Why are drug addicts so coddled?

You must have never been around an alcoholic. They are the worst of the worst of addicts.

But... it's a disease!

Because it's easier to throw money at addicts than it is to effectively fund the prevention of initial addiction or address underlying factors of why many (not all) people become addicts - depression, loneliness, stress, abuse, trauma, physical correlates, etc.

TLDR

Mmmmm diet pills...

If it’s derived from nature, legalize it.

Much better to start the day with a cup of coca tea, dab some opium in the afternoon, and sit back with a beer and a spliff in the evening.

You type high.

[quote] address underlying factors of why many (not all) people become addicts - depression, loneliness, stress, abuse, trauma, physical correlates, etc.

I'm sorry but those are simply conditons of life. We will never eliminate those conditions and, quite frankly, they are different for each person. What we need to do is to help make people able to handle the human condition when it comes their way. Maybe we can start by not encouraging people to feel like vicitms so much. People are much stronger than the victim culture gives them credit for. Patronizing people as if they are perpetual special children does them no good.

There are degrees of drug addiction and I have complete sympathy for them. Our current mess with heroin stems from the opiods that were given out like candy to anyone with even a headache the past 20 years.

But I would like to see anti-vagrancy laws enacted. Most of the severe addicts are homeless (or if they weren't addicts before being homeless, they are now).

Round them all up and put them in detox and housing somewhere. People should not live on the streets as a lifestyle choice - or, even worse, because they are that destitute. Most of them do not want to live like that. And society shouldn't have to deal with feces, needles, tents in public areas, etc.

Always, always, always follow the money.

We need to reopen mental institutions.

Why does OP hate pleasure? There’s nothing morally, intrinsically wrong with addiction. It’s the behaviors employed to keep the addiction funded and often unresolved traumas resulting in replays of the trauma that are problematic. If fewer people were like OP, we’d have better addicts.

Decriminalizing possession is not the same as legalization. Putting addicts in jail is expensive and counterproductive, even if you don't agree that you're punishing the victim in ways that will not rehabilitate them. It also affects marginalized communities more. Dealing will still be criminal.

Because if decriminalize drug use it takes the violence out of it. If you make it a treatable disease covered by insurance more people get treatment. If you remove the stigma, then people can get help.

[quote]Society doesn’t give passes to alcoholics.

Smokers, too!

[quote] It’s the behaviors employed to keep the addiction funded and often unresolved traumas resulting in replays of the trauma that are problematic.

That's a very naive take on drug behavior and addiction. There are certainly behaviors brought on by the drug use itself that is destructive and harmful - to themselves, their children, their families, their jobs, and their ability to conduct themselves responsibly.

If you think the only reason an addict commits a crime is to feed his habit then you are wrong. Certain drugs are the root cause of some destructive behaviors and tendencies such as taking risks, e.g.

Further some drugs are not "casual" drugs and there is no real predicting who will become an addict and who won't.

In the US it is not a crime to be an addict. The crime is the possession and other activities involved with drugs.

R14 Right, I guess since both smoking/drinking and drugs are both not criminal offences anymore, they'll be treated in the same way. I look forward to fines and rehab being given to smokers. /eyeroll

What about all the addicts who just do it because it feels good? Coming from a family with several addicts, lots of them started out occasionally, then every weekend, then full blown addicts. They don't WANT to quit. One of my cousins refuses to get treated because basically all he and his girlfriend have in common are drugs and they just feed off each other. His parents are great people who have tried repeatedly to do everything they can to help in his 38 years on this earth and it just never works.

It does piss me off a bit. Be there for your family and definitely make rehab available to the poor but I’m sick of having to act like they’re e all victims. What about the kids they thoughtlessly bring into the world who are doomed from the start? I’m much more worried about that.

[quote] Society doesn’t give passes to alcoholics.

Mmmmm alcohol isn’t illegal to access? It’s positively reinforced as a cultural touchstone for almost every social celebration. Are you sure you understand how the world works OP?

[quote]fall back on society, knowing someone will catch them, treat them and lift them back up again

I don't know that you can call what passes for our current form of social services to the addicted anything that resembles treatment and rehabilitation. I'm sorry for the loss of your niece. I lost a nephew nearly 15 years ago, after a lifetime of addictions. He was fortunate in that my sister and brother-in-law have money and put him in the very best programs. It didn't help.

As for treatment at the other end of the spectrum... I had a friend who was injured on the job and ended up addicted to Fentanyl and to make matters worse, he dabbled in meth, and five years later ended up a ward of the state in order to get treatment. But to qualify, he had to be literally penniless. When he checked in, he held his every earthly possession in a plastic grocery bag. It was hell. I supported him through treatment as best I could, but grew frustrated when he relapsed even after suffering through the state system.

Addiction is a disease.

Some people just like being fucked up, it has nothing to do with any trauma.

"...or address underlying factors of why many (not all) people become addicts - depression, loneliness, stress, abuse, trauma, physical correlates, etc."

People don't necessarily become addicts because of tragedy or mental illness, some people become addicts because they LIKE drugs! But that's something the pro-legalization advocates are desperate to keep out of the conversation, they want to blame trauma, mental illness, irresponsible doctors, everyone but the recreational users

They also want everyone to think of the poor tragic addicts, and now how much recreational use will increase with legalization and tolerance, and how much addiction will increase if recreational use of the more dangerous drugs is normalized.

"...I can’t help but realize, no other group on America would appear to be so universally protected and ‘understood’ as drug addicts."

