DRUG-USER ADVOCATE CANS COURIER

To the editor:

Re: "Former cop backs mandatory drug treatment," Dec. 14.

Yikes! Mike Howell writes that Dave Dickson said the focus should
shift from harm reduction services to mandatory drug treatment because
that is the only way women in the sex trade will change their lives.
It is irresponsible to write a story quoting a person like poor Dave
Dickson mentioning "mandatory drug treatment" without letting us all
know what "mandatory drug treatment" is.

Kidnapping a person and holding them against their will while
"treating" them is illegal and is perhaps a poor approach. As far as I
know, "forced" treatment is legal for minors, so Canadian children can
be locked up and "treated." I also know this approach when
unsuccessful often creates a lifetime "treatment resistance" because
it destroys the therapeutic value of treatment and instead associates
a medical treatment with punishment.

It is irresponsible to publish stories in the Courier that are
completely out of context. With no details of what is meant by
"mandatory drug treatment," Dave Dickson gets the hopes up of those
who are related to people who use illegal drugs thinking there is a
strategy that has not yet been tried here but is effective.

I am horrified to read Dave's comment that the missing women "weren't
women who phoned home every week. Their contact was minimal, so when
they went missing, no one really noticed."

A public dialogue about what is the "best practice" in "addiction
treatment" is welcome and necessary in Vancouver, as is a review of
how so many women went missing with no action by police. Please let's
not flip off empty terms like "mandatory drug treatment" and keep
spreading misinformation about whether the missing women regularly
phoned home.

Ann Livingston, Executive Program Director, Vancouver Area Network of
Drug Users