Canadian province experiments with decriminalising hard drugs

[Loren Pechtel]

Even with medically necessary, prescribed medications, sometimes an individual can become quickly addicted. That happened to a contractor who did some work for me. He had knee replacement and when he went off the meds after returning home, he became very, very ill because he was withdrawing. Now, I have neither his medical records nor a medical degree so I don't know if he was prescribed the appropriate dosage while he was hospitalized/in rehab for the knee. I do know that he's an extremely straight arrow and definitely not someone who abuses alcohol.

I doubt the problem was with the dose he was given, but with how they handled it when he came home. Habituation is going to happen if they're used long enough and for some people that's not very long. However, for most people you can step down the dose gradually and solve the problem. The DEA's crusade against opioids causes problems like this.

That said, sohy is right: my MIL was made to suffer without the use of opioids or opiates during her last year when her fragility necessitated her moving into a nursing home. She had become pretty salty in her later years, mostly because of increasing pain due to arthritis and osteoporosis. When she was in the rehab to help her try to regain function after a serious fracture, she was given morphine and was the same person I had known for more than 30 years. When she was moved to a nursing home, she tried very hard but the pain was not manageable nor would they give her anything but ibuprofen, which did nothing except leave her in agony while harming her organs.

When the choice is "addiction" or not being able to function it's quite clear to me what path should be taken. If the docs can't remove the source of the need then simply accept that they'll be using it for the rest of their life.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I think you have good points....but thinking of a family member with decades of substance abuse--drugs and alcohol--I cannot figure out how legalization would have helped him. I really wish that I did. I came the the realization several years ago that I had probably never seen him not high on something.

And the illegality protected him how??

For somebody like that the legality means a safer supply with less burden of acquiring it, we aren't suggesting that it will solve the problem--the objective is to minimize the harm for such people.

Unless we used that money to actually treat mental health issues. I don't see that happening, although there is desperate need.

You aren't presenting any scenario where legality would do harm.

So, that's why I'm hesitant. Legalization will make it more easily available and so more used.

That's not what we actually see happening. Legality does not increase use. Advertising does increase use. Prescriptions for addicts reduces the rate of new addictions.

I'm also a bit hesitant because for a lot of addicts, they seem drawn to the next bigger high. Which involves things like bath salts, more damaging stuff. Starting in your teens or twenties and using for a lot of years really increases the likelihood of increased usage and of more toxic stuff.

When it's a huge expense they'll look for the biggest bang for their buck. Look at alcohol--you don't see the winos driven to the top of the spectrum.

 

[Toni]

I think you have good points....but thinking of a family member with decades of substance abuse--drugs and alcohol--I cannot figure out how legalization would have helped him. I really wish that I did. I came the the realization several years ago that I had probably never seen him not high on something.

And the illegality protected him how??

For somebody like that the legality means a safer supply with less burden of acquiring it, we aren't suggesting that it will solve the problem--the objective is to minimize the harm for such people.

Unless we used that money to actually treat mental health issues. I don't see that happening, although there is desperate need.

You aren't presenting any scenario where legality would do harm.

So, that's why I'm hesitant. Legalization will make it more easily available and so more used.

That's not what we actually see happening. Legality does not increase use. Advertising does increase use. Prescriptions for addicts reduces the rate of new addictions.

I'm also a bit hesitant because for a lot of addicts, they seem drawn to the next bigger high. Which involves things like bath salts, more damaging stuff. Starting in your teens or twenties and using for a lot of years really increases the likelihood of increased usage and of more toxic stuff.

When it's a huge expense they'll look for the biggest bang for their buck. Look at alcohol--you don't see the winos driven to the top of the spectrum.

The issue is that I cannot see any scenario where legalization would have helped. It did not help the family I described with alcoholic addiction. And I know a lot more of those —including one that produced kids who were in rehab a few times before they could legally consume alcohol.

The issue with legalization that I fear is that more people will use because it’s legal and so therefore ok.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

...I came the the realization several years ago that I had probably never seen him not high on something. ... He claims he's not using but then he will mention the pain meds he's on for this or that: I do NOT disagree that he needs relief from pain and will throughout his life. ...

[rant]Effective pain relief and getting high do not have to go together. After my wife's surgery she asked for an alternative to the standard opioid due to side effects, so the surgeon prescribed darvocet. It turned out to be perfect. Took care of the pain, no high, and when she didn't need it any more she stopped, no withdrawal, no issues. A few years later the FDA banned darvocet.[/rant]

Just because it was perfect for her pain doesn't mean it was safe for her heart.

