Vancouver Has Ballz

The Dutch parliament (Tweede Kamer) has voted to expand the country's free heroin program after hearing of the overwhelmingly positive results of a two-year pilot program, the Rotterdam newspaper de Volksrant reported March 5. The pilot program is currently providing free heroin to some 300 users, who must be Dutch nationals and at least 25 years of age. The program, started in March 2002, came about as the Ministries of Public Health, Social Affairs, and Justice recognized that despite their best efforts to stop and reduce heroin use, the county had anywhere from one to two thousand hardcore heroin addicts who could not or would not kick the habit. By this summer, a thousand Dutch users could be in the program, parliament members told the newspaper.

Government officials had supported the original pilot project in part because of anticipated economic and social benefits. And they are seeing them. Public Health Minister Borst told de Volksrant that the free heroin program costs around 15,000 euro per patient annually, a far cry less than the costs of prison and petty crime associated with black market drug use.

The policy also conserves law enforcement resources, and keeps heroin users in touch with mainstream society. "All the statistics point to the fact that free heroin is the best policy," Dr. Wim Van den Brink, director of the Dutch agency to treat heroin addicts (CCBH), told the newspaper. After one year in the program, according to Van den Brink, all participants had better mental and physical health, while the number of days addicts engaged in crime to "score" heroin dropped from 14 to two per month.

The announcement that the pilot program would be not only continued but expanded is remarkable coming from a Dutch government controlled by the conservative Christian Democrats (Christen Democratisch Appel or CDA). In addition to earning its rightist stripes by appealing to anti-immigrant sentiments, and sending Dutch troops to Afghanistan and supporting the US occupation of Iraq in the face of mass public opposition, the CDA has proven no friend of relaxing drug laws.

In January 2002, as reported by the newspaper Algemeen Dagblad, before they gained power, the CDA sponsored and passed a bill to prohibit the "testing" of MDMA (ecstasy) pills at raves for impurities or adulterants. For about 10 years local city governments turned a blind eye and allowed such tests at youth centers and private raves as a harm reduction measure, said the Algemeen Dagblad. Despite the obvious public health benefits, the CDA, joined with other Christian and right-wing parties banned the practice. Further, in May 2002 (The Week Online, Issue #238, May 24, 2002), the CDA floated a trial balloon about closing down hash bars and has continued to make similar noises ever since. Their ideological preferences notwithstanding, even CDA leaders, unlike their American counterparts in the US Congress or the Bush Administration, cannot challenge statistics showing the success of free heroin.

Dutch social scientist and drug expert Peter Cohen has famously noted that drug policy has little to do with drug use levels. A comparison of Dutch and US heroin use rates appears to support his point. According to the National Institutes on Drug Abuse (NIDA), the lifetime use rate was 0.85 in the harshly prohibitionist US, while Cohen and other researchers have found lifetime use rates in the more tolerant Netherlands about half the US rate, 0.4%

Just another Band Aid that society in general places on the open wounds of Heroin/Meth or any other "Drug" Addiction and why it has become an epidemic globally.

As usual, you and others...

Look at the numbers from Europe, compared to our incarceration nation. That's good enough for me.

It's not going away, no matter how much abstinence you preach. Believe that.

Why did it ever get to that point, Ghost.

Education of why one should never initially engage in such a behavior in the first place is the proactive approach to this issue.

don't give me irrelevant anecdote.

Science and Politics can't do shet when that invades ones life/lives.

You forgot two so important factors... the patient in most cases was in control when they initially chose to associate themselves with the drug. AND, until they abstain from ingesting the drug, they have no control. Thus, in order to retain some control and regain some sort of rational thinking and decision making capabilities regarding the choice to continue with the drug inflicted behavior, it is paramount that one get off the drug and rid that drug from their body and mind. Continued ingestion of that drug does not allow for that to occur..... rational thinking and decision making abilities. That comes from the long R&D "science" of recovery.

Why did Vancouver allow itself to reach the level of misery that it did. Why did the city officials turn a blind eye to the realities that were occurring in that area of their community?

Appears that there was no form of control. Just outright blatant allowance of this chaotic behavior to continue in their city.

Thus my initial response of reactive behavior on the part of society.

They too answered your question just as I did.

So when is Vancouver going to open up clean alcohol centers in order serve the homeless downtown alcoholics population clean booze. Thus reducing the epidemic of alcohol poisoning from ingesting cheap ISOPRO alcohol and other forms of non-liquor types of the alcoholic drug?

Justifying this abnormal behavior is not the solution. Let's start treating the reasons why and not the actual shooting up of the drugs.

John....

I did. Drug court programs work taking the addicts off the streets, providing medical assistance during the detox phase and then providing resources to clean them up mentally, psychologically and physically. With follow up resources for life long recovery.

You think my bias is a negative aspect to this issue

Attempting to do that [personal intervention] on a large scale in a major urban area is a different matter and likely requires significant policy backing and tremendous spending of public health money.

Yet here you are.

What happened?

but the main thing I am directing insult at is unreasonable people,

never intends to seek resolution, only continued dominance and control of the conversation to further their power?

Tami -- "the issue of addiction and people is vitally important to attend to in order to create a civil society."

What rubs me wrong is the way he talks down to others on any subject, as though his point of view is the only one with any merit.

I can't reply adequately right now ( probably welcomed by most it seems) but for now I suggest there is overt forms of disrespect and then there are insinuated forms, and I suggest that engaging in a conversation from a position of intransigence is as insulting or more so than any other, as it subverts process, a process that connects us despite differences. It serves no purpose to pretend otherwise simply o " get along".

It's an ethic that is insulting. I get it that replying in turn doesn't elevate the conversation and respect that maybe your right and maybe I' ll just shut up for now seeing how at least some would appreciate it

Been burying far too many of Shipmates lately....