Carman Fox

VANCOUVER: Free Heroin For Addicts

YuckFou

Banned
Jan 11, 2005
20
0
0
Vancouver Plans To Offer
Free Heroin To Addicts
By Jane Armstrong
GlobeAndMail.com | 1-31-5

VANCOUVER -- On a warm, rainy Saturday morning, Debbie Woelke stops pushing her shopping cart long enough to discuss the pros and cons of a plan to give free heroin to drug addicts in Canada's poorest neighbourhood. The heroin trial is all the talk of Vancouver's Downtown Eastside and Ms. Woelke, 48, thinks it's a good idea. She might even apply, herself. "They should have done this a long time ago," she said leaning on her cart, which contains all her worldly belongings -- not groceries.

Like other addicts, Ms. Woelke lives in a bleak rented room in a residential hotel. Far better to be outside in the rain, even if it means wheeling around your clothes all day.

"Sometimes you need something just to relax and get your mind together, instead of always being in a state of panic. That's what's killing everyone down here," she said, pointing to the throngs of bedraggled souls shuffling along East Hastings Street. Like Ms. Woelke, they must hit the pavement every day to raise enough cash for their drugs. Most steal. Many women work as prostitutes.

"They have to do things they wouldn't normally do."

This is exactly what some of Canada's top addiction experts want to find out when they begin the first heroin prescription trial in North America.

If heroin addicts are freed of their daily chase for drugs, if it is given to them three times a day like medicine, can they change their lives for the better?

In a couple of weeks, the research team will begin taking applications here in Vancouver and later in Toronto and Montreal from addicts who want to be part of the study.

Researchers are looking for hard-core addicts, people who have tried and failed at least twice to get clean. In the three cities, there are spots for 428 addicts, roughly half of whom will receive heroin for a year; the other half will receive methadone, an artificial opiate that controls the cravings for heroin.

In Vancouver, the trials are causing a stir on the syringe-littered streets of the city's skid row, home to more than 4,000 drug users. Among those who deal first hand with these chaotic lives, there's a feeling that Canada is breaking new ground in how it treats the most intractable of drug addictions.

Similar studies in the Netherlands and Switzerland have shown positive results for addicts.

"What if you could say to an addict, 'For the next little while, you're not going to have to get your drugs from Al Capone. You can get your drugs from Marcus Welby,' " said Dr. Martin Schechter, the project's lead researcher.

"You don't have to worry about this afternoon and this evening. And therefore, you don't have to go and break in to cars or be a prostitute. You could actually come and talk to a counsellor or . . . get some skills training."

It's a landmark study in North America, one that turns its back on abstinence as the goal.

But not everyone is thrilled with the prospect of free heroin for hard-core addicts. And even supporters have expressed concern about the ethics of offering heroin to addicts for a prescribed period of time. Is it fair to yank away their heroin at the end of the year?

Addiction experts in Canada have already expressed concerns about the risk of overdoses.

Last December, two staff physicians at Toronto's Centre for Addiction and Mental Health wrote scathing critiques to the ethics adviser of the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, the agency funding the study.

Vancouver physician Stanley deVlaming is worried the trials are designed to garner positive results. In Vancouver, 88 subjects are to receive heroin, while 70 will receive methadone, the heroin substitute.

"How meaningful will it be to compare the group of 88 elated subjects that win the heroin lottery to the group of 70 who were also desperately trying to get the free heroin, but lost the luck of the draw?" asked Dr. deVlaming, who has treated addicts in the Downtown Eastside for more than a dozen years.

"The first group would likely be very motivated to give the researchers positive results, while the second disappointed and disgruntled group randomized to methadone would be much less motivated."

As expected, the plan has rankled U.S. drug officials, specifically the office of White House drug czar John Walters, where an official called it an unethical and "inhumane medical experiment."

Offering free heroin to addicts when there are proven treatments for addiction can't be justified if the addict's desire is to get off drugs, policy analyst David Murray said.

"What you're doing is making it easier to be a heroin addict," he said from Washington. "These people won't get that much better in the long run. They will still be heroin addicts."

Washington's disapproval was expected and hasn't deterred Ottawa from funding the study. The Canadian Institutes of Health Research has committed $8.1-million for the trials.

In Vancouver, the plan has the support of top politicians and law enforcers, including the mayor and the police chief.

Mayor Larry Campbell, who was once a coroner and drug cop, said the trials are needed because current treatments aren't working for hard-core addicts.

"The critical thing is to accept this as a medical condition," Mr. Campbell said.

"The side effects of this medical condition is that it forces you to . . . do things that you would never do, be it work as a sex-trade worker, be a B and E [break-and-enter] artist or a purse snatcher. So if I can mitigate that by putting you on heroin, imagine the changes you could have."

Right now, the trial is waiting for Health Canada to grant the necessary exemption form the Canadian Narcotics Act.

Ms. Woelke said she plans to tell her friends to apply. She would be content to get on the methadone program.

"Methadone, whatever," she said shrugging her shoulders. "I need something every day."