 

[Toni]

...I came the the realization several years ago that I had probably never seen him not high on something. ... He claims he's not using but then he will mention the pain meds he's on for this or that: I do NOT disagree that he needs relief from pain and will throughout his life. ...

[rant]Effective pain relief and getting high do not have to go together. After my wife's surgery she asked for an alternative to the standard opioid due to side effects, so the surgeon prescribed darvocet. It turned out to be perfect. Took care of the pain, no high, and when she didn't need it any more she stopped, no withdrawal, no issues. A few years later the FDA banned darvocet.[/rant]

Just because it was perfect for her pain doesn't mean it was safe for her heart.

OxyContin taken for pain relief does not cause a high. It’s a drug that can make you sleepy and out of it. It is not a euphoric.

If you know your body does not do well with opiates you should ask for a different kind of pain relief and take as little as possible for as short a time as possible. Anyone can become addicted in a very short period of time, even taking any narcotic as directed.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

...I came the the realization several years ago that I had probably never seen him not high on something. ... He claims he's not using but then he will mention the pain meds he's on for this or that: I do NOT disagree that he needs relief from pain and will throughout his life. ...

[rant]Effective pain relief and getting high do not have to go together. After my wife's surgery she asked for an alternative to the standard opioid due to side effects, so the surgeon prescribed darvocet. It turned out to be perfect. Took care of the pain, no high, and when she didn't need it any more she stopped, no withdrawal, no issues. A few years later the FDA banned darvocet.[/rant]

Just because it was perfect for her pain doesn't mean it was safe for her heart.

OxyContin taken for pain relief does not cause a high. It’s a drug that can make you sleepy and out of it. It is not a euphoric.

If you know your body does not do well with opiates you should ask for a different kind of pain relief and take as little as possible for as short a time as possible. Anyone can become addicted in a very short period of time, even taking any narcotic as directed.

When you have kidney stones there's not really much else. What I was saying about the heart was Darvocet--it was pulled because it sometimes caused heart problems.

 

[Toni]

...I came the the realization several years ago that I had probably never seen him not high on something. ... He claims he's not using but then he will mention the pain meds he's on for this or that: I do NOT disagree that he needs relief from pain and will throughout his life. ...

[rant]Effective pain relief and getting high do not have to go together. After my wife's surgery she asked for an alternative to the standard opioid due to side effects, so the surgeon prescribed darvocet. It turned out to be perfect. Took care of the pain, no high, and when she didn't need it any more she stopped, no withdrawal, no issues. A few years later the FDA banned darvocet.[/rant]

Just because it was perfect for her pain doesn't mean it was safe for her heart.

OxyContin taken for pain relief does not cause a high. It’s a drug that can make you sleepy and out of it. It is not a euphoric.

If you know your body does not do well with opiates you should ask for a different kind of pain relief and take as little as possible for as short a time as possible. Anyone can become addicted in a very short period of time, even taking any narcotic as directed.

When you have kidney stones there's not really much else. What I was saying about the heart was Darvocet--it was pulled because it sometimes caused heart problems.

I’ve never had kidney stones ( much gratitude) —just a couple of kidney infections. No pain meds offered—just antibiotics which took care of things.

Kidney stones sound like an e turkey different level, tho. Yikes.

I remember Darvocet for family members who had oral surgeries…Didn’t know that it had been pulled.

 

[TSwizzle]

What could possibly go wrong, eh?

The numbers are horrifying, but drug overdose death statistics can't fully convey the crisis ravaging America, so DailyMail.com has documented the suffering in some of the worst-affected communities. There were 107,622 deaths from drug overdoses in the US in 2021, an increase of nearly 15 percent from the year prior, and shocking national trends show few signs of the crisis abating. Just two milligrams of fentanyl - the amount that fits on the top of a pencil tip - is deadly. Despite successful nationwide stings to bust dealers, authorities admit there's no end in sight for the epidemic. The animal sedative Xylazine - known as 'tranq' - is now exacerbating the crisis. It's often combined with fentanyl and its horrific effects cause visceral 'flesh-eating' abscesses and addicts to zonk out as they lose feeling in their muscles. These harrowing pictures lay bare the devastation across the country - as 'zombied' fentanyl and tranq users collapse on needle-littered streets stretching from Washington to Massachusetts, Louisiana to Philadelphia.
In 2021, courts in Seattle scrapped a law making hard-drug possession - including cocaine, meth, and heroin - a felony. Now, the crime is a misdemeanor - and social commentators believe this is a huge reason for Seattle's current issues.

