• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Free Booze Benefits Homelss Alcoholics

scm77

Sr. Member
Inactive
Reaction score
2
Points
230
Study: Free booze benefits homeless alcoholics

TORONTO, Ontario (Reuters) -- Giving homeless alcoholics a regular supply of booze may improve their health and their behavior, the Canadian Medical Association Journal said in a study published on Tuesday.

Seventeen homeless adults, all with long and chronic histories of alcohol abuse, were allowed up to 15 glasses of wine or sherry a day -- a glass an hour from 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. -- in the Ottawa-based program, which started in 2002 and is continuing.

After an average of 16 months, the number of times participants got in trouble with the law had fallen 51 percent from the three years before they joined the program, and hospital emergency room visits were down 36 percent.

"Once we give a 'small amount' of alcohol and stabilize the addiction, we are able to provide health services that lead to a reduction in the unnecessary health services they were getting before," said Dr. Jeff Turnbull, one of the authors of the report.

"The alcohol gets them in, builds the trust and then we have the opportunity to treat other medical diseases... It's about improving the quality of life."

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/americas/01/05/toronto.booze.reut/
---------------------
Thoughts?
 
There was a debate tonight on a talk show, about that study and the plan to extend that study into an actual program.

Personally, I think that even if the study is real (it hasn't been replicated and we don't know how "scientific" it was) it's about as good idea to give alcohol to alcoholics as it would be to give little girls to pedophiles.

Taking the slippery slope aside, it doesn't make fiscal sense. Say you were to replicate the study on a large scale. Assume it costs 10$ worth of alcohol per person, per day. At the end of the month, that's 300$. That can pay for detox, housing (won't be a five-star hotel, but they'll have somewhere safe, relatively clean and warm to go to) and food.

Take the money you'd have used to make unproductive members of society into even more unproductive members of society, and apply it to making them into productive members again. Sure, SOME homeless people consider it their "freedom" and WANT to live in the streets, but generally those are not alcoholics. There are also a lot of people who don't want to live in the street but don't see how they can get out.

We should turn away from being a nation that takes people by the hand and tells them "you have problems but it doesn't matter, that's how you are, so we'll just finance your problem" to being a nation that says "you have a problem, we're gonna help you get rid of it, and then you'll make society better as well."

Several people I know had trouble (drug/alcohol abuse, violence, etc) in their teenage years and, after they got some help, (and some, being in juvie for a while) they were fine. One is studying to be a paramedic, for example. Do you think giving him drugs and alcohol when he had problems with that would have helped him get there? Not bloody likely!
 
scm77 said:
"The alcohol gets them in, builds the trust and then we have the opportunity to treat other medical diseases... It's about improving the quality of life."

Whoa, apart from the medical diseases, that sounds awfully like how the army recruited me.  :blotto:
 
They have been giving out free booze to alky's in Toronto's downtown core for years now.  They call it "harm reduction", and this so-called "study" will be used to further entrench this program (and other programs, like the safe crack kit).  These ideas are insane.  Man I really wish Toronto would elect a mayor with some nuts, who can come in and tell all the people who run/come up with these programs, your funding is cut there is the door.
 
Gentlemen,
The easiest and most effective way to control disease, any disease, is to simply kill the person who exhibits the first symptom of the disease. This way the disease is stopped with no worries of progression and transmission. That course of action is, of course, immoral and illegal. Then we must look at "treating" such condition.
Alcohol dependance is a medical disease, and needs to be treated medically. If this study proves that programs like this will help in not having me or other medics routinely called out to pick this class of frequent flyer, I am all for it.

There are a few items which are not highlighted in the article about this study.

full story here:
http://www.cmaj.ca/cgi/content/full/174/1/45

Research

Shelter-based managed alcohol administration to chronicallyhomeless people addicted to alcohol
Tiina Podymow, Jeff Turnbull, Doug Coyle, Elizabeth Yetisir and George Wells
From the Inner City Health Project, University of Ottawa, and the Department of Medicine, Ottawa Hospital (Podymow, Turnbull); the Clinical Epidemiology Program of the Ottawa Health Research Institute and the Department of Medicine, University of Ottawa (Coyle); the University of Ottawa (Yetisir); and the Department of Epidemiology and Community Medicine, University of Ottawa (Wells), Ottawa, Ont.

