Jac's Voice
  • HOME
  • MISSION
  • MEDIA-BLOGS
    • What Donna Has To Say
    • Video - RESILIENCY, Donna explains how and why she does it
    • OTTAWA - SAFE CONSUMPTION SITES
    • 2014 - Conversations around Addiciton
    • Video - THE TRUTH ABOUT THE WAR ON DRUGS
    • Video - STIGMA
    • Video - DISRUPTING THE DANCE (Lifting the Veil on America's Opioid Addiction)
    • Video - THE ADDICT'S MOM, Sharing without Shame
    • Video - BREAKING BAD, what it really tells us
    • Video - ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!
    • NALOXONE - Save a Life
    • SUBOXONE - The truth about it
  • ADDICTION & MENTAL HEALTH
    • Exactly What Does HARM REDUCTION mean?
    • Awareness & Education
    • Article on Addiction Awareness
    • Article on Mental Illness Awareness
    • Resources & Support
  • MY WORK
  • CONTACT INFO
    • About Donna
    • Contact Us

February 26th, 2014

2/26/2014

0 Comments

 

The Federal Government and Safe Injecting Sites: 
Why the Ongoing Resistance?

Authors: Seonaid Nolan, MD, FRCPC and Evan Wood, MD, FRCPC

It is no secret that the consequences of drug addiction are severe, sometimes even fatal. Imagine, for a moment, an opportunity that offered a completely different outcome for Canadians suffering from the stigma that surrounds severe addiction.

Imagine an opportunity that provided a welcome environment free of judgment to those most entrenched in their disease.  A setting that has repeatedly proven to substantially reduce the chance of acquiring a life threatening infectious disease or die from a drug overdose.  A place where one could access health care services without shame, engage in medical detoxification and be referred for other addiction treatment.

It would be hard to comprehend why anyone would not be in support of such a program.  Yet that is exactly where we find ourselves with the federal government’s entrenched opposition to Vancouver’s supervised injecting facility, Insite.

Despite a wealth of scientific evidence repeatedly demonstrating the success of Insite in reducing harms associated with illicit drug use and widespread endorsement for the program from numerous health bodies, including the Canadian Medical Association, the federal government went all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada in an effort to have Insite shut down.  They were ultimately unsuccessful when a unanimous 2011 decision stipulated the facility remain open and also described how the government must consider applications for future programs.

The government’s response?  Announcement of its “Respect for Communities Act.” A Bill so onerous it seemed geared towards making it
impossible for any organization to meet eligibility criteria to even submit a future application.  Ultimately, the Bill did not become law but was quickly succeeded by the introduction of Bill C2

The government’s stark opposition to supervised injecting facilities is rather confusing given their support for other health interventions for intravenous drug users.  At the 2008 International AIDS Conference, former Health Minister Tony Clement made clear the Conservative’s support for needle exchange programs, which involve handing out clean needles to addicts and have proven effective at reducing the spread of infections like HIV.  In the case of Insite, however, Clement made clear his strong opposition to the program famously calling it an “abomination.”

The irony is that needle exchange programs do essentially the same function as Insite but they don’t regulate how and where the needles are used.  For instance, individuals using a needle exchange may take a needle and subsequently inject in full view of the public and then dispose of the needle in parks or other areas where there is a risk of needle stick injury.  Contrast this with Insite, where injections take place out of the public view, away from vulnerable youth, and onsite disposals ensure used needles can not find their way into public spaces.  Strict rules and nursing supervision also precludes the possibility of a used syringe being passed between users at Insite, a behavior primarily responsible for the spread of HIV among this population and not fully prevented by traditional needle exchange programs.  Locally, Insite has contributed to a 90 percent reduction in new HIV cases in BC, which is remarkable given each new HIV infection costs on average $500,000 in medical costs.  Insite also forces its clients to temporarily remain onsite after injecting where an addiction treatment program is co-located.  As a result a study published in theNew England Journal of Medicine demonstrated that weekly use of supervised injecting facilities was associated with a greater than 70 percent increase in the use of medical detoxification among its clients.

Despite these clear successes, and the ability of the program to reduce public drug use and the spread of disease and death, the federal government remains firm in their opposition to supervised injecting facilities.  Unfortunately, many desperately addicted Canadian’s lives currently hang in the balance as a result.

What further evidence does the government need to support this lifesaving program?

Authors: Seonaid Nolan, MD, FRCPC and Evan Wood, MD, FRCPC

**Please note that the material presented here does not necessarily imply endorsement or agreement by individuals at the Centre for Addictions Research of BC



0 Comments

    RSS Feed

    RSS Feed


    Donna May's Calendar


    Picture

    About Me

    Donna was born and raised in Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario Canada; a relatively small steel making community, and spent her first 25 years there. She married, divorced and raised two of her three children there until leaving during the recession of the early 1980's. Toronto more than provided her with the means to support her family; it held all of the resources that she would need to attain her goals and dreams of a better future than The Sault could ever possibly allow her.

    Sadly, those goals and dreams were hers alone, and she soon found the unhappiness of her children would cost her their upbringing.

    At the age of nine, Jacquilynne and her older brother, then twelve, would return to the care of their father and the same small town influences that had driven their mother away.

    Although raised by the same moral standards, only two of Donna's children grew to be fine young men with deep rooted standards and convictions while her daughter Jacquilynne choose a life completely contradictory to every moral she was raised by.

    And so, it would be Jacquilynne, her only daughter, who would provide Donna with the basis, as well as the encouragement, with which to write.

    Jacquilynne's life style would find her beaten, threatened with death, in the midst of murders and crime, running for her life and suffering terminal illness caused from her addiction. Donna would learn how wrong the common belief that "addiciton is a choice" really is and how 'tough love' almost denied her the final months of her daughter's life. 

    Tweets by @donnadmay

    Archives

    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    February 2015
    February 2014
    November 2013
    September 2013
    August 2013
    July 2013
    June 2013
    April 2013

©Jac's voice - Donna D May 2013. All Rights Reserved.