San Francisco Considers Nation's First Safe Injection Site for Addicts

[southcitymom]

I thought the Vancouver article said it helps them get off the drug.

No, I think it said that having such centers in the area led to a decrease in drug use, but I don't think that's the same thing.

Everything I have read about these centers emphasizes that they are not treatment places or like treatment places - they don't administer drugs - they just offer a safer place for addicts to get high.

 

[Marthatex]

No, I think it said that having such centers in the area led to a decrease in drug use, but I don't think that's the same thing.

Everything I have read about these centers emphasizes that they are not treatment places or like treatment places - they don't administer drugs - they just offer a safer place for addicts to get high.

How would it possibly decrease the drug use then?

 

[Marthatex]

No, I think it said that having such centers in the area led to a decrease in drug use, but I don't think that's the same thing.

Everything I have read about these centers emphasizes that they are not treatment places or like treatment places - they don't administer drugs - they just offer a safer place for addicts to get high.

OK, I re-read it and you're right they are not treatment places, but do have Nurses (Vancouver). They make sure they don't overdose.

The study says it DOES reduce the spread of HIV and people who visit the site at least once a week have been more willing to ENTER TREATMENT.

 

[pedinurse]

I think that this may decrease the spread of infection if they are going to supply clean needles... THOSE programs have been proven to work... esp. in san fran... however... I am not sure that it will work to help decrease the incidence of OD. will the nurses be liable if a patient OD's? how will the nurse know what the patient took before or are the patient leaves the facility? there is also a lot of unknowns re: patient tolerance. i worry abotu the nurse getting blamed for a patient ODing a this facility and the family suing.

 

[Marthatex]

I think that this may decrease the spread of infection if they are going to supply clean needles... THOSE programs have been proven to work... esp. in san fran... however... I am not sure that it will work to help decrease the incidence of OD. will the nurses be liable if a patient OD's? how will the nurse know what the patient took before or are the patient leaves the facility? there is also a lot of unknowns re: patient tolerance. i worry abotu the nurse getting blamed for a patient ODing a this facility and the family suing.

I think there are some medical-legal questions involved.

 

[southcitymom]

OK, I re-read it and you're right they are not treatment places, but do have Nurses (Vancouver). They make sure they don't overdose.

The study says it DOES reduce the spread of HIV and people who visit the site at least once a week have been more willing to ENTER TREATMENT.

Yes, that's the way I read it also - an important distinction, I think.

 

[diamondgirl]

Gosh, this is an interesting topic. I can see both sides of it really. It does seem wrong, but then I can just imagine a little boy at Auntie Heroine's house and he picks up her needle and pokes himself in the hand with it. He either gets AIDs or worse, Hep C (a lot more contractible). Then I also know that even if they have one of these places that the druggies are not going to go there everytime they need a fix. Really tough issue. But then maybe one less dirty needle off the street is better than two. Just thinking out loud. I'm an RN and I would NEVER work there. YIKES. A little off topic, but if they do have this then why not make the drug addicts have their names taken and fingerprinted incase they OD on the street and pass away they will be easier to identify.

 

[southcitymom]

Gosh, this is an interesting topic. I can see both sides of it really. It does seem wrong, but then I can just imagine a little boy at Auntie Heroine's house and he picks up her needle and pokes himself in the hand with it. He either gets AIDs or worse, Hep C (a lot more contractible). Then I also know that even if they have one of these places that the druggies are not going to go there everytime they need a fix. Really tough issue. But then maybe one less dirty needle off the street is better than two. Just thinking out loud. I'm an RN and I would NEVER work there. YIKES. A little off topic, but if they do have this then why not make the drug addicts have their names taken and fingerprinted incase they OD on the street and pass away they will be easier to identify.

I think many drug addicts would be reluctant to go to a place like this if they thought they were going to be tracked via name and fingerprints! Most drug addicts like to stay far far away from anything related to law enforcement!!

 

[diamondgirl]

I think many drug addicts would be reluctant to go to a place like this if they thought they were going to be tracked via name and fingerprints! Most drug addicts like to stay far far away from anything related to law enforcement!!

Oh yeah, didnt think of that. I need to learn to think like a criminal. By hubby says i was so protected as a child. I was hoping we could use it for our benefit.

 

[southcitymom]

Oh yeah, didnt think of that. I need to learn to think like a criminal. By hubby says i was so protected as a child. I was hoping we could use it for our benefit.

LOL - I know your motives were pure. Most drug addicts bear a terrible shame about their condition - they'd rather the less people who know the better!

