NationStates Jolt Archive

http://society.guardian.co.uk/drugsandalcohol/story/0,,2059067,00.html

Any thoughts on this, should she and, if not, what are the alternatives?

Ah the wonder that is prohibition. :rolleyes:

Ah the wonder that is prohibition. :rolleyes:

I can't really see an easy solution to this, I'm all for liberty but to the extent of legalising heroin? The 2 main problems are:

1. It's so very addictive
2. It incapacitates you for a long period of time

So I can see cigarettes being allowed because you can at least be productive, therefore allowing you to earn the money to buy cigarettes. Marijuana, well you can still get stuff done while high. LSD or Ecstasy aren't really physically addictive.

Yet the heroin addict is rarely rich enough to buy through ordinary means, therefore leading to a negative effect on society as a whole, it affects other people. They're also totally useless in terms of doing anything to increase their wealth until cold turkey makes them desperate enough to find money.

I can't see an easy solution to her dilemma either, even when he's forced to go clean, as soon as those restrictions relax he's back on.

Ah the wonder that is prohibition. :rolleyes:

Considering the addictive qualities of heroin, as well as its applications in behavioral modification, I find it quite difficult to argue for legalized heroin.

Additionally, considering the costs of heroin, even if it were legalized (which would probably shoot up anyway as legit businesses monopolize the market), most addicts would still end up committing crimes to feed their habit.

Possibly workable, but heinous, methods involve terminating market share profitability. Immediate execution without possibility of pardon for all addicts and dealers upon confirmation combined with confiscation of all assets and effective policing rather than current "catch and release" policies.

Harsh punishment only works when there is strong fear of not being able to escape it.

http://society.guardian.co.uk/drugsandalcohol/story/0,,2059067,00.html

Any thoughts on this, should she and, if not, what are the alternatives?

Wow. Reading this and then coming to the point where she said this has been going for 10 years (10 years!) I thought they had to be crazy to keep up this charade, they should just...yeah, what? Throw him out? Stop supplying? Of course. But he didn't succeed to stop using under the best circumstances, they know he certainly won't stop using under worse ones. So basically screaming at them to wake up and see that he's not going to change the way things are going just means telling them to dump their son and leave him to very probably die sooner rather than later.

That's not exactly a choice for a parent, is it?

I have no idea what they should do. Obviously. If I had after reading a short article, they'd have already thought of it 10 years ago.

http://society.guardian.co.uk/drugsandalcohol/story/0,,2059067,00.html

Any thoughts on this, should she and, if not, what are the alternatives?

They're not going to "wean him off it".

Studies show that for periods of up to six months, some treatments show the promise of keeping a person off of heroin - for up to 60 or 70 percent of those treated.

Long term studies, as well as several reviews of long term studies, show that no treatment works for much longer than that. Regardless of treatment, 90 to 95 percent of heroin users will relapse after that.

It would be kinder to spike his heroin with phenol and be done with it.

Umm lest see.

It does seem silly to pick and choose which recreational drugs we make leagal or not. Ethier they all are, or none of them are, any other way is hypocritical.

Overcoming any addiction is a case of doing it by your self. Nobody can over come an addiction for you. 10 years? I would administer some 'tough love' and would have kicked him out after 5.

Love even parental love is a two way street. I would have no problems in getting my children aressted and even imprisoned if they performed actions, of their won free will, to deserve such a thing. How many people wide hide thier child from the police if he was a murderer, pedophile, bank robber or rapeist?

They're not going to "wean him off it".

Studies show that for periods of up to six months, some treatments show the promise of keeping a person off of heroin - for up to 60 or 70 percent of those treated.

Long term studies, as well as several reviews of long term studies, show that no treatment works for much longer than that. Regardless of treatment, 90 to 95 percent of heroin users will relapse after that.

It would be kinder to spike his heroin with phenol and be done with it.

The mother is in denial. Not to mention a tad overprotective. Read what she did when she realized her son was arrested. She removed the evidence.

If I was dumb enough to commit a crime and get caught, my parents certainly wouldn't have protected me regardless of how young I was.

http://society.guardian.co.uk/drugsa...059067,00.html

Any thoughts on this, should she and, if not, what are the alternatives?

The woman is a fool. She believed her son when he told her "a reliable source of heroin would enable him to get his life together, and we could wean him off it."

She shouldn't be supporting him. She seemingly rejects "tough love" without the understanding that sometimes you have to let go of someone and let them fall splat on their face and take the consequences.

Also, by indulging him in the addiction, she's destroying her family, as demonstrated by her own admissions regarding her husband and other son.

Finally, she's endangering herself and others in multiple ways. She says herself he's dangerous ("he's angry, explosive, unpredictable and intimidating" as well as the lies and thefts).

Current drug prohibitions are inconsitant, illogical, racist, and fundamentaly immoral. However, that does not make this woman's behaviour acceptable.

Heroin neds to be stopped. I have had personal experience with what this drug can do to people. People eventually become obsessed with it, they value it more than anything else and are willing to stoop to anything just for a few minutes of bliss. It is an evil substance.

