Baby, take a walk on the wild side
I am in the post-Yuletide dead zone slump. I know it’s 2008, but my mind and body still believe it to be 2007. It’s anticlimax time. I’ve always preferred pre-climax, but that’s entirely another matter.
What I am contending with in this neutral time is awaiting the beginning of things for the forthcoming year. One of those ‘things’ that is meant to begin shortly is a contract offer that, while it seemed like a good idea at the time, now doesn’t exactly fill me with enthusiasm.
A couple of months ago I was approached by a woman (whom I know quite well) who manages a local job-search business. This is one of those places where they take the jobless (for various reasons) and try to match them up with suitable employers. A noble quest and one that is probably pretty thankless a lot of the time.
In her work it had become apparent to her and others in the field that there are two categories of unemployed folk: 1) those for whom this is a temporary bit of misfortune in which they had been downsized, had suffered an illness, the firm had closed its doors, and so forth – and 2) those for whom unemployment fit hand-and-glove with ‘personal issues’ that were rendering them ineligible for the job market. In the latter category there might be reasons as diverse as lack of education, lack of marketable skills, attitude problems, mental illness or – and this is the biggest one – abuse of a substance at a chronic level.
In other words, active junkies and alcoholics do not make primo potential employees.
No doubt.
However, she is also wise enough to know that alcoholics and drug abusers in genuine recovery can and often do make superb employees, and many of them populate virtually all levels of the economy with great success. So, she thought, if somebody could help show these unfortunates ‘the way’ then they might be able to get away from their unproductive lifestyle.
She thought that maybe I could be that someone.
As I have said before, I used to be an addictions counsellor. Well, actually I still am, I just haven’t done the job for a few years. So, she offered me a contract position on a per-client basis. And I agreed to give it a shot. Now, I’m not so sure that I want to head back into that fray. But, I’ll do it, just to see how it works out. One advantage of doing contract work is one can walk at any time.
Part of the reason for my apprehension is that I do not accept the current ‘wisdom’ in addressing addiction. The current wisdom – generally expressed by those who have never actively and directly worked in the field -- is a thing called ‘harm reduction.’
I don’t buy the premise. What I buy is you get off whatever substance is disabling you and you become a functional human being again – or you don’t. There is no middle ground.
Here in British Columbia the harm reduction premise has gone nuts. Rather than providing viable treatment options for those afflicted with addiction, the harm reduction folk have opted instead to make life much more pleasant for addicts. This includes providing them with so-called ‘safe’ injection sites so they don’t have to shoot up in alleyways. And, they can shoot up with nice, clean and sanitized syringes, that are also provided gratis (except to the taxpayer, who pays for the fucking things).
And now, get this, please GET THIS; the provincial health authority is going to provide clean and sanitized crack pipes for those who choose to rot their brains in that manner. And the pussies in provincial health maintain this is a good thing because this allays the spread of HIV and Hep-C amongst crackheads. My first thought is, HIV and Hep-C among crackheads: I should give a shit? My second is, why in God’s name are you not doing something to get these poor sods off the crap rather than enabling them? After my fit of pique is over I opt for my second thought.
So, when I go back counselling I trust they will be comfortable with me not propounding harm reduction, because if they want me to, I will be gone.
Anyway, I can attest to dozens of people I know who have successfully kicked addictions and have become functional and productive citizens.
Oh, and as an aside, this provincial (so-called) health authority does ‘not’ provide free syringes to diabetics.
And that is my rant for January 4th, 2008.
What I am contending with in this neutral time is awaiting the beginning of things for the forthcoming year. One of those ‘things’ that is meant to begin shortly is a contract offer that, while it seemed like a good idea at the time, now doesn’t exactly fill me with enthusiasm.
A couple of months ago I was approached by a woman (whom I know quite well) who manages a local job-search business. This is one of those places where they take the jobless (for various reasons) and try to match them up with suitable employers. A noble quest and one that is probably pretty thankless a lot of the time.
In her work it had become apparent to her and others in the field that there are two categories of unemployed folk: 1) those for whom this is a temporary bit of misfortune in which they had been downsized, had suffered an illness, the firm had closed its doors, and so forth – and 2) those for whom unemployment fit hand-and-glove with ‘personal issues’ that were rendering them ineligible for the job market. In the latter category there might be reasons as diverse as lack of education, lack of marketable skills, attitude problems, mental illness or – and this is the biggest one – abuse of a substance at a chronic level.
In other words, active junkies and alcoholics do not make primo potential employees.
No doubt.
However, she is also wise enough to know that alcoholics and drug abusers in genuine recovery can and often do make superb employees, and many of them populate virtually all levels of the economy with great success. So, she thought, if somebody could help show these unfortunates ‘the way’ then they might be able to get away from their unproductive lifestyle.
She thought that maybe I could be that someone.
As I have said before, I used to be an addictions counsellor. Well, actually I still am, I just haven’t done the job for a few years. So, she offered me a contract position on a per-client basis. And I agreed to give it a shot. Now, I’m not so sure that I want to head back into that fray. But, I’ll do it, just to see how it works out. One advantage of doing contract work is one can walk at any time.
Part of the reason for my apprehension is that I do not accept the current ‘wisdom’ in addressing addiction. The current wisdom – generally expressed by those who have never actively and directly worked in the field -- is a thing called ‘harm reduction.’
I don’t buy the premise. What I buy is you get off whatever substance is disabling you and you become a functional human being again – or you don’t. There is no middle ground.
