OUR drug treatment “experts” would do well to come out of their denial and note Max Cruickshank’s insightful observation (Letters, November 6) that methadone just substitutes one addictive drug for another – it merely stabilises the “must have” urgency of say, heroin addiction, allowing people to get on with other aspects of living; and I applaud anyone who can use it so; but until they can also ditch the methadone, they are still drug addicts, despite “expert” pronouncements to the contrary. Methadone maintenance was only initiated to change the quality of addiction – nothing else.
It seems to me that the current Scottish call for devolvement of drug laws so that we can treat addiction as a public health rather than a criminal problem misunderstands (perhaps deliberately) that Scotland and the wider UK has a long history of treating addiction with an appropriate combination of public health and criminal justice interventions – the latter addressing drug dealing.
However, given the habits of current society, it does seem wastefully unproductive to prosecute the possession of small amounts of some drugs judged less harmful (but not entirely harmless) to users if used responsibly, such as cannabis; so a measure of decriminalisation (not legalisation, which is another issue) might now be sensible because it would be decriminalising the already-existing personal use of some currently illicit drugs.
The real radical solution we need to tackle rising drug deaths, is not primarily drug consumption rooms (which may be a useful interim measure for individual users) but rather, to rid our drug treatment practice of the current tsunami of “touchy-feely”, politically-correct, naïve harm reductionism impeding effective decisions towards supporting users to eventually leave all addiction behind; we need a contractual relationship between users and support services, with each proactively “doing their bit” to reach that goal.
Given what we currently know about addiction, which is not a disease in itself, but rather, behaviour, this goal is “doable” if both sides really want it.
Unfortunately, without this change in attitude in the drug treatment field, I fear that Scotland’s current call for devolved drug laws, if granted, would simply result in the sham of adding yet two more factors – decriminalisation and drug consumption rooms –to naïve harm reduction’s ongoing maintenance of a growing population of full- and quasi-drug addicts constantly at risk of overdosing and adding themselves to the latest drug death statistics.
Philip Adams, Crosslee.
Of all the toxic legacies of President Richard Nixon, the most pernicious was his “War on Drugs”. Without a national debate on the subject Britain followed his use of the failed methods of prohibition to tackle what had until then been seen in this country as a medical problem.
Most of the money spent is on enforcement yet organised crime is clearly in charge, spreading death and corruption. Enlightened national leaders long ago concluded that “prohibition” had once again proved a disastrous idea. The debate about handling this tragic problem is now largely over except in Westminster where it has hardy begun. Time for Scotland to take a grip of its own destiny.
Rev Dr John Cameron, St Andrews.
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 hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel