LETTER TO THE EDITOR: No quick fix with drugs

Opinion

“Thank you, I guess, for saving me? Helping me? Mr. Policeman. You have confiscated my supply of drugs, but for what reason, what end? I know you are acting with the law in mind, but don’t you realize that I have a health problem — it’s called addiction? You must feel I can ‘do better’ and have my health problem get better, by taking away the ‘drugs’ I am dependent on. And now you are arresting me! But I am not a criminal; I’m not the enemy!”

The first premise we need to agree on is that the so-called “war on drugs” is a complete bust! Isn’t it interesting that this “war,” at one time, included marijuana, which now, has been decriminalized — legalized! Why? Is it because it does no harm? Let’s also remember that the use of alcohol is “legal” as well. Are those drugs harmless? Obviously not! The one advantage of being legal is that the product for use (sale) has to meet “safety” standards and its sale is supervised. And people are not being jailed when they are in possession of these products.

What about other illegal drugs? In trying to understand and deal with what is going on with other drugs, a number of jurisdictions have been adopting different programs I feel, and sense, there is more of an urgency for these programs, as we are being made aware of the “epidemic” of drug overdoses. During the same period of time, at the heights of death from COVID-19, in British Columbia, there were more overdose deaths!

What can we do about this? One approach that has received a lot of attention lately is to “decriminalize” the possession of small amounts of “illegal drugs.” This is happening in B.C., in Oregon, and if you looked at what’s going on in Portugal — they’ve decriminalized drugs completely. At first glance, this does not sound like a good idea.

That very position was supported by a recent Brandon Sun local viewpoint where Wab Kinew was taken to task about his support of the decriminalization of the possession of small amounts of illegal drugs. As one reads this article and tries to make sense of all this, probably the most important point is that if you think that “decriminalizing” will be a “quick fix” and we won’t have to deal with drug addiction anymore, then think again! I can’t speak directly for Mr. Kinew, but I’m sure the “decriminalization” was just a start/first step in trying to deal with addiction and that other programs or supports will also be needed.

I think it was unfair to demonize Mr. Kinew by saying that, “he wants us to stop telling the kids and adults to ‘say no to drugs.’” “Just say no” — if it were only that simple! We also had the justice minister at the time, Cliff Cullen, responding with, “Wab Kinew wants to tell kids it’s OK to do meth and other illegal drugs … I can tell you that our government will continue to warn kids about the dangers of using ‘illegal drugs.’”

I also hope he means that the same warning should also apply to alcohol, marijuana and cigarettes. Further along in the viewpoint we are informed that, “there is a massive difference, however, between kids experimenting with cannabis and alcohol versus highly dangerous and addictive drugs such as meth, cocaine, fentanyl and heroin.” Are you kidding? The “drug” that out ranks all the addictive drugs in regards to how much harm with addiction and other health issues is “alcohol,” even among the young!

In the viewpoint, it is suggested that in Oregon, a jurisdiction that decriminalized possession of small amounts of certain illegal drugs, the rate of drug abuse and the number of fatal overdoses have increased since decriminalization happened. I don’t know if you can make a direct cause-and-effect conclusion.

What is important to know is that it is not the quantity of the drug, it is the quality that has a direct causal relationship to overdose deaths. This very fact speaks to what else we might do to deal with overdose deaths. So, first, you can possess small amounts, obviously intended for personal use, (we arrest and prosecute the dealers) and second, we will make sure that the drug you are going to use is safe and won’t kill you. In most settings, this is to make sure it is not laced with fentanyl. Did you know that there are test kits to detect fentanyl?

We can take it a step further for the addict and arrange for them to have access to methadone or suboxone. Do you realize that many addicts take advantage of this safe approach to deal with their addiction? And then they can attempt to resume a normal life: work, driving a vehicle, having a home, having a family.

But, sorry, there is much more to the story, isn’t there? If I may quote an entry in Johann Hart’s book called “Chasing the Scream.” The quote is a comment from a figure named Jiao — an addict — “using drugs is only a symptom of some suffering, and we have to reach the reasons” that make addicts want to be out of their heads much of the time. “You can stop using drugs for a while, but ‘if’ you don’t solve the problem you have in your minds, things will come back. We have to work on the trauma in your life, and only ‘then’ can you ‘change’ the ‘way’ you deal with it.”

So, if I can go back to our meeting with the addict at the beginning of this piece, I feel that the dialogue could go: “Thank you, Mr. Policeman, for ‘not’ taking my drugs. Thank you for giving me the test kit to make sure my drugs are ‘safe.’ (I don’t want to die, and neither does my family want me to die.) Thank you for making me aware of the ‘help’ I might take advantage of. I’m not a criminal! I’m not the enemy!”

SCOTT BLYTH

Brandon