TREATMENT HOMES NOT A THREAT TO KIDS

This opposition to opening a treatment facility in their neighbourhood
is a perfect example of a frustrating, dark-ages type of ignorance
toward mental health and drug treatment ["Double Bind", December 2-9].

Supposedly, the main problem with this proposal is that it is too
close to a school. However, if we are to stay a certain distance away
from all schools, which are well-placed throughout our community,
there would be nowhere for people to go for help.

It is also interesting how so often the people who say they want to
run these "crazies and addicts" off the streets are the same people
who don't support them when they want to get help and treatment that
will aid in recovery and get them off the streets.

Yet these people already are our neighbours, our family, our friends.
How many of our neighbourhood children or those attending this school
will become alcoholics or drug addicts or develop a mental illness
when they are adults--if they haven't done so already? How will we
treat them then? Where will they go for treatment when their own
neighbourhoods refuse them?

The facts are clear about who hurts our children the most; it is
almost always someone the child knows, a family member, a friend, an
"ordinary-appearing" neighbour. And it could be someone who has an
untreated addiction or other illness. In some cases, government
policies hurt our children even more.

So is this outcry really about protecting children? Is this opposition
really about creating safe neighbourhoods? Or is this just fear based
on ignorance?

If the real concern is about protecting our neighbourhoods and our
children, then we will support our neighbours in their desire to get
the health treatment they need and deserve.

Lenore S. Clemens

Vancouver