Daily Mail

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

What could possibly go wrong, eh?

The numbers are horrifying, but drug overdose death statistics can't fully convey the crisis ravaging America, so DailyMail.com has documented the suffering in some of the worst-affected communities. There were 107,622 deaths from drug overdoses in the US in 2021, an increase of nearly 15 percent from the year prior, and shocking national trends show few signs of the crisis abating. Just two milligrams of fentanyl - the amount that fits on the top of a pencil tip - is deadly. Despite successful nationwide stings to bust dealers, authorities admit there's no end in sight for the epidemic. The animal sedative Xylazine - known as 'tranq' - is now exacerbating the crisis. It's often combined with fentanyl and its horrific effects cause visceral 'flesh-eating' abscesses and addicts to zonk out as they lose feeling in their muscles. These harrowing pictures lay bare the devastation across the country - as 'zombied' fentanyl and tranq users collapse on needle-littered streets stretching from Washington to Massachusetts, Louisiana to Philadelphia.
In 2021, courts in Seattle scrapped a law making hard-drug possession - including cocaine, meth, and heroin - a felony. Now, the crime is a misdemeanor - and social commentators believe this is a huge reason for Seattle's current issues.

Daily Mail

Your post suffers from all sorts of deficiencies. Make it legal?! Over 100,000 died in America when it was illegal! As if that is making an argument in your favor.

Too many people are dying from overdoses!

Maybe we need to change how we address this issue.

What could possibly go wrong?

But didn't you just say too many are already dying?

Oh, I guess being inconsistent and nonsensical just drives you all "woke".

 

[Elixir]

When it comes to drugs, sex or virtually anything else deemed "fun" by any significant number of people, we can ALWAYS rely on those freedumb-lubbin' Republitards to mitigate the harms done by such things, by restricting behaviors via regressive laws.
Their "solution" is always "lock 'em up!", which is why we have such an embarrassingly outsized population of incarcerated people. And the RW idiots never seem to notice that the harm and expense caused by their solution is far, far greater than that done by the original "problem".

 

[Loren Pechtel]

What could possibly go wrong, eh?

The numbers are horrifying, but drug overdose death statistics can't fully convey the crisis ravaging America, so DailyMail.com has documented the suffering in some of the worst-affected communities. There were 107,622 deaths from drug overdoses in the US in 2021, an increase of nearly 15 percent from the year prior, and shocking national trends show few signs of the crisis abating. Just two milligrams of fentanyl - the amount that fits on the top of a pencil tip - is deadly. Despite successful nationwide stings to bust dealers, authorities admit there's no end in sight for the epidemic. The animal sedative Xylazine - known as 'tranq' - is now exacerbating the crisis. It's often combined with fentanyl and its horrific effects cause visceral 'flesh-eating' abscesses and addicts to zonk out as they lose feeling in their muscles. These harrowing pictures lay bare the devastation across the country - as 'zombied' fentanyl and tranq users collapse on needle-littered streets stretching from Washington to Massachusetts, Louisiana to Philadelphia.
In 2021, courts in Seattle scrapped a law making hard-drug possession - including cocaine, meth, and heroin - a felony. Now, the crime is a misdemeanor - and social commentators believe this is a huge reason for Seattle's current issues.

Daily Mail

Foot, meet bullet.

You're showing drug war deaths, not drug deaths. (Although avoiding these needs full legalization, not merely decriminalization of possession.)

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Too many people are dying from overdoses!

Maybe we need to change how we address this issue.

Had a thought here--perhaps a very different approach: Heavy opioids (anything that are schedule II) in quantities greater than one dose are only legal if accompanied by a dose of Narcan.

 

[Jarhyn]

I think you have good points....but thinking of a family member with decades of substance abuse--drugs and alcohol--I cannot figure out how legalization would have helped him. I really wish that I did. I came the the realization several years ago that I had probably never seen him not high on something. He was really good at presenting himself well. It is only in retrospect that I realize that he was probably altered that time.... Now: his brain is not great. And his emotional development stopped at about age 15 or so. He still makes important decisions like a 15 year old boy in the throes of adolescence. And yes, the volatility is there. He claims he's not using but then he will mention the pain meds he's on for this or that: I do NOT disagree that he needs relief from pain and will throughout his life. He's always managed to work so generally, his habit was covered. However, there were times when he did steal from family members and doubtless told himself that they could afford to lose whatever it was that he took. This was not actually true. Would it have been better for him if his drugs of choice (and it changed over time, as is often the case) had been legal? Maybe. It would not have helped him be sober enough to be a decent human being, to not be abusive to those around him, to be reliable, to parent. All of those things have caused a great deal of heartache in the family. Not to mention lots of money.

