|
|
Post by Magliocca on Feb 26, 2018 4:47:08 GMT
When I first heard about the controversial topic of safe injection sites I wasn’t sure on which stance I was going to take but after reading the articles I have come to agree with the statement provided by Vox stating “While in an ideal world no one would use dangerous and potentially deadly drugs, many people do. So it’s better to give these drug users a space where they can use with some sort of supervision. It’s a harm reduction approach.” The opioid epidemic at this point will be nearly impossible to stop so by employing the old saying “If you can’t beat them you might as well join them” mentality, we can start to at least make a dent. For some, it may be hard to fully understand how big of an impact this can truly have with it only compassing a small demographic such as Philadelphia. If the entire state of Pennsylvania for example being one of the worst states in terms of opioid overdose deaths according to the CDC, were to implement these protection zones statewide, the results would be more shocking. This is an instance where affairs need to be handled on a case by case or more relevantly a state by state basis. Since opioid death rates vary drastically from state to state it would be economically unsound to force all states to implement safe injection zones. By employing a federalist principle allowing states to own and not forcing a federal law upon them, it will create a more efficient and less costly program.
People who are on the other stance would argue that, as stated by usatoday “There are no “safe heroin injection sites.” The only “safe” approach to heroin is not to take it.” Some say the way these safe injection sites go out “helping” are not actually doing what is intended. They are simply prolonging the agonies associated with opioid use. There is nothing actually being done to help a person, they are only there to help make first responders and a hospital workers job easier. This stance, however, has no grounding. These sites have been proven to stop tests which should be the goal of almost anything.
Q: If you were an opioid user, would you rather someone actively try to save your life or simply become another statistic?
|
|
|
|
Post by Thompson on Feb 26, 2018 4:57:31 GMT
While these safe injection sites may reduce the number of opioid-induced deaths, they are providing a road to normalizing drug use for citizens. The epidemic is not just in these large citites that are mentioned but however has reached into towns such as Butler. With how close this problem is to home, it is not uncommon to know someone either directly or indirectly that has had or still has a drug issue. True, statistics show that safe injection sites reduce the number of overdose deaths, but what does this do to reduce the number of drug producers, dealers, and users? Supporters argue that having these sites reduces the negative stigma of drug use, allowing users to live their lives more normally instead of feeling like an outcast. However, by reducing this stigma we could take a step down a dangerous path of normalizing the use of opioids. This could create the misconception that, “since it’s not illegal, it’s not that bad”. By creating that point of view, more people would be likely to start using if they have thought about it before. By providing drugs, needles, elastic bands, and everything else needed to use the drugs, along with personnel to recessitate anyone that happens to overdose, people may be more likely to try opioids and become addicted. The only upside to these sites may be that they provide routes to treatment and help to becoming clean. However if you can use safely and legally, then why stop? Under the controlled substances act, these places would be illegal and not protected by the law. Although professer Kreit says that there may be a loophole in the act, created to allow undercover officers to buy drugs from a dealer in sting operations, critics say it is a far stretch. Much like the stretch made by congress to defend the original gun free school zones act under the commerce clause. Question: Would allowing safe injection sites normalize drug use and therefore create an even larger group of drug users and addictees?
|
|
|
|
Post by Croll on Feb 26, 2018 17:28:00 GMT
@kalebkamerer
I like your question asking if this is teaching the world that the usage of drugs is okay. Essentially, this could give off that vibe. By providing safe-injection sites, we are showing the users that their addiction is okay. If these sites are implemented into neighborhoods, we are supporting the users addiction. This may help many individuals come out or come open about the addiction that they struggle from, however it seems that most people may not do that. Their addictions may eventually just become worse than before since they now know that they have a safer way to do it. They are being provided with clean needles and clean areas, this is not a solution to the epidemic.
|
|
|
|
Post by Martin on Feb 26, 2018 20:37:59 GMT
@thompson I agree with you in that by reducing the stigma attached to users we are also normalizing the use of opioids, and that is a frightening future. That's why I'm so torn on this topic, because although safe injection sites have many benefits it's also feeding into addicts desire to do drugs, and what good is that going to do for our society? These sites aren't urging users to get better, as you said. It's just condoning their bad habit. To answer your Q, I think allowing safe injection sites would normalize drug use. Think about it, it's free, it's welcoming, and it's recognized as a "safe zone". I just think it's going to lead more people to do drugs knowing they have a place to do it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Martin on Feb 26, 2018 20:47:23 GMT
@magliocca
I like how you recognize "The opioid epidemic at this point will be nearly impossible to stop" maybe supporting your stance. People are going to and will still find a way to do drugs no matter what, so why not set safe sites in place to make sure they are being safe about it, rather than not doing anything at all? I agree that in terms of federalism this issue needs to be dealt with on a state to state basis, since opioid death rates differ in every state. I think it would be interesting to see Pennsylvania put safe injection sites in place and look at how much overdose rates decrease. Also, good job at acknowledging the other side of this debate.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bonetti on Feb 27, 2018 0:04:36 GMT
@magliocca
The saying "if you can't beat them, join them" did not necessarily come up in my mind, but I thought it was a really creative and original connection that you made from the topic to the quote. Additionally, I just wanted to focus more on the question that you posed at the end of your response. I think that your question is a logical fallacy because it is more of a hasty generalization. I think that there is a multitude of variables rather than just living or dying. I don't really think that's how addicts view their decisions. Again, I really liked your response and I am not trying to pick on you, I just wanted to further analyze your question because I am opposed to it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bonetti on Feb 27, 2018 0:12:03 GMT
@williams
Pertaining mostly to your question, I think that there is an alarming amount of drug overdoses, which need an immediate call for action. I agree with the fact that you said that providing these safe injection sites allows for "a normal occurrence", but I think that it is better than not trying to help out with the problem at all. In addition to, or instead of these safe injection sites, I really liked the whole idea of the "free needle exchange". Although these exchanges may not help with overdose death rates, they greatly decrease the number of medical treatments needed for infections such as HIV and hepatitis C.
