I have no sympathy for BC's policies (and to be utterly honest, little for addiction as a disease: there seems to be no fruitful treatment through regarding addiction that way, and more from regarding it as a moral failing to be resisted) and read this news with horror. Then I briefly considered which would be better: my minor children receiving safer supply drugs or dying? Likely the former, but only if it was followed up with my preference for treating addiction as a moral choice, as otherwise one keeps on giving 'safe' drugs until they die.
I spent forty years as a practicing physician, and I never saw any benefit from treating addiction as a disease. Not once, not at all. It isn't a disease; it is a choice, and a poor one. AA gets this right, however you might criticise them. And I'm grateful I have no child who has felt the need to dull their sensibility through drugs.
To best reframe the “safer supply” policy, the question to ask is, “Would you want your loved ones to be provided with a “safer supply” of the drug they’re addicted to?”
If you love someone, you want them to receive treatment to get off the drug. Feeding their addiction is not compassion. It’s a cop out.
Here's a swell idea - instead of giving them fentanyl, how about buprenorphine, which is widely available in CA (and the US...even as a generic) and is approved to treat OUD (opioid use disorder). What in the actual F are they thinking up there? Are their brains frozen?
What is the rationale behind this? I'm asking legitimately. Are they hoping that legalization of the drug will curtail its usage? What is the endgame here other than an increase in overdoses and the creation of a populace unable to function because they are perpetually strung out?
I haven't told my wife yet - but I seriously want to move to Alberta or one of the red states in the US when we retire. I am so sick of this province with its policies of evil empathy.
I have no sympathy for BC's policies (and to be utterly honest, little for addiction as a disease: there seems to be no fruitful treatment through regarding addiction that way, and more from regarding it as a moral failing to be resisted) and read this news with horror. Then I briefly considered which would be better: my minor children receiving safer supply drugs or dying? Likely the former, but only if it was followed up with my preference for treating addiction as a moral choice, as otherwise one keeps on giving 'safe' drugs until they die.
I spent forty years as a practicing physician, and I never saw any benefit from treating addiction as a disease. Not once, not at all. It isn't a disease; it is a choice, and a poor one. AA gets this right, however you might criticise them. And I'm grateful I have no child who has felt the need to dull their sensibility through drugs.
It gets harder and harder to read this kind of stuff and not lose all hope that societies and governments will some day come to their senses.
Giving drugs to minors without informing parents....if it was my kids I would hunt down the person who gave them the drugs.
To best reframe the “safer supply” policy, the question to ask is, “Would you want your loved ones to be provided with a “safer supply” of the drug they’re addicted to?”
If you love someone, you want them to receive treatment to get off the drug. Feeding their addiction is not compassion. It’s a cop out.
Here's a swell idea - instead of giving them fentanyl, how about buprenorphine, which is widely available in CA (and the US...even as a generic) and is approved to treat OUD (opioid use disorder). What in the actual F are they thinking up there? Are their brains frozen?
What is the rationale behind this? I'm asking legitimately. Are they hoping that legalization of the drug will curtail its usage? What is the endgame here other than an increase in overdoses and the creation of a populace unable to function because they are perpetually strung out?
Elsewhere in the news - "Toronto Bans Tobogganing on 45 Hills, Puts Up Warning Signs."
It seems Canadians have a strange understanding of risk.
The Liberal party is destroying Canada.
I haven't told my wife yet - but I seriously want to move to Alberta or one of the red states in the US when we retire. I am so sick of this province with its policies of evil empathy.
If Canadians don't give a fuck about their government killing them with drugs or assisted suicide, why the fuck should I?
Fuck Canada.
Nate the aPretty Good is spot on. There seems to be no end of the perversion thought up by those in charge.
Nice little dystopia you've got there.