News (Media Awareness Project) - CN BC: LTE: Where's The Safety In Harm Reduction? |
Title: | CN BC: LTE: Where's The Safety In Harm Reduction? |
Published On: | 2005-05-26 |
Source: | Abbotsford News (CN BC) |
Fetched On: | 2008-01-16 12:01:08 |
WHERE'S THE SAFETY IN HARM REDUCTION?
Editor, The News:
Thanks to city council for the public hearing on harm reduction. The
community is urged to attend events such as these in order to get a fair,
first-hand perspective on the presentations.
The hearing may be over but a number of questions remain.
Fraser Valley health officer Dr. Andrew Larder wants a continuum of
services. If that is true, then where is the most basic and essential of
services: detox?
With the millions of tax dollars available, why does detox continue to be a
glaring omission among the services?
We were told at the hearing that the success rate of harm reduction is
"fantastic." Where are the numbers? Where is the evidence of
"scientifically proven effectiveness"? If HR is working, why is Vancouver
in such a mess?
The four-pillar approach is touted by the harm reductionists when the HR
argument gets difficult. If this is about four pillars, then where is the
money for the other three - law enforcement, prevention and treatment?
According to the advocates of harm reduction at the hearing, HR must be
considered in a broad sense; it isn't only about needle exchanges, safe
injection sites and methadone.
Then why did the provincial government withdraw funding to Wagner Hills
Farms after that recovery facility simply declined to use methadone as
treatment?
Interesting that the strongest HR proponents are employed by the
government. We wouldn't want to think these people are protecting their
wallets, but who signs their paycheques?
The faith-based treatment centres don't cost the taxpayer a dime. B.C. Teen
Challenge's success rate is 80 per cent - after five years - for those
students who completed the one-year treatment program. The cure rate of
secular rehab programs is, at most, three to 15 per cent. Why the difference?
Advocates of harm reduction urged council to do further study. I agree. We
in Abbotsford want to know what impact HR services would have on a city
that is surrounded by prisons and adjoins an international border.
Yes, we need to know exactly what this would mean for our community.
This isn't over and our council will need a lot of back-up for future
proposals that are sure to come.
Meanwhile, let's be a community that doesn't just keep addicts "alive
another day."
Let's be a place that gives them hope and a way out.
M. R. Heinrichs
Abbotsford
Editor, The News:
Thanks to city council for the public hearing on harm reduction. The
community is urged to attend events such as these in order to get a fair,
first-hand perspective on the presentations.
The hearing may be over but a number of questions remain.
Fraser Valley health officer Dr. Andrew Larder wants a continuum of
services. If that is true, then where is the most basic and essential of
services: detox?
With the millions of tax dollars available, why does detox continue to be a
glaring omission among the services?
We were told at the hearing that the success rate of harm reduction is
"fantastic." Where are the numbers? Where is the evidence of
"scientifically proven effectiveness"? If HR is working, why is Vancouver
in such a mess?
The four-pillar approach is touted by the harm reductionists when the HR
argument gets difficult. If this is about four pillars, then where is the
money for the other three - law enforcement, prevention and treatment?
According to the advocates of harm reduction at the hearing, HR must be
considered in a broad sense; it isn't only about needle exchanges, safe
injection sites and methadone.
Then why did the provincial government withdraw funding to Wagner Hills
Farms after that recovery facility simply declined to use methadone as
treatment?
Interesting that the strongest HR proponents are employed by the
government. We wouldn't want to think these people are protecting their
wallets, but who signs their paycheques?
The faith-based treatment centres don't cost the taxpayer a dime. B.C. Teen
Challenge's success rate is 80 per cent - after five years - for those
students who completed the one-year treatment program. The cure rate of
secular rehab programs is, at most, three to 15 per cent. Why the difference?
Advocates of harm reduction urged council to do further study. I agree. We
in Abbotsford want to know what impact HR services would have on a city
that is surrounded by prisons and adjoins an international border.
Yes, we need to know exactly what this would mean for our community.
This isn't over and our council will need a lot of back-up for future
proposals that are sure to come.
Meanwhile, let's be a community that doesn't just keep addicts "alive
another day."
Let's be a place that gives them hope and a way out.
M. R. Heinrichs
Abbotsford
Member Comments |
No member comments available...