|
|
|
|
Post by Croll on Feb 27, 2018 0:46:34 GMT
@thompson
I like how you had mentioned “However, by reducing this stigma we could take a step down a dangerous path of normalizing the use of opioids.” The use of these drugs will no longer have as much of a negative connotation as before, because it would be more normal as there is sites that you can use the drugs in. As you had said, people often get the misconception that something is okay just because it is legal, which could absolutely come if this was legalized. Responding to your question, “would allowing safe injection sites normalize drug use and therefore create an even larger group of drug users and addictees?” I do feel as though it could go either way. Maybe opening up to other strangers about their addiction could help them come off the drugs. However, that is not the main intention of the sites themselves, but just to reduce the numbers of deaths from overdose. The sites would most likely lead to a larger number of addicts.
|
|
|
|
Post by Roxberry on Feb 27, 2018 4:17:03 GMT
@croll- To respond to your question in regards to the results of having safe injection sites, the answer, unfortunately, is not so straightforward. While the sites may be something that causes the normalization of doing drugs in America, they are also reducing the number of drug abusers dying from an overdose. However, I do agree that the "safe" injection sites are spreading the wrong message and enabling an unhealthy and unlawful thing. Doing drugs is never "safe" and should never be made to be perceived that way.
|
|
|
|
Post by Howell on Feb 27, 2018 4:26:48 GMT
@ Sarver - I agree with your statement that these safe injection sites are feeding into the problem and influencing the problem. And for your question I think they are scared but I think they are going to risk it for a clean needles and unlaced drug and it's sad that they might have to say no to that because the fear of getting caught.
@ Bonetti - I was the same way when I first heard the idea I was shocked that why would be supporting the use of drugs but after reading about how they actually save lives everyday it really changed my opinion. I think the decisions of the government are based more on morals because it really depends on whether the law is more important or a human life is more important.
|
|
|
|
Post by Roxberry on Feb 27, 2018 4:41:11 GMT
@magliocca- I think an important thing to realize is that the way we go about the opioid epidemic is more so an ethical dilemma, especially when addressing your question. No, it is not right to let these people die and not try to do anything to solve it, but the solution that is being proposed right now is not the answer. Addiction is now being considered a disease, something that results in many health and societal consequences. As with any other addiction/ disease, medical professionals attempt to provide their patient with a solution that usually involves some sort of therapy, medication, or rehabilitation. The solution in a majority of these cases is not to enable people to contribute to something that makes the effects of their disease worse, yet with the opioid epidemic, that is what people are trying to do. Yes, we need to focus on saving lives, but we can not eliminate society's awareness of the consequences of doing drugs.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hilliard on Feb 27, 2018 12:48:31 GMT
@thompson allowing for these safe sites is just basically opening up a door for users to come in and use their drug in a safe environment. Maybe they will help end the crisis or possibly make it worse. In a way you are openly inviting people to use the drug without fear of a negative consicuencse. A benefit of this however would be that they could help lower the number of drugs being used on the street. The only way to find out if to experiment with it and make a conclusion based on the stats.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kingerski on Feb 27, 2018 13:41:32 GMT
@sarver
I like how you mentioned that this is only exposing them to their addiction, it is not a method of treatment. However, with such a large epidemic there is no way that the federal government can ignore this issue forever. Whether the Trump administration likes the idea of these safe injection sites or not doesn't matter, the states are doing what they can to lower the overdose rate.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kingerski on Feb 27, 2018 13:47:55 GMT
@magliocca
Your post mentions both sides of the argument, and I like how you included the saying "If you can't beat them, join them." Although, I find it interesting how controversial these statements can be. Like you mentioned, there is no safe way to use heroin, so why do some people choose to do so? There is no way to eliminate such harmful drugs from our society, but something has to be done about this epidemic.
|
|
|
|
Post by McHattie on Feb 27, 2018 15:13:51 GMT
@croll: Although these safe injection sites do have benefits, I believe that they will do more harm than good. The sites will indeed promote the usage of drugs. If people are able to use drugs without consequence, then it will only feed into their addiction.
@kingerski: I believe that these safe injection sites will only be a temporary relief to the issue. These sites only stop overdose deaths not the overall drug issue. No matter what, people are still going to use drugs. There really is not a full proof solution to the epidemic, but the injection sites only promote the epidemic rather than help it.
|
|