© Copyright 2005 Bell Globemedia Publishing Inc. All Rights Reserved.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com
 

Massagegirl

Banned
Mar 25, 2003
891
1
0
That is awesome news! They did this in Amsterdam and crime dropped 85% which is pretty fucking good IMHO. Except that it wasn't just a trial it was the whole city, free heroin 3 times a day but only just enough to keep them from jonsing. It wasn't a very nice place in '89 when I was there, but apparently now it is all cleaned up. Vancouver need this! :cool:
 

bruizewayne

New member
Mar 20, 2004
96
0
0
57
Massagegirl said:
That is awesome news! They did this in Amsterdam and crime dropped 85% which is pretty fucking good IMHO. Except that it wasn't just a trial it was the whole city, free heroin 3 times a day but only just enough to keep them from jonsing. It wasn't a very nice place in '89 when I was there, but apparently now it is all cleaned up. Vancouver need this! :cool:
here here!!
 

Very Veronica

Banned
Aug 2, 2004
1,770
7
0
Vancouver
I agree with gov't sanctioned dispensing of heroin however the drug problem in this city is with crack and meth.

I say pull the entire rug out from under the dealers and give affected neighbourhoods a break by making every drug available for free on an island somewhere...you wanna go party your brains out, go for it.
 

Paris

Guest
Oct 27, 2004
207
0
0
In The Country
What happens when this experiment is over? Back to the way it was????????

Maybe some hard-core therapy as to why these people want to blot their minds out on an hourly basis would be more reasonable.

Getting to the root of the problem seems to make more sense.

Paris/Caryn
 

static

Banned
Jul 2, 2004
208
0
0
How much must I steal till I get free pot?

I can see the pushers now, saying to little kids, c'mon, the first ones on me, and the second one is on the gov't, give it a try.
 

PinkLady

New member
May 21, 2003
62
0
0
Spectacular success!

I think the free clinic quickly used up their initial $2 million seed money, and have a projected $15 million budget. That's a lot of tax dollars. :p
 

hornydude

New member
Dec 22, 2004
646
0
0
Surrey
This is nuts!

Free treatment or free methadone would be sensible...

This idea however just shows how far we as Canadians have fallen in terms of common sense and morality.

Is there a difference between the junkies stealing from me and my tax dollars going to buy them "free" dope? Yes: The government acts as the middle man in the transaction with the latter approach.

If there were real punishments for the dealers and importers, then the problem would be solved. Period.

If the dealers risked forfeiting their freedom for life (or their life), and the judges had the balls to give the maximum sentence, it would change the cost-benefit relationship of the drug trade.

Once the supply drops off, then you can do an "outreach" to the addicts....only then.

Our society is on a very slippery slope because we lack the will collectively to confront such troubling problems in a direct and courageous way.

The only thing that encourages me is that perhaps one day at this rate the government will give free pussy to troubled pooners....perhaps I should lobby my MP!
 
How nice...

first free needles, now free heroin for the junkies. Meanwhile, my father, who worked hard all his life, has to pay for the needles to inject his insulin. Well, that really is special.
 

hornydude

New member
Dec 22, 2004
646
0
0
Surrey
Stupid people

Hey Dakota...we're stupid, you, me, and your dad.

We ought to know by now that this compassionate society rewards flakes and losers and above all the dishonest.

We should sink into the depths of addiction and live off the state. If that doesn't cut it we can supplement our income by stealing the odd car stereo or purse...it's tax free, too!

Look at the sympathy these shitheads get! It's truly hard to fathom.

Love the losers, punish the winners is the new Canadian ethic.
 

dbrw42

New member
Jan 26, 2003
418
0
0
dakota30 said:
first free needles, now free heroin for the junkies. Meanwhile, my father, who worked hard all his life, has to pay for the needles to inject his insulin. Well, that really is special.
Years back, I knew a diabetic who would take his needles into a needle exchange program to get them free.

But how fucked up is this country when law-abiding diabetics have to pay for their needles and my tax dollars are giving free needles to junkies?
 

Paris

Guest
Oct 27, 2004
207
0
0
In The Country
Really powerful point dakota30.

BTW nice name! My son is named that. Without the 30 of course.

I wish your dad all the best.

Paris/Caryn
 

Massagegirl

Banned
Mar 25, 2003
891
1
0
In my opinion,

Heroin itself is not very expensive, any more than codeine, but the fact that it's illegal drives the street price up. If they are giving it away free, or legalizing it, then the dealers are out of a job and have to move on, thereby reducing/illuminating the supply which causes the problems. Sometimes the ends justify the means.

To go at the drug problem like the US.'s "War on drugs" will not work either, anything illegal can always still be found for a price, you can never stamp it out. Look at how the U.S.'s war on prostitution is going? The jails are full, but new girls keep hitting the street, imagine that. Prohibition just got a lot of Canadians rich with smuggling it in, and people built their own distilleries.