 

[Details]

LOL - I know your motives were pure. Most drug addicts bear a terrible shame about their condition - they'd rather the less people who know the better!

I suspect this is why it helps to increase the number willing to go for treatment. They go to these places, find out some medical professionals can talk to them as people, have information about help available - and for those who are ready, there we go.

 

[ziggy]

One of my nieces is a SERIOUS Meth junkie and God knows what else. There is no way that going to a safe get high site would help her, it only enables. JMO but addicts really don't have the guts and wear-with-all to change because IT'S HARD. They medicate because life is hard. They avoid any responsibility etc. Like I said, the Vancouver articles are not the last word and addicts will still act irresponsibly and illegally to get money for drugs to take to the safe sites. It just goes against my common sense, but hey, so does being a drug addict. Their "disease" is 100% curable. I can't feel too sorry for them when I compare that to the victims that lie in a Saint Judes facility. Even my own niece, bless her soul, is just the epitome of irresponsible "blame everyone else for my problems" mentality. I honestly don't think she'll live to be 30 and the GRIEF AND CHAOS she causes to others who love her is unjustified in this great country of opportunity. Some people just aren't strong enough to make it and that's life.

 

[close_enough]

Very good points. Alcohol use causes the most damage and cost to our society; nicotene a tremendous toll on people who use it and the health care system.

Mothers often provide "safe havens" for their teenagers' drinking; so they won't go on the street and kill someone or themselves.
I would hope the safe house would be in conjunction with counseling and withdrawal from drugs - I hope it wouldn't "encourage use".

If it works in other places, try it. Evidently San Francisco has a huge drug problem to deal with.

But as far as bashing it; there are many who would love to live there if it weren't so expensive.

yes!!!....do you ever watch Intervention???...parents provide "safe havens"...it blows my mind!

 

[close_enough]

Gosh, this is an interesting topic. I can see both sides of it really. It does seem wrong, but then I can just imagine a little boy at Auntie Heroine's house and he picks up her needle and pokes himself in the hand with it. He either gets AIDs or worse, Hep C (a lot more contractible). Then I also know that even if they have one of these places that the druggies are not going to go there everytime they need a fix. Really tough issue. But then maybe one less dirty needle off the street is better than two. Just thinking out loud. I'm an RN and I would NEVER work there. YIKES. A little off topic, but if they do have this then why not make the drug addicts have their names taken and fingerprinted incase they OD on the street and pass away they will be easier to identify.

hmmm, i hadn't thought of that..

 

[dingo]

Theres been one in Sydneys red light district for 4 years.....the link explains how it operates and what its objectives are...Im not sure whether Im in favour of them or not.

http://www.sydneymsic.com/whatwedo.htm

 

[Marthatex]

Theres been one in Sydneys red light district for 4 years.....the link explains how it operates and what its objectives are...Im not sure whether Im in favour of them or not.

http://www.sydneymsic.com/whatwedo.htm

That site seems to list in a very organized way what the benefits are.

Think about it: Someone uses a dirty needle - another case of aids. People with aids have to be taken care of by our health care system even if they don't have the money or a job.

The aids victim gets pregnant before she knows she has aids. A baby is born with aids. She dies of overdose; the baby goes to an orphanage.

Just look at the cost to society of just that one person who spreads aids. It's a spiral/cycle that perhaps can be stopped just with the clean injections alone; and if they are talked into treatment that is icing on the cake.

The idea seems kind of strange to us, but if there is a long-term benefit and savings, are people just seeing the short-term situation and not really thinking of all the ramifications?

I'm impressed by how nice that clinic looks. Plus the benefit of getting them off the street; drug addicts are scary.

 

[dingo]

The benefits are there Marthatex.....Im just not sure whether our goverment should be aiding and abbetting criminals.
The clinic does look nice and welcomming.....Id like to know who is paying for the flowers though..proberly us taxpayers

 

[southcitymom]

I suspect this is why it helps to increase the number willing to go for treatment. They go to these places, find out some medical professionals can talk to them as people, have information about help available - and for those who are ready, there we go.

That's a great point. A place like this would certainly lessen the secretiveness and isolation most addicts engage in when they use.

For the most part, society feels disgust at the thought of drug users (particularly IV drug users) and don't care for a second when one dies accidentally. Drug users know this. They know they won't be much missed if they die - so why should they try to stop killing themselves with drugs. It can be a vicious cycle.

A place like this one certainly sends a different message to addicts than they are used to receiving - that sort of positive message could indeed have positive results in terms of addicts wishing to get real help for themselves.