Here in British Columbia the harm reduction premise has gone nuts. Rather than providing viable treatment options for those afflicted with addiction, the harm reduction folk have opted instead to make life much more pleasant for addicts. This includes providing them with so-called ‘safe’ injection sites so they don’t have to shoot up in alleyways. And, they can shoot up with nice, clean and sanitized syringes, that are also provided gratis (except to the taxpayer, who pays for the fucking things).
And now, get this, please GET THIS; the provincial health authority is going to provide clean and sanitized crack pipes for those who choose to rot their brains in that manner. And the pussies in provincial health maintain this is a good thing because this allays the spread of HIV and Hep-C amongst crackheads. My first thought is, HIV and Hep-C among crackheads: I should give a shit? My second is, why in God’s name are you not doing something to get these poor sods off the crap rather than enabling them? After my fit of pique is over I opt for my second thought.
So, when I go back counselling I trust they will be comfortable with me not propounding harm reduction, because if they want me to, I will be gone.
Anyway, I can attest to dozens of people I know who have successfully kicked addictions and have become functional and productive citizens.
Oh, and as an aside, this provincial (so-called) health authority does ‘not’ provide free syringes to diabetics.
And that is my rant for January 4th, 2008.
Labels: Harm reduction 'R' us, sadly
13 Comments:
Oh, boy....I don't like the sound of harm reduction. I totally agree with you that coming off is the only way. Warm, fuzzy and other such coddling methods enable the addiction to continue.
That being said, I'd hightail it outta there too if harm reduction is the only treatment style.
We are of similar minds, Ian.
Never heard of the term "harm reduction" ...
Hi Ian, after seeing you on a few mutual blogs, I decided maybe it was time to visit your own place.
Pk
I am invariably in agreement with your opinions on such matters.
I get enraged when they preach clean free needles, & 'shooting galleries' here in Sydney.
When my eldest son told me he was addicted to heroin, he had a friend with him, who was in the same addiction.
I was so furious, I told them both to go over to the train station & GET UNDER the first train that came along! That way there would only be one grief & they would save everyone a lot of bloody heartache.
They were both so shocked, they couldn't believe it.
They both got help, & went into rehab facilities.
Well, I certainly don't know everything about the 'harm reduction' policies, but part of my understanding was that HIV, Hep, and other "social diseases" are more expensive to pay for in the long run than clean needles.
But I rather think that just getting off the junk is a much superior policy.
Oh see, that's absolutely ridiculous. It seems like the message should just be that folks need to stop using. I get that people are powerless over their addiction and so lose the ability to not use a contaminated needle, but still, the point shouldn't be to just hook folks up with the tools to use a drug.
I wouldn't be too excited either.
Boy you and I should get together on this Ian! The greatest shock in my life was to be at a drugstore where addicts were picking up their "free" methadone while I had just "paid" $200 for prescriptions to keep me alive, meanwhile wondering which bill was not going to get paid that month.
Oh yeah... harm reduction...I forgot.
"Fred" (29 years old) is a fellow with severe ADD and had used since he was 15. Two years ago he finally went into a 120-day treatment program and has now been clean for almost two years.
Social Services paid for this - something in the neighborhood of over $3500. It is an intensive program that takes the time to teach people to change their way of thinking and become a useful participant in society. Why doesn't Social Services refuse their handouts unless these people take AND finish a program like this?
"Fred" had tried many one week and one month programs but this was for six months and made all the difference in the world. The success rate for this particular program is well over 75%.
Ian I agree with you 100 percent, harm reduction sucks. It is slowly making it's way to Toronto as well with much outrage. Unfortunately once the city father's have decided it should be done, it generally is. Usually when I talk about it I'm told I'm too black and white on the issue and can't see the middle ground, tough, I am what I am...ciao
I can see the wisdom in many perspectives. I just don't think any current approach is global enough. Drugs come from international organized crime syndicates. The revenues go to criminals - murderers, terrorists, blackmailers, human slave traders. The solution has to be in more effective law enforcement, perhaps this new enforcement should be paid for by the legalization and taxation of certain substances. Let's face it. Either alcohol should be illegal or pot should be legal. It makes no sense the way it is.
I also wonder about the stats that the govmnt comes up with about the correlation between addiction and mental illness. They MUST be skewed to make the "harm reduction" philosophy more attractive.
I agree for a lot there must be a link between addiction and mental illness.
Harm reduction! Costly soft approach more like!
agreed...
for many years i was addicted to... tobacco
it was not til i started hacking blood that i realized it could kill me
so i quit... cold turkey
not everyone can quit their addiction that way, so i applaud your efforts in guiding them
Wow, free crack pipes. I understand the theory behind harm reduction, and also tai's point about the costliness of treting HIV and Hep-C, but it still feels like the wrong path. And frankly, I'm skeptical that it would even work. Would a crack addict only use the free pipes and never engage n risky behavior that would expose them to disease? I doubt it. I believe in compassion when dealing with addictions, but not enabling.
It's an absurd premise, and your penultimate graph says it all, no free syringes to diabetics.
"Harm reduction" states clearly that no one believes that addicts can kick their life-destroying habits, and I think that an important factor in people doing so is knowing that they CAN.
May I be evil and say that even if they do get Hep-C or HIV a lot of them won't live long enough to live with it anyway. Or will they?
It's utterly ridiculous to have to actually pay for junkies' needles. The mind, it boggles.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home