INSITE STATUS QUO FEEDS 'LIVING DEAD'

To the editor:

Re: "Health Minister cites VPD cop in Insite attack," June 27.

As a former resident, parent and non-profit organizer in Strathcona,
it's time to speak my feelings regarding Insite, which I'm sure will
not be popular.

If it is true that addictions are an illness and treated as such and
if it is true that "supervised" injection sites are part of "harm
reduction," then Insite belongs in a medical facility and needs to be
part of the process of recovery.

I initiated a non-profit organization dedicated to self-employment,
which opened the first new business on Hastings between Gore and
Cambie a few years ago. I was a resident of Strathcona, my daughter
was raised in the community. From my perspective, institutions such
as Insite enable individuals to continue their dysfunctional lives,
provide make-work projects for the power barons who run conglomerate
non-profit organizations and continue to foster the attitude that
illness, abuse and horror is normalized.

I have no way of knowing whether the "scientific" research provided
by supporters of Insite is accurate or skewed. That being said, if
Insite is contributing to lessening the spread of disease and keeping
individuals alive, it belongs in a medical facility such as St.
Paul's wherein people who use such a facility are strongly encouraged
to leave their community to receive treatment as cancer patients are
required to do. I feel the same way regarding the NAOMI trials, which
disperses free heroin to addicts.

The Downtown Eastside faces incredible challenges in the next two
years, with $1 million condos embedded amidst even more social
housing for the "hard to house." If there is any plan related to that
neighbourhood, one is mystified in trying to understand what that plan is.

For the life of me, having lived in that 'hood, I see no evidence of
any "harm" being "reduced" in the neighbourhood. The living dead in
front of Insite is just one more "going nowhere" testament to the
salaries of the individuals who run the various organizations
dedicated to keeping the status quo in the community.

Perhaps Insite should continue, but addicts need to understand that,
if they are to be granted a sanctuary to continue their deathwish,
then such a "right" comes with obligations. Their obligation to keep
such a place open would be to leave their community to receive
treatment (and it should be considered treatment), realize that usage
of such a service is part of their commitment to reevaluate their
lives and consider treatment. Otherwise, Insite is an unsightly and
dangerous experiment in enabling the living dead. The people outside
the facility may be animated, but who would call that "living?"

Ruth Meta, Vancouver