 

[southcitymom]

One of my nieces is a SERIOUS Meth junkie and God knows what else. There is no way that going to a safe get high site would help her, it only enables. JMO but addicts really don't have the guts and wear-with-all to change because IT'S HARD. They medicate because life is hard. They avoid any responsibility etc. Like I said, the Vancouver articles are not the last word and addicts will still act irresponsibly and illegally to get money for drugs to take to the safe sites. It just goes against my common sense, but hey, so does being a drug addict. Their "disease" is 100% curable. I can't feel too sorry for them when I compare that to the victims that lie in a Saint Judes facility. Even my own niece, bless her soul, is just the epitome of irresponsible "blame everyone else for my problems" mentality. I honestly don't think she'll live to be 30 and the GRIEF AND CHAOS she causes to others who love her is unjustified in this great country of opportunity. Some people just aren't strong enough to make it and that's life.

Well spoken, ziggy. However, I think places like this are not just to help the selfish addict, many of whom - as you point out - are beyond help or don't want it. There are larger social benefits to the society so affected by addicts - and addiction is such a massive drain on society that it is worth looking at different ways to cope with its effects.

 

[i.b.nora]

The benefits are there Marthatex.....Im just not sure whether our goverment should be aiding and abbetting criminals.
The clinic does look nice and welcomming.....Id like to know who is paying for the flowers though..proberly us taxpayers

Well, actually, the Kings Cross injecting centre is a State Government program that is "Funded by the confiscated proceeds of crime - not with taxpayers' money as the Opposition claims - the centre was born out of the 1999 drug summit at State Parliament."

This is a portion from an article included at the website:

Sydney Morning Herald
1700 overdoses that didn't end in death

Author: Ruth Pollard
Publication: Sydney Morning Herald (8,Sat 08 Jul 2006)
Edition: Third
Section: News and Features
Keywords: jail (1)

INJECTING CENTRE

"The Kings Cross injecting centre has been saving lives for five years, writes Ruth Pollard.

IT IS one of the few State Government programs devoted to caring for those living on the fringes of society rather than throwing them in jail.

Lauded as brave and pioneering by many and derided by others as giving tacit approval to illicit activities, the Medically Supervised Injecting Centre quietly celebrated its fifth year of operation eight weeks ago.

Such is the sensitivity surrounding its operation there were no obvious celebrations, no fanfare - just a quiet determination to continue its work in the face of growing political opposition amid a law-and-order auction leading up to next year's state election.

"If they close the centre it is going to go back to how it was - the mess in the street, the overdoses in the street, the death in the street will be a recurring nightmare," says Sally, who fought and beat a 17-year heroin habit.

One of the first drug users to register when the centre opened on May 6, 2001, she gradually moved from heroin to methadone, and from the streets to public housing.

In August she celebrates three years off methadone, and four years of sleeping indoors.

With assistance from staff at the injecting centre, Sally gathered the strength to move away from drugs when she discovered her partner of eight years had cancer.

"It didn't matter how many times I had overdosed and been brought back, it wasn't until I was confronted with my boyfriend's mortality that it made some sense to get straight."

In its five years of operation, the centre has registered 8912 injecting drug users, many of whom had not previously had any recent contact with health services. Nearly 310,000 episodes of injecting have occurred at the centre, now running at about 220 a day - episodes that would otherwise have happened in parks, toilets or back lanes, in public view and without medical support if an overdose occurs.

A long-time Kings Cross resident, Margaret Harvie, said the centre had made a huge difference to those who live and work in the area.

"The injecting centre has significantly improved things - you do not have people overdosing; there are not ambulances screaming around the streets."

Ms Harvie dismissed the idea that the centre is a honeypot for dealers and users.

People have been hanging around Kings Cross for years, she says, attracted by the nightclubs and the prostitution rather than the injecting centre.

But the Liberal leader, Peter Debnam, said he would close the centre if elected premier next year - dumping his predecessor John Brogden's policy of supporting the centre.

His health spokeswoman, Jillian Skinner, who voted against the centre's trial, has been asked to develop the Opposition's drug policy.

"If you can clearly demonstrate that it is a success in helping people move on to rehabilitation, then good; if it is [money] that could have been spent allowing people to go to treatment services ... that is not a good use of scarce resources," she said.

Funded by the confiscated proceeds of crime - not with taxpayers' money as the Opposition claims - the centre was born out of the 1999 drug summit at State Parliament."

there is much more...

1700 overdoses that didn't end in death

My only concern is that the Liberal leader Peter Debnam might have by now been elected premier. There is a lot of very interesting and important information included at that website.