Heroin neds to be stopped. I have had personal experience with what this drug can do to people. People eventually become obsessed with it, they value it more than anything else and are willing to stoop to anything just for a few minutes of bliss. It is an evil substance.

Fixed version showing the faults in that argument:
Love neds to be stopped. I have had personal experience with what this "drug" can do to people. People eventually become obsessed with it, they value it more than anything else and are willing to stoop to anything just for a few minutes of bliss. It is evil.

Fixed version showing the faults in that argument:

Touche, Cecil.
Having never felt love, I wouldn't know, but still, a well-made point.

I don't think parents smacking their children is a good idea

I don't think parents smacking their children is a good idea

Laaadies and genteeelmen, I give you todays funniest joke on tha 'net!:D

I don't think parents smacking their children is a good idea

Laaadies and genteeelmen, I give you todays funniest joke on tha 'net!:D

I think the 2 points, that the mother is in denial and that's she's a fool, are perhaps the areas to look at. I think many parents would simply have given up on this child.

I wonder if she's looking at this as a heroin problem, possibly fears that she did not watch out for it and is therefore to blame in some way. That might explain the extraordinary lengths she is going to because in her heart she feels that 'it's not his fault', that, in fact, it's her fault.

She should see it as a mental problem and therefore have him sent to an institute. It might, to some degree, change his position as well, that the stigma of being mentally ill, as opposed to a certain cachet in being a heroin addict, would alter his view, if only slightly. To some extent, the focus on the heroin should be shifted.

Failing that, I can understand her position, she simply cannot let him die, others might, she cannot.

Sometimes I'm very glad I'm not female - sad to say but true. I'm not saying men are heartless but that the mother-child bond places females in such heartbreaking situations.

Mentally ill?

Can we lock up alcoholics too? How about caffeine junkies? All of these substances cause physical alterations to the brain, that over time can become permanent.

Mentally ill?

Can we lock up alcoholics too? How about caffeine junkies? All of these substances cause physical alterations to the brain, that over time can become permanent.

I think we've pointed out how heroin differs from these, alcoholics I can accept to some point but caffeine? Alcoholics that have reached the point where they are a danger to society are treated where possible.

What is wrong with treating people with severe addictions?

And yes, is it not a mental illness?

EDIT: 'Lock up' is a bit harsh, not proposing we leave him in a cell to waste away, proposing treatment as viewed from a mental perspective resulting in drug abuse as opposed to merely drug addiction

I think we've pointed out how heroin differs from these, alcoholics I can accept to some point but caffeine? Alcoholics that have reached the point where they are a danger to society are treated where possible.

What is wrong with treating people with severe addictions?

And yes, is it not a mental illness?

Yes, caffeine. I'm not just talking coffee...I'm also referring to No-Doze pills, high-caffeine sodas and teas etc. Caffeine stimulates the central nervous system, and creates dependency.

As for alcohol...if you are referring to court-mandated detox programs, well that's one thing. But the majority of alcoholics are not forced into such programs, even when the addiction is killing them...or causes their children to be born FASD.

Alcohol is legally available. Few people need to commit crime to buy it on the street. But prohibitions shows us that criminalisation of alcohol absolutely leads to higher crime rates.

So if we are going to decide to lock up only those addicts who are 'a danger to society', what criteria shall we use? Criminality? With no thought to how the criminalisation of their drug impacts that? Or are we going to use some other yardstick?

Yes, caffeine. I'm not just talking coffee...I'm also referring to No-Doze pills, high-caffeine sodas and teas etc. Caffeine stimulates the central nervous system, and creates dependency.

As for alcohol...if you are referring to court-mandated detox programs, well that's one thing. But the majority of alcoholics are not forced into such programs, even when the addiction is killing them...or causes their children to be born FASD.

Alcohol is legally available. Few people need to commit crime to buy it on the street. But prohibitions shows us that criminalisation of alcohol absolutely leads to higher crime rates.

So if we are going to decide to lock up only those addicts who are 'a danger to society', what criteria shall we use? Criminality? With no thought to how the criminalisation of their drug impacts that? Or are we going to use some other yardstick?

Amm...I'm only talking about the particular situation in the article.

EDIT: Certainly not proposing any state-sponsored 'solution' to heroin in general, just this particular case, as someone else has pointed out, she runs the risk of being jailed herself.

Yes, caffeine. I'm not just talking coffee...I'm also referring to No-Doze pills, high-caffeine sodas and teas etc. Caffeine stimulates the central nervous system, and creates dependency.

As for alcohol...if you are referring to court-mandated detox programs, well that's one thing. But the majority of alcoholics are not forced into such programs, even when the addiction is killing them...or causes their children to be born FASD.

Alcohol is legally available. Few people need to commit crime to buy it on the street. But prohibitions shows us that criminalisation of alcohol absolutely leads to higher crime rates.

So if we are going to decide to lock up only those addicts who are 'a danger to society', what criteria shall we use? Criminality? With no thought to how the criminalisation of their drug impacts that? Or are we going to use some other yardstick?


Ummm nowhere have I seen anybody say we should lock up heroin addicts?