Background: People who are homeless and chronically alcoholic have increased health problems, use of emergency services and police contact, with a low likelihood of rehabilitation. Harm reduction is a policy to decrease the adverse consequences of substance use without requiring abstinence. The shelter-based Managed Alcohol Project (MAP) was created to deliver health care to homeless adults with alcoholism and to minimize harm; its effect upon consumption of alcohol and use of crisis services is described as proof of principle.

Methods: Subjects enrolled in MAP were dispensed alcohol on an hourly basis. Hospital charts were reviewed for all emergency department (ED) visits and admissions during the 3 years before and up to 2 years after program enrolment, and the police database was accessed for all encounters during the same periods. The results of blood tests were analyzed for trends. A questionnaire was administered to MAP participants and staff about alcohol use, health and activities of daily living before and during the program. Direct program costs were also recorded.

Results: Seventeen adults with an average age of 51 years and a mean duration of alcoholism of 35 years were enrolled in MAP for an average of 16 months. Their monthly mean group total of ED visits decreased from 13.5 to 8 (p = 0.004); police encounters, from 18.1 to 8.8 (p = 0.018). Changes in blood test findings were nonsignificant. All program participants reported less alcohol consumption during MAP, and subjects and staff alike reported improved hygiene, compliance with medical care and health.

Interpretation: A managed alcohol program for homeless people with chronic alcoholism can stabilize alcohol intake and significantly decrease ED visits and police encounters.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alcoholism is well known to affect homeless people. It has been reported to affect 53%–73% of homeless adults, with a high frequency of heavy alcoholism (i.e., > 20 drinks/day). Because of its availability and low cost, nonbeverage alcohol (e.g., mouthwash) is commonly used. People with chronic alcoholism are frequent users of crisis health services such as the emergency department (ED); at one centre, alcoholism was a characteristic of 81% of homeless people who sought care. ED visits because of alcohol intoxication, withdrawal or its complications are recurrent. In addition, homeless people have higher rates of chronic illnesses, longer hospital stays with higher costs and increased mortality compared with those who have home addresses.
Police encounters are recurrent for public drunkenness. In one study, 70% of homeless alcoholic men had a history of imprisonment.

Although treatment with detoxification and abstention ("detox") is the best option from a health perspective, the likelihood of rehabilitation among among people both alcoholic and homeless is low. Obstacles to sobriety include psychiatric illness, poor social support, lack of stable housing, duration of addiction and refusal of treatment.

Harm reduction is a policy to reduce the adverse health, social and economic consequences of substance use without requiring abstinence. Methadone maintenance treatment of opioid dependence, for example, is superior to detox in reducing heroin use and behaviours that increase the risk of HIV infection. After an inquest into the freezing deaths of homeless alcoholic men, a pattern was noted of heavy alcohol consumption before shelter entry to achieve in-shelter abstinence, followed by early-morning alcohol-seeking to avoid the symptoms of withdrawal. Despite the high incidence of people with chronic alcoholism dying homeless in cities worldwide, this population has been underrecognized in program development and in the clinical literature. In response, a managed alcohol harm-reduction program was developed for people with long-term homelessness and refractory alcoholism.

In Ottawa, an estimated 1000 people are chronically homeless, with 48%–63% having a history of alcohol abuse. With the city and the University of Ottawa, the Managed Alcohol Program (MAP) was developed in a harm-reduction model to deliver health services to homeless adults within the shelter system. The objective of this study was to examine the effectiveness of MAP, as proof of principle, in reducing the use of crisis services and consumption of alcohol and improving health care in a cohort of chronically homeless people with refractory alcoholism.

MAP is an ongoing 15-bed shelter-based project in Ottawa. Potential participants are referred by shelter staff, police or community workers familiar with them as being chronically homeless, having severe alcoholism (according to DSM-IV diagnostic criteria for alcohol abuse) and showing evidence of harm to self and community, and for whom abstinence-based programs had failed or been refused. Admission was arranged upon agreement of the participant, shelter staff and the program manager, a registered nurse.