I'm also thinking of a young adult who grew up spending a lot of time in my home. Their parents abused alcohol and one also had a gambling addiction. The parents were two of the most talented people I knew--extremely artistic and the father was also a very gifted craftsman. But the alcohol abuse dramatically affected their ability to perform on jobs. There was tremendous economic insecurity, and that was with grandparents helping out substantially. As for the kid who spent so much time at my house: they're struggling a bit with their own alcohol abuse and also caught in a custody battle and the serious health issues of their father (stage 4 cancer...). I don't know much about the dad's family but I know that the mother was raised in a very middle class and very loving and supportive family. All of her siblings have struggled with some degree of substance abuse except one, and I believe that's why that sister divorced her ex.

I've mentioned before that I live in a small town. The local newspaper will publish if the fire department comes to your house for a cooking fire generating smoke. So, it's pretty easy to see why people in this town are arrested. Almost 100%, either drugs or alcohol are involved. Occasionally both. My son is a public defender, serving mostly residents in a county that is even more rural than mine. Almost every single one of his cases involves drugs. He's for legalization. We've talked about why the current generation of young 20 somethings would ever touch the stuff, seeing how it destroyed their parents and maybe grandparents. His opinion is that they do it because in their experience, that's just how you coped with bad stuff: pain, job loss, break ups, fights, etc. Of course that's all a very vicious cycle as using drugs to cope with emotional needs causes more pain, job loss, break ups, fights, all kinds of instability. Rinse/repeat. I don't see how legalization would stop that or even slow it down.

Unless we used that money to actually treat mental health issues. I don't see that happening, although there is desperate need.

So, that's why I'm hesitant. Legalization will make it more easily available and so more used.

I'm also a bit hesitant because for a lot of addicts, they seem drawn to the next bigger high. Which involves things like bath salts, more damaging stuff. Starting in your teens or twenties and using for a lot of years really increases the likelihood of increased usage and of more toxic stuff.

I think that pain management is one issue. The other issue is that it is my strong belief that many people abuse various substances because of untreated mental health issues and also because of despair.

Another lesson that you eventually learn while playing my stupid little game: not everyone can be helped.

Sometimes you have to realize that your parent or your child or your friend is a junkie and is sliding and will continue to do so, and that it isn't the drugs, but rather them.

You have indicated a person who has issues at prioritization: they prioritize how they feel, when how they want to feel is "like an abusive asshole".

You could possibly address why they want to feel like an abusive asshole (doesn't feel anything over being an abusive ass). Normally people are pretty averse about wanting to become that, to the point where people who are angry drunks but NOT assholes decide to not drink, especially around people they could become angry with.

Maybe start with identifying that some people really are not cut out to be parents and some things people should ask for a divorce over, call CPS over, tell a teacher about, and have that person removed to a place where there may be people who can help them fix their priorities or just let their priorities run their course (let them drug themselves to death).

In some ways I prefer becoming accepting of this bad end. It is the least violent of the outcomes, even if people we love will fall into the trap of it and make us sad for having done so.

The correct course of action when there is a trap is generally to either avoid it entirely or spring it strategically and accept the consequences.

Almost everyone will have a story of someone they lost to drugs, but they didn't lose that person to drugs, they lost that person to society's inability to give them something better.

 

[Jarhyn]

Too many people are dying from overdoses!

Maybe we need to change how we address this issue.

Had a thought here--perhaps a very different approach: Heavy opioids (anything that are schedule II) in quantities greater than one dose are only legal if accompanied by a dose of Narcan.

Or only following overdose counseling and end of life consent, following several weeks, months, or years in a concerted rehab attempt...

I am not above letting people kill themselves.

There are people I would cheer killing themselves even if I had to clean up the mess.

I wouldn't cheer these people. They at least deserve to be mourned, but we need to not hold onto them so tightly nor pass laws that make their lives worse.

 

[Jarhyn]

Too many people are dying from overdoses!

Maybe we need to change how we address this issue.

Had a thought here--perhaps a very different approach: Heavy opioids (anything that are schedule II) in quantities greater than one dose are only legal if accompanied by a dose of Narcan.

And respond by supplying them with narcan.

 

[Toni]

Too many people are dying from overdoses!

Maybe we need to change how we address this issue.

Had a thought here--perhaps a very different approach: Heavy opioids (anything that are schedule II) in quantities greater than one dose are only legal if accompanied by a dose of Narcan.

