This is the eve of the BC election. I won’t mince words here. Two of the three political parties running to lead this province have based at least one of their platforms on completely outdated misinformation. Of course I’m talking about addressing substance use health.
The current party platforms have taken advantage of the general public’s lack of knowledge regarding substance use health issues (aka addiction). Their platforms include forcing substance use treatment, proven to be only partly effective, on people. In one party’s case, they want to eliminate life saving harm reduction measures that have proven effective in saving lives in an era where prohibited substances are so contaminated and toxic, they are taking 6-7 lives per day.
It says a lot about our society and culture when the only party that has a viable (and now promising if not proven) effective solution to the overdose/opioid/toxic drug death crisis can only, at best, gain a seat or two in this election.
It says a lot about our society and culture when two people who, after thorough transparency and oversight, were arrested after conducting a statistically significant study regarding a safer supply distribution. Through a compassion club model, the study showed that a safer supply actually saves lives, reduces crime and reduces health care.
www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S095539592400015X
It says a lot about our society when we want to eliminate facilities like safe consumption sites that have proven to improve overall life expectancy outcomes
https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1002964
It says a lot about our society when we react to one Nanaimo politician’s judgment on safe and clean paraphernalia distribution when those supplies have proven over decades that they have significantly reduced the spread of HIV and Hep C as well as other sexually transmitted diseases. Those supplies are now unavailable. Well done idiot! Truly an abstain or die supporter.
Here is my plea. Having worked, as a counsellor and treatment provider and now volunteering as advocate for a total of over 37 years now, I implore people to learn all they can about substance use health and the most effective and up to date approaches.
Certain recovery group organizations would have you believe there is only one way to recover. This is simply not true. My personal counselling experience and my personal journey with substance use alongside multiple programs and support groups, that exist in society, proves this absolutely wrong. Those particular organizations can work for some people, but not enough; and leaves too many in harm’s way. Unfortunately, it appears that politicians are relying only on these limited narrow organizations to inform them on policy.
The policy they are proposing takes us backwards to a system that I began my career in over 35 years ago. My colleagues and I, and millions of others worked hard and still work tirelessly, (and now thanklessly), on creating strategies that save lives and minimizes harm to people who use substances: just so they can access help when they need it, without risk of grievous harm and death. The current anti harm reduction movement based in fear mongering, true ignorance and misinterpretation has kicked the wind out of our sails so to speak. We are extremely discouraged and in awe and horror at the lack of knowledge and thus lack of compassion that has driven this movement.
It takes us backwards to a time that emphasizes that treating addiction through a “just say no” mindset takes precedence over saving lives. It takes us back to a time when addiction was treated as a moral “shortcoming” and not the health and social issue that it is. We’ve done this and it failed miserably. This is the type of policy that has brought us to where we are now; Where we need massive triage based harm reduction strategies to stem the tide of death caused by the most toxic supply of illegal substances ever, even more than the toxic supply of alcohol during its prohibition.
Harm reduction is not the cause of our current situation. Our failed economy, housing policies, treatment policies, and most of all, our criminal justice system is at the root of the troubles we see today. These failures have made Harm reduction necessary; like the MASH unit in a war on people who use substances. No we are not treating addiction at this level, we are treating the wounds that are incurred, quite frankly, more by the system we have in place than the drugs themselves.
And now, we want to take that away? Do we stop treating and trying to prevent those wounds? That’s like saying we’ll take away the MASH units while an ongoing seemingly unstoppable war is raging. Somehow we seem unwilling to stop this war for some reason. Get shot? You die, you asked for it. We’ve been brainwashed into thinking this war is necessary and good. Good for who I wonder. In the meantime, we save lives.
So whoever gets elected needs to be held accountable. They need to be properly educated to produce policy that encompasses a whole sphere of programs and strategies that will not only treat those struggling with addiction, but also:
* provide accurate and preventative and preparative information, including harm reduction principles and strategies to youth and the general public;
* To recognize that there are a significant number of people dying who would not even fall under a diagnosis of substance use disorder and qualify for treatment, yet would benefit from harm reduction principles and strategies.
* will provide life saving harm reduction strategies such as supervised consumption sites, clean supplies, and safer supply to offset wait times for treatment, and the mostly inevitable return to using that occurs after the first couple of admissions to a treatment program;
* To provide complete information and resources to those employed, especially in high risk industries such as trades, restaurant and sales.
* To provide an accessible array of current evidence based treatment programs for those who voluntarily want and need it before clogging the system with legally mandated forced treatment candidates.
* to provide appropriate contingency plans and solid resources for a “slip” during treatment or while living in a recovery house (early discharge = death);
* to replace criminality with health care such as opiate agonist therapies, regulated safer supply and compassion club resources for a more accessible safer supply;
* social welfare care such as affordable housing, vocational resources and opportunities.
We need to learn this and then hold politicians’ feet to the fire on this or more will die.
Abstain or die is not an answer, it is manslaughter.
