Read on Twitter
I did a radio interview this morning & was asked:
"Is compulsory treatment for drug use, rather than prison, a step in the right direction?"
Answer:
a. What do you mean by drugs? Psychoactive stimulant use - such needing a shot coffee before you can face the day?
1/8
"Is compulsory treatment for drug use, rather than prison, a step in the right direction?"
Answer:
a. What do you mean by drugs? Psychoactive stimulant use - such needing a shot coffee before you can face the day?
1/8
2/8
b. Oh - it only applies to unapproved drugs, I see, - but there is no scientific evidence to support that separation between the legal and unapproved drugs. So on what basis can the distinction be justified?
b. Oh - it only applies to unapproved drugs, I see, - but there is no scientific evidence to support that separation between the legal and unapproved drugs. So on what basis can the distinction be justified?
3/8
c. People who use drugs, legal or unapproved, do not need treatment. We don't treat people simply because they use nicotine, alcohol or caffeine. It's no different with unapproved drugs. 90% use without difficulties.
c. People who use drugs, legal or unapproved, do not need treatment. We don't treat people simply because they use nicotine, alcohol or caffeine. It's no different with unapproved drugs. 90% use without difficulties.
4/8
c. (cont.) However, people who use unapproved drugs are forced into additional risks, but that has nothing to do with the drug itself, and everything to do with prohibition enforcement.
c. (cont.) However, people who use unapproved drugs are forced into additional risks, but that has nothing to do with the drug itself, and everything to do with prohibition enforcement.
5/8
d. So the 90% could be helped by ending prohibition and legally regulating drugs.
The only people who would benefit from treatment would be the 10% who get into difficulties
d. So the 90% could be helped by ending prohibition and legally regulating drugs.
The only people who would benefit from treatment would be the 10% who get into difficulties
6/8
e. But this 10% should be offered treatment on a voluntary basis because there is no evidence to support the effectiveness of mandatory treatment.
People do best overcoming addiction when they are ready, able and wanting to address issues -voluntarily.
e. But this 10% should be offered treatment on a voluntary basis because there is no evidence to support the effectiveness of mandatory treatment.
People do best overcoming addiction when they are ready, able and wanting to address issues -voluntarily.
7/8
f. And when you say 'treatment' what exactly are we talking about? Treatment that insists on abstinence from every drug is questionable. If I had an alcohol problem would you insist I must give up caffeine? If people are going to get treatment it needs to be evidence based
f. And when you say 'treatment' what exactly are we talking about? Treatment that insists on abstinence from every drug is questionable. If I had an alcohol problem would you insist I must give up caffeine? If people are going to get treatment it needs to be evidence based
8/8 (thx for reading!)
g. These so called incremental steps in the right direction are dangerous because they are rooted in deeply questionable prohibitionist discourse and paradigms. Such an approach reminds me of a Malcolm X quote:
g. These so called incremental steps in the right direction are dangerous because they are rooted in deeply questionable prohibitionist discourse and paradigms. Such an approach reminds me of a Malcolm X quote:
