IT is in nobody’s interest for drug or alcohol users to be ending up by default at hospital accident and emergency departments.
It is a waste of the NHS resources we all contribute to, can delay those using casualty departments for other reasons, and it is unlikely to be the best place for the patient.
Figures released by the Scottish Parliament in March revealed visits by problem drug users to Scottish hospital A&E units cost about £10 million annually. Now the Global Drugs Survey has claimed such unplanned hospital visits are more likely to happen in Scotland than in other parts of the UK.
The Scottish Drugs Forum argues this is evidence more help is needed for those who want to stop using, or reduce the harm caused by their dependency. SDF director David Liddell also says it may be a sign the focus of addiction services on heroin is leaving users of other substances without adequate support.
Both of these theories may be true. It is right services for tackling heroin addiction are prioritised and that the potential of new schemes such as the safer injecting pilot for Glasgow Centre is tested. Heroin and other opiates cause greater long-term devastation in the lives of users, their families and the public at large than most other substances – apart from, arguably, tobacco and alcohol.
But heroin is predominantly a problem for older users and there is certainly a case for more and better services for those at risk from some of the newer psychoactive compounds, particularly young people. Such chemically formulated drugs, often designed to replicate the effects of other drugs such as LSD or cannabis, can frequently be dangerously unpredictable.
Prohibition doesn’t work, especially in an era where the authorities struggle to keep up with the proliferation of new substances, and where facilities such as the secretive Darknet make purchases more easy. It is better to provide help for those who want to stop and harm reduction for those who do not or cannot – than pay more later when problems have worsened, or allow inappropriate and expensive misuse of NHS resources.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here