Study subjects were housed at the shelter in an area designated for MAP and were provided with beds and meals. The program employed a client care worker to supervise the participants, give aid with activities of daily living, help fill out applications for social benefits, accompany them to medical appointments and dispense regular medications. Participants were given up to a maximum of 5 ounces (140 mL) of wine or 3 ounces (90 mL) of sherry hourly, on demand, from 0700– 2200, 7 days per week. Medical care was provided 24 hours per day by nurses and 2 physicians associated with the project, with daily nurse and weekly physician visits. Medical records were kept on a secured online system developed by the Ottawa Inner City Health Project.

Program participants were enrolled into MAP and included for analysis with approval from the Ottawa Hospital research ethics board and police services. Inclusion required continuous program participation for at least 5 months by July 2002. Data for all 17 eligible subjects were included for analysis; no one left the program before 5 months or was excluded from the study. A consent and confidentiality statement was read to each person at program entry, and written consent obtained to access hospital and police records. The project was analyzed as a before-and-after study design. Charts from all 5 area hospitals were reviewed for 3 years before program entry and while participants were in the program for number of ED visits, ambulance use and diagnoses of trauma, seizures or intoxication at presentation. Hospital admissions and lengths of stay were recorded, as were blood-test markers of alcohol use. The police services' computerized database was accessed for each participant by name, date of birth and all aliases, and the number of police encounters recorded for the same period as for hospital records.

Descriptive statistics using the mean and standard deviation were used for normally distributed continuous outcomes. Average monthly rates of use of ambulance services, visits to hospital EDs, diagnoses, hospital admissions and police encounters were calculated for a 36-month period before and up to 24 months after program enrolment. Differences in outcome measures before and after program entry were assessed with the paired Student's t test. Average values for blood-test results were calculated for the 24 months before and during program enrolment for each participant, and analyzed for statistical differences.

Eligible participants underwent structured interviews about their drinking patterns before and after enrolment and their perceived health, nutrition and sleep. Participants estimated their typical daily beverage and nonbeverage alcohol consumption before program entry, which was compared with in-program daily alcohol intake averaged over the program period. Life satisfaction was measured by means of Diener's Satisfaction With Life (DSWL) Scale. The client care workers involved were interviewed for their observations of the participants' drinking patterns, hygiene, sleep, nutrition and medication compliance.

Fifteen men and 2 women who had been homeless for at least 2 years participated in MAP for 5–24 months (mean 16 mo; Table 1). The majority were single white males aged an average of 51 years, had alcoholic parents, had started drinking in their early teens and were not educated beyond high school. Study participants had been alcoholic for an average of 35 years, with most consuming nonbeverage alcohol regularly. Typical consumption before MAP enrolment was reported to average 46 drinks per day. Most had tried detox and abstention, but were unable to maintain sobriety. Fifteen (88%) had at least one chronic medical or psychiatric illness.

For the 3 years before entry into the program, the total mean monthly number of ED visits by all participants was 13.5, a monthly mean per participant of 0.79 (Table 2). During the program, this number decreased to a group monthly total of 8.1 (mean 0.51 visits per participant), with a decreased mean monthly paired difference per subject of 0.28 (standard deviation 0.35, p = 0.004; Fig. 1). Use of ambulance services, hospital admissions and ED visits all showed a decreasing trend, as did diagnoses of intoxication, trauma and convulsion, although statistical significance was not attained. Police encounters decreased from a monthly mean of 18.1 for the group to 8.8 (p = 0.018).

When concentrations of blood markers of alcoholism recorded during the 2 years before enrolment were compared with those obtained during the program, differences in group averages were nonsignificant, as were individual paired differences (results not shown).

Three people declined to be interviewed about their drinking history, health and life satisfaction, and 3 others died before being interviewed. The remaining 11 participants all reported a markedly decreased consumption of beverage and nonbeverage alcohol, and most reported improved sleep, hygiene, nutrition and health. Paired data were available for 10 participants to compare the amount of alcohol they were consuming before program entry with the amount consumed during MAP (Table 3). Subjects noted that a typical day's consumption was difficult to estimate; most described drinking all the alcohol that was available and would drink until they lost consciousness. For all participants, the absolute amount of alcohol consumed was found to decrease, from an average of 46 drinks per day to 8 (p = 0.002). Ten participants who agreed to be administered the DSWL Scale scored a median of 22, consistent with feeling "slightly satisfied" with life.30

The client care workers interviewed all noted improved hygiene and nutrition for all participants during the program. Compliance with medication, defined as taking it as prescribed at least 80% of the time, was noted for 88% of subjects. The majority were reported to attend scheduled medical appointments.

