving it out as free treatment in countries like the netherlands has resulted in, statistically, less young people trying the drug for the first time.
 
People do not -need- heroin. There is nothing I would like more than to be given free heroin, that would be wonderful, but I think of what else that money could be spent on, food, shelter, so on so forth.
 
Mora Fiend said:
People do not -need- heroin. There is nothing I would like more than to be given free heroin, that would be wonderful, but I think of what else that money could be spent on, food, shelter, so on so forth.
Click to expand...
these programs actually return more than you pay into them. because of the reduced costs related to healthcare and so many things i shouldn't try to list them.

so they're very friendly to the budget, and the only obstacle really is moral outrage at what is a medical and personal problem.
 
^ I think it's an intresting idea actually. There's always two sides or more to just about any point, but if the returns of a social program are worth the initial investment than it's worth a look.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top