Back to my point, some addicts have $1,000 a day habits, and the need to come up with it is what leads to the problem not the drug itself. If they don't get another hit they get very sick, as demonstrated in Trainspotting, so it is a need not a desire. It is a very good painkiller and used to be given to soldiers in WW1 to carry on them in case they were injured, so it can't be all bad, in moderation. It is just being abused like so many other things nowadays.

Even if the plan is to charge like regular medicine with a doctors prescription, (which they may in the future) at a reasonable cost, it is still better than nothing. As the article said, not worrying about their next high is what would allow them to focus on other things like counseling for what is causing them to do such a destructive thing, followed by a job and home so they can get off it eventually and not be a danger or a burden to society.

PS Needles should be classified by Pharmacre and/or be included with the insulin. Do people buy Insulin without needles? That's like selling tampons separately from the card board applicator! That needs to be changed...
 

HankQuinlan

I dont re Member
Sep 7, 2002
1,744
6
0
victoria
"fairness vs. harm reduction"

There are two principles involved in these posts. What is "fair" is open to interpretation; for example "It isn't 'fair' to give junkies drugs for free or to pay tax dollars to support their habit."

But it isn't "fair" to get your home or car constantly broken in to either, and it isn't "fair" to have to pay for cops and prosecutors to police drug laws.

Is it "fair" to prosecute drug users and send them to jail when there aren't close to enough drug treatment programs for those that do want them?

If it gives people better lives, and keeps my car windows from getting smashed by junkies that want the parking change (and the huge insurance costs involved), give them the drugs.

I'll trade "fair" for any system that works for everybody and reduces costs in the long run.
 

hornydude

New member
Dec 22, 2004
646
0
0
Surrey
Well, maybe....

Hank,point taken about practicality trumping "fairness", but that approach still smacks of surrender using the excuse of expediency to me...better to confront a problem the hard way, pay the short term costs, and then reap the greater long term rewards (less crime, less addicts with ruined lives, etc.) ongoing for the laong haul imho.

....or maybe I'm just an out of touch right wing nut ;)

(but maybe not because I would support my tax dollars going to buy needles for diabetics for the record!)
 

HankQuinlan

I dont re Member
Sep 7, 2002
1,744
6
0
victoria
hornydude said:
Hank,point taken about practicality trumping "fairness", but that approach still smacks of surrender using the excuse of expediency to me...better to confront a problem the hard way, pay the short term costs, and then reap the greater long term rewards (less crime, less addicts with ruined lives, etc.) ongoing for the laong haul imho.
Except....it doesn't work. The "War on Drugs" in the US has worked so well there that now there are no more drugs? They have to keep building more jails -- prescribing the drugs would be a lot cheaper (and ruin a lot fewer lives).
 

BC visitor

Member
May 2, 2004
235
0
16
Blue guy in red state
I disagree with this

I think this is a bad idea.

Unless you give free drugs to everyone who asks, you will still have a crime problem as some people will still be getting drugs from dealers on the street at high prices and have to steal to get the money.

And if you give drugs to everyone who asks for them, you are going to make more addicts.

This will increase the cost of the social safety net in Canada, and impact your economic output as your effective work force will be reduced. A double wammy.

So how does this help anything?

Also if you give drugs to addicts, you are just giving up on these people. They will never return to mainstream society. They will just move through life in a drug induced fog.

Is this level of social engineering what you want? I'm not saying the current war on drugs works, but is this an effective alternative?
 

static

Banned
Jul 2, 2004
208
0
0
Actually, if the gov't starts handing out drugs, the price will go down. The gov't sells pot to those with prescriptions, and the stuff on the street is cheaper than what they sell it for. Although, high grade pot is more readily available at the gov't sponsored pot store, or so it seems.
 
M

My Name is Mud

Harm reduction or harm enhancement?

While I agree whole heartedly that something needs to be done to help these people, giving them the substance that is killing them for free, just doesn't seem like the right answer in the long term. Comprehensive treatment programs seem to me to be a better path.

Whats next, free booze for alcoholics??? :confused: :confused:
 

LonelyGhost

Telefunkin
Apr 26, 2004
3,935
0
0
This is certainly not a B&W issue with B&W answers, however:

1. addicts typically have more problems than their addiction: 'mainstreaming' them is going to cost more than a lifetime of safe drugs and injection sites and all the counselling in the world is not going to help.

2. at what point do we draw the line on addictions? booze, cigs, sex, gambling, racing, violence??? and what is the cost of trying to control them?

3. there is a huge cost to the police and very little benefit from their efforts: we either need judges that uphold the laws we want them to or we simply change the laws so that police resources are not wasted on efforts that obtain no benefit.

The bottom line is that by decriminalizing the drugs and providing them gratis, we remove the incentive to commit crimes to obtain drugs. This will not stop crime, but it will remove a number of elements that the police no longer have to focus on to no avail.

Is 'treatment for all' the best solution? At what point can you treat someone who doesn't want to be treated?

I would rather see the police arrest more drunk drivers AND have judges impose proper sentencing than to have them worry about someone who is addicted to heroin probably because of a number of mental health problems that heroin helps them deal with in a perversely theraputically destructive manner.
 
Vancouver Escorts