A cost analysis was performed (results not shown). Mean monthly direct cost of the program was $771 per client, with estimated per-client reductions in the costs of ED services of $96; hospital care, $150; and police services, $201.


This article describes the effect of providing supportive shelter for a subset of chronically homeless people with alcoholism and providing them with institutionally administered alcohol as a harm-reduction measure. The 17 participants enrolled in MAP drank heavily and had long drinking histories. They were regular users of nonbeverage alcohols such as mouthwash, had significant medical and psychiatric comorbidities, and were frequent users of emergency, hospital and police services. Within MAP they received housing, health care and treatment of their alcoholism with doses of alcohol that were modest in comparison with their previous levels of consumption.

Police encounters decreased by 51% and ED visits by 36%, which, given the associated "unit encounter" costs ($93 and $270, respectively), offset a portion of the costs of MAP. Police encounters and ED visits were seen to increase for 2 subjects (Fig. 1), but both had been in jail or living in another province during the 2 years before MAP enrolment and their reports were not captured in the Ottawa system. Blood-test markers of alcohol use remained stable, and participants and client care workers reported improvements in health, nutrition and hygiene. Compliance with prescribed medications and attendance at medical appointments was excellent compared with what might be predicted for alcoholic individuals living without homes. Three participants died of causes and at ages that have previously been described among homeless people;15,16,18 they died of intracerebral hemorrhage, cardiac arrest and acute alcoholic hepatitis, respectively. It must be noted that MAP is intended as a program with no stop date per admitted individual; participants would be expected to die of causes that are consequences of life-long addiction.

This study had limitations. Although it may have been preferable to compare 2 such groups in a randomized controlled trial, logistical, population and financial constraints made such methodology unfeasible. Potential biases identified with the one-group pretest–post-test study design include biases of history, maturation, testing and instrumentation, as well as statistical regression to the mean. However, there has been no change in ED, police or social policies to account for the decreased use of ED and police services. Maturation or biologic changes in the participants over time would tend to bias against MAP, with expected declines in health. Pre-and post-program hospital and police encounters would not be subjected to testing bias, since external databases were used. Observations were repeated over time with no instrument decay or regression to the mean. Clinical regression, in which participants might enter MAP when addictive consequences were at their worst and therefore appear to improve, is another possible source of bias; but the addiction in this group was of a severe and long-standing nature, and severity at program entry was likely representative of overall severity.

Continuity of care among homeless people has been found to be exceptionally difficult. Shelter operators already having demonstrated cultural competence in caring for the homeless were integrated into a shelter-based medical model of care to address previously unmet needs. This served to treat vulnerable individuals in a timely manner and coordinate their care, which allowed timely discharge from hospital. Police in frequent contact with people repeatedly inebriated in public have the opportunity to refer potential program participants to MAP and address a need within a system otherwise obliged to repeatedly process minor offences and bring people in for overnight detox in a police cell. Program development is ongoing for preventive care against infections such as tuberculosis and hepatitis and for administration of HIV tests and immunizations. For people whose drinking pattern has stabilized in MAP, psychiatric evaluations and follow-up have been successful.31 Finally, the option to detoxify from alcohol is always presented; once stabilized in the program, a few participants have successfully been medically detoxified and received housing, a formidable accomplishment considering the severity of an on-average 35-year addiction in which subjects drank daily to unconsciousness. This appears attributable to tempering alcohol consumption in a safe environment, which makes alterations of behaviour, including detoxification, possible.

In one large study,32,33 mentally ill homeless people in supportive housing had decreased shelter use, incarcerations, admissions to hospital and lengths of hospital stay. In another study,24 only 20% of people with case__managed alcoholism were able to maintain housing. Although housing is immensely beneficial for health, it is difficult to maintain without appropriate skills. Part of the success of MAP has likely been due to the supportive housing provided, but housing alone would not have prevented alcohol-seeking, consumption and the harm therefrom.

MAP is an innovative program based on a harm-reduction model that, when evaluated in a small group, appeared to be effective in decreasing alcohol consumption and the use of crisis services. Those responsible for the well-being of homeless people should consider the implementation and prospective evaluation of programs that integrate health services within shelters using a