One reason for that is that many people who's lost a loved one to drug addiction hope that if their addict can be protected from jails and overdoses ... then some day they'll go back to being the person they used to be, the one who was worthy of love.

Well, it sure as hell doesn't work that way now, but maybe if effective rehabilitation was widely available, well, maybe some people would come out of it and be able to start over.

OP is Becka from HR and she’s the reason we use drugs.

There’s nothing wrong with drug addiction. If you’re going to take a stand against “recreational” drugs, you need to also stand against insulin and psych meds and anything else people take for daily maintenance, otherwise you’re being intellectually and ethically inconsistent. Just admit that you’re a Puritan who hates the idea of other people taking joy from anything given that you’re incapable of joy.

And OP needs to realize - the law decriminalizes POSSESSION of drugs, it's not a free for all.

There has been a huge increase in arrests for drug possession the last 20 years - far outnumbering an increase in drug selling and manufacturing arrests. So what can we deduce by that? They are incarcerating drug addicts and not attacking the source.

These aren't necessarily violent people. They need help and court resources (Expensive) and prison (MORE EXPENSIVE) are not the resources we should be leaning on to change things.

I support this. But I also support that homeless should not be allowed to live on the streets. It's disgusting what has happened to downtown Portland - particularly that shanty town they've developed for homeless people. That's not the answer.

Because many people have invested their careers in the drug addiction "treatment" industry, and also the anti-drug "enforcement" industry of police, jails and prisons. Finding a real solution to drug addiction would eliminate a lot of jobs.

R27 - the War on Drugs has been far worse than any addiction treatment 'industry'.

And why not switch the money from the courts and imprisonment to actually helping and not punishing addiction? It doesn't have to be a net loss of jobs.

The fact that a significant percentage of our economy is based on incarceration should be questioned and re-evaluated. Nobody has more people in prison than the US. NO ONE. Do we have THAT much more crime and criminals? No.

Reading through the responses and even OP's headline is everything that is wrong with the US take on drugs. Right now, we are spending tens of billions locking up addicts and barely doing anything to help get them treatment, which is much much cheaper. Putting aside actual crimes committed by addicts, the way that we tie them up in our court system is fucking insane and very expensive. So instead of shit talking reform, maybe take a minute to get angry at Republicans who insist on keeping the justice and prison system a revolving door for addicts while we don't have enough money for rehabs, therapy, and other treatments.

Yes, some people go through rehab multiple times. But if you're a heroin addict and want treatment, good luck finding a bed somewhere or the money to pay for it. But if that addict is on parole and fails a drug test, we'll lock that bitch away for months or years at $50k per year.

[quote] Society doesn’t give passes to alcoholics. There are no municipal or state laws requiring pharmacies to hand over diet pills to the obese the way many laws require them to give needles or anti-overdose medication to drug users

worry about yourself. I'm a pharmacist. Shut the fuck up

I've had to dispense Viagra, to a child molester. Yes, and you're okay with that, but just don't sell syringes to drug addicts.

You'd be SHOCKED to learn about all the drug addicts that are addicts who legally get all their meds from a dr. It's NOTHING new. It's ALWAYS been that way. Most of them are assholes (like you). I'd take a drug addict as a customer over some of the legal addicts. 75 % of the legal addicts are a pain in the ass

OP: You ask this on the only message board on the Internet that worships Judy Garland?

R31, Ha! Ha! I’ll say!!!

I've been thinking for a long time now that there must be a personality disorder aspect to addiction. I just don't know if the personality disorder makes one more likely to become an addict, or if the addiction makes one more likely to develop the personality disorder. At any rate, addicts are the most self-centered, most self-pitying, least self-reliant, and most demanding people around. They point the finger at everyone else, blaming them for their troubles, and expecting everyone to cater to their needs. They never take responsibility for anything, including their addiction and the trouble it and they cause for their families and neighbors.

And I roll my eyes every time someone spouts the ridiculous trope that decriminalization will be the magical solution. No. Odds are it'll just end up creating more social parasites aka addicts.

Hey all you judgmental dipshits - go back to blowing the your idols the Reagans and their failed war on drugs. Or, better yet - research the problem before spouting off all of your puritanical, holier than thou bullshit. Addiction is most certainly a disease - what about all of the deaths of despair plaguing Middle America at present? Portugal decriminalized substance use - and it seems to be a great first step in solving the problem. We Americans never have been able to shake off the hateful, judgmental nature of the Puritans, embedded in our national character...

[quote] Round them all up and put them in detox and housing somewhere.

What you're basically saying is to arrest and confine them, which is I don't think is legal unless someone is suspected of a crime. I don't think anti-vagrancy laws could be applied in this way.

[quote] There’s nothing wrong with drug addiction.

Then why treat it at all?

R29 Most constructive response so far.

R8 spouting noble truths like the Buddha over here.

[quote] But if you're a heroin addict and want treatment, good luck finding a bed somewhere or the money to pay for it. But if that addict is on parole and fails a drug test, we'll lock that bitch away for months or years at $50k per year.

The key words are "want treatment." I've helped addicts get to the door of treatment (figuratively), everything set up (financial, etc.), and they walk away (from treatment). If you've ever watched "Intervention," you'll see how resistant addicts are to getting *free* treatment.

I don't want to argue about this, just want to put down my real-life work experience.

Yes, some do accept treatment and turn their lives around. Many don't even have the desire & will fight treatment tooth and nail.

They ain't coddled here, OP. Especially if they're -- you know...