Long term drug treatment

I read an interesting article in The Province the other day and thought I would shed some thoughts on it. Ethan Baron, the author of the article, had previously written a column which stated that, “addicts who collect welfare and steal to support their habits should be forced into long-term rehabilitation.”

This concept poses that addicts who are convicted of crimes can choose between going to jail or going to long-term rehab, in hopes that once the addicts are presented with the opportunity of treatment, they will take it. This of course, is a conditional sentence and the decision would ultimately be up to the judge. Where would this facility be? Suggestions have been made about incorporating the model into the already existing long-term care centre in Burnaby (at the Burnaby Centre for Mental Health and Addictions,) or at Riverview Hospital in Coquitlam. How can we afford this? While the cost to provide facilities and treatment would be immense, these costs would be offset by the reduction in welfare collection, theft, and emergency room visits.

This column has brought on much debate as to whether or not it is an effective solution. Those who support the idea say that forcing treatment can work, and may be necessary as drug addicts are often incapable of making rational decisions. Since addicts have no control over their addictions, and the system has no power over the addicts, forcing them into long-term treatment may be the only to guarantee that they stay clean.

Those who are against the idea believe that addicts do not need to be forced into treatment. They believe that the problem is that the opportunity to clean up is currently not realistic and available; yet if the appropriate resources are provided, then many addicts would be interested and would probably admit themselves. Those who argue against the idea of forced long-term treatment also voice concerns about how this concept can violate civil rights, that addicts have the right to decide how they spend their money. Further arguments state that more focus should be put on prevention, so that this problem can be attacked at its roots.

While I believe that prevention is the best solution for this problem, I do not think that we should give up on those who have gotten caught in the spiral just because they made the mistake of trying a drug “just this once.” If we only focused on prevention, we would be giving up on those who are suffering, probably the most they’ve suffered in their entire lives. It would be unfair to leave those victims behind, just because they do not have the rationality or resources to go in the right direction.

I think that the long-term treatment would be a good idea. Many current treatment offer short term treatment, while providing some sort or mentorship or sponsorship afterward. Long-term treatment would increase the education, support, and counselling for the addict which would in turn increase the chances of the addict closing that chapter in his or her life. If they are going to be put in jail anyway, why not try to help them instead of shutting them out of society?

Advertisement