What to do with drug addicts?

[spindrift]

What about the question of informed consent?

 

The addicts may not be in a fit state of mind to give it, so Harris leaves it to doctors to judge whether their patient is able to make a rational decision about something as life-changing as sterilisation.

But the doctors aren't told by Project Prevention that their patient will be getting money in exchange for the procedure, so they aren't fully informed of the addict's motivations when they make their assessment.

 

Harris sees no problem with this.

 

"If they want to tell their doctor, that's their choice – we don't communicate with doctors."

 

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2010/jun/12/barbara-harris-sterilise-drug-addicts-alcoholics

[Stoatwobbler]

£200 to an addict is not a 'free'choice', the addict me be pining for crack.

 

The poll is flawed.

 

Well the programme is flawed IMHO. The temptation will be for junkies to get £200.00 to spend on drugs, thus keeping the addict mired in the personal problems that keep them being a burden on themselves and society.

 

The better option is to do something to get the addict off drugs, but that is more difficult and expensive.

[Chris_Sleeps]

I've said it before, eugenics is always ugly. People have a right to have children.

 

Drug addicts having children they can't care for and look after is a different point, and isn't good for society. The charity is blunt and smashes through everyone's ideas about eugenics to solely reach the end of stopping addicts procreating. I can't work out my feelings on the subject, but i think to dismiss the lady as a lunatic does no good at all.

[Chris_Sleeps]

What about the question of informed consent?

 

The addicts may not be in a fit state of mind to give it, so Harris leaves it to doctors to judge whether their patient is able to make a rational decision about something as life-changing as sterilisation.

One could argue that if they aren't in a fit state of mind to consider sterilisation fully, then they aren't in a fit state of mind to consider parenthood either.

[rubydazzler]

This woman is clearly a deranged religious lunatic, she should have her tubes cauterised to prevent her having any more brainwashed children.

It may be more likely that she's become a little deranged by caring for the four children of crack addicted mothers that she adopted?

 

I've talked intensively in the past with the teenage and adult children of addicts, whether of drink or drugs, and I'm not sure that many people from 'average' families quite realise just how much physical abuse and neglect, not to mention fear and emotional damage can be caused to children by these parents.

 

Whilst I agree that paying them £200 isn't a great idea, preventing them having children whilst addicted, by whatever means, seems a good move to me.

[spindrift]

One could argue that if they aren't in a fit state of mind to consider sterilisation fully, then they aren't in a fit state of mind to consider parenthood either.

 

 

Addicts with a clean supply can live a perfectly normal, productive, crime-free life. They are no more bad parents than parents who smoke. Want to sterilise smokers?

 

As I said, the chances of a child coming to harm because of a driver are far higher than them coming to harm because of drugs.

 

Follow Harris's logic and ask what to do about drivers who speed down residential roads...

[Funky_Gibbon]

I've talked intensively in the past with the teenage and adult children of addicts, whether of drink or drugs, and I'm not sure that many people from 'average' families quite realise just how much physical abuse and neglect, not to mention fear and emotional damage can be caused to children by these parents.

 

Whilst I agree that paying them £200 isn't a great idea, preventing them having children whilst addicted, by whatever means, seems a good move to me.

 

Physical abuse, neglect, fear and emotional damage are caused in plenty of families who don't have problems with drink or drugs. Should we spay them too?

[Chris_Sleeps]

Addicts with a clean supply can live a perfectly normal, productive, crime-free life. They are no more bad parents than parents who smoke. Want to sterilise smokers?

I do not want to sterilise smokers, no. I wouldn't apply her own logic to all drug use either. A crack addict is a different to an heroin addict, for example. A methodone addict is different to an heroin addict aswell. The awkward point about drug use is that all drugs are different, and people are different. Mostly it is quite hard to find a a catch-all answer.

 

Secondly, you know as well as i do that addicts rarely have access to a clean supply of drugs, so your point is a little muffled. While people are still being destoryed by drug use, which does occur, is it wrong to tempt them into sterilisation by using money?

As i say, i don't know my feelings on it yet. They aren't going to use their own logic to think "maybe we shouldn't have a child while we are addicted to drugs," so is money a bait to get them to an end a logical person would find on their own?

[rubydazzler]

Physical abuse, neglect, fear and emotional damage are caused in plenty of families who don't have problems with drink or drugs. Should we spay them too?

I was replying to a comment about drug users' children. If you want to discuss your own topic, feel free to start a thread about it. I'm discussing this one, not children and families generally.

 

Unfortunately, we can't hedge appropriate posts around with disclaimers and sorties into other territory, otherwise we'd all be writing endless posts.

[Nagel]

I voted 'treat and rehabilitate', by which I mean give them their drugs on the NHS. It would stop all drug related crime in an instant and allow them to lead normal lives. We used to have this policy in the 1960s and it worked very well. They have the policy in Switzerland and it's a great success there too.