Wednesday, May 18, 2011


I have not been a big fan of insite. It smacks to me of allowing people to further wallow in their misery. I have seen some evidence that the harm reduction strategy works, but I it also seems to absolve people of personal responsibility. I have met one of the doctors who helps run insite and he assures me it works. I guess I have ideological problems with the concept. I also have spoken to a prominent HIV researcher in Montreal who also likes Insite.
Insite is funded provincially so the only question is whether the Federal jurisdiction of criminal law will be recognized by the high court. I do believe that provinces should have the right to try alternate forms of healthcare ( and thereby mostly ignore the dumb Canada health Act). So my position is leave Insite to the BC Government to decide. Let there be no federal funding. As I have said before I support the Portuguese approach to drugs.
I hope my colleagues at Insite will strongly encourage rehab. I have dealt with many addicts in my life. There is a great sadness to their lives. They also destroy the lives of those all around them. This drug issue is one of my big problems with my libertarian friends. I have come to the conclusion that I can support the Portuguese laws, but I am still very wary of Insite. My position is more to allow provinces the right to experiment with such healthcare issues in all spheres.

1 comment:

dougf said...

I have found myself growing increasingly social-darwinist in my attitudes towards societies band of self-afflicted. I have no problems with either the concept or the operation of this type of site, but I really have a problem with the State paying for it. This should be funded by well-intentioned individuals if they feel themselves obliged to do so. Why is it fair for some poor slob who resists temptation and just tries to stagger through doing the best that he/she can, to be forced to support the willfully and/or cluelessly drug addicted ?
I can't speak for the general but I have a relative who managed to get himself 'addicted' to oxycontin which I believe is very similar to heroin in its addictive qualities. I was not very pleased with his typical addict behaviour( which was the usual malignant blend of constant lies, thieving, and exploitation), but I was just enraged when he told me he did it because he wanted to as he enjoyed it and could see no reason to stop. I have a strong feeling that the because 'I WANT to' reason is by far the strongest base for addict behaviour.
I just find it hard to have ANY sympathy for them at all and REALLY resent paying for their activities in any way whatsoever. I think that Singapore has the right idea on how to deal with this scourge. No tolerance and no mercy either. You choose ---- you lose. End of story. But we seem to believe that good will magically win out or alternatively that opening all the house windows and allowing the thieves to walk right in is somehow cost effective because at least it saves the broken glass.

I Support Lord Black