WE SHOULD AIM FOR ZERO DRUG DEATHS

ON 29 April Crispin Hull wrote a challenging article in this paper,
"Driving for zero tolerance", which made a number of pertinent points
applicable not only to alcohol and driving, but illicit drug taking
also. Whether he would fully agree I'm not sure, but the parallel is
there, I believe.

He gave the example of Australian mining companies aiming specifically
for zero injuries and deaths.

Mr Hull added, "We do not do that with the road toll . . .We only aim
for a reduced toll . . But more radical aims are achievable . . . We
should aim for zero deaths a year." The vital phrase, as Mr Hull
states, is "aiming for zero deaths". Aiming for a reduced road toll is
like aiming to minimise harm from drugs.

It sounds good (virtually a "motherhood" statement) but, as in Mr
Hull's example, it largely misses the point.

Mr Hull said, "Kant's test for morally good action was to ask the
question: 'What if everyone behaved like that?' " A good question.

What if everyone used illicit drugs?

Of course, not everyone need behave like that for such actions to be
morally wrong, but the message is clear.

Aiming for zero road deaths and zero drug deaths is a concept which
must be publicly declared and written into the health policies of
governments. Only that specific societal and health policy aim will
dramatically and sufficiently reduce road and drug deaths.

It will strongly help to create and reinforce decisions by youth either
not to experiment with dangerous drugs or to cease use. Someone once
said no-one believes we will ever have a perfect democratic society -
but that doesn't stop us from aiming for it.