And respond by supplying them with narcan.

I’m a little ignorant of such issues but can someone who is overdosing recognize that they are in trouble and self administer Narcan? I assumed they’d be too sick to recognize their danger or to self administer.

I do know that police officers are not thrilled with having to act as EMTs re: overdose cases as often as they do.

 

[Jarhyn]

Too many people are dying from overdoses!

Maybe we need to change how we address this issue.

Had a thought here--perhaps a very different approach: Heavy opioids (anything that are schedule II) in quantities greater than one dose are only legal if accompanied by a dose of Narcan.

And respond by supplying them with narcan.

I’m a little ignorant of such issues but can someone who is overdosing recognize that they are in trouble and self administer Narcan? I assumed they’d be too sick to recognize their danger or to self administer.

I do know that police officers are not thrilled with having to act as EMTs re: overdose cases as often as they do.

And to me this echoes a different response than the kind that is always attempted and always fails: maybe we should try giving them monitored spaces, make the opium dens where people go to die comfortable and safe and with counseling and exit services, and... Maybe not even charge money?

Support it through taxes.

Just don't mix things up, this is a pipeline of suicide prevention built around a recognized path to suicide, for what all that an opium den is. Or a meth spiral, or whatever they call it.

I do not think opioids are a thing people should have to pay for, because some people need them... And some people really just want to die.

 

[southernhybrid]

Has anyone mentioned that illegal opiates are often tainted with fentanyl? This is why there have been so many drug related deaths in the last few years, especially among young people. If these drugs were legal or at least decriminalized, they would be much safer. Again, many young people experiment with drugs but then stop using them once they mature a bit. Making drugs legal would make them safer, regardless if a small percentage of people abused them.

When Portugal decriminalized drugs, there was no evidence that drug usage increased. ETOH is legal but most people drink in moderation or don't drink at all. I've never drank much and I haven't had as much as a glass of wine in about 4 or 5 years. We worry too much about abuse of these substances, when abuse is limited to a small percentage of people. Perhaps we should put more time studying why it is that some people abuse drugs. I imagine that at least some of them are trying to escape miserable lives. Offer them help or at least make the drugs they use safer by decriminalizing or legalizing them.

Other than moralizing drug usage, I really don't understand the objections to decriminalizing recreational drugs. Of course they should be regulated. That would make them safer. I've read that even when opiates were being almost handed out like candy by some physicians, less than 6% of people developed an addiction to these drugs. Why should the 94% who need these drugs suffer because 6% have problems using these drugs. I am so thankful that I have a physician who prescribes opiates for my pain. I'm just concerned about building up too much of a tolerance and then not having an effective pain reliever. I've said it before. NSAIDS are far more dangerous for older adults compared to narcotics.

Speaking of Darvocet or Darvon, which is actually a narcotic, similar but not as strong as methadone. I also used it for several years for arthritis back in my early 50s. I was devastated when it was taken off of the market and I was given tramadol. Tramadol isn't actually a narcotic although it has some narcotic like actions. That drug gave me seizures and it wasn't nearly as effective for my pain management. It was the neurologist who knew that this drug caused seizures in a small percentage of people. He's the one who told me that tramadol works on the brain in a weird way, differently from pure narcotics. I regret ever taking that drug since I now have to take an anticonvulsant, which like all drugs in that category of drugs, has many risk factors related to it. Still, it's better than risking more seizures, which are sometimes fatal.

 

[Elixir]

Of course they should be regulated. That would make them safer.

I agree - sort of. I think ”regulated” drugs should be readily available, and cheap enough to kill the black market for adulterated product. Not ”regulated” in the sense of controlled availability, just in the sense of quality control.

 

[Jarhyn]

Of course they should be regulated. That would make them safer.

I agree - sort of. I think ”regulated” drugs should be readily available, and cheap enough to kill the black market for adulterated product. Not ”regulated” in the sense of controlled availability, just in the sense of quality control.

I would say some should be held for free behind an open doorway, free to cross out, but crossing in means consent to acknowledge that being there is self harm unto suicide, and that they are there to help you leave, and anyone talking on staff encouraging staying (silence is acceptable), be immediately terminated and investigated for crimes.

I think that such a system can be built that makes use of the service almost as wide as the population of users of such drugs, and catch and direct a maximum amount out through their own consent back into society.

Part of being ethical, is allowing people to choose to die.

This would in fact mesh well with my idea that we should educate everyone early and often. It gives people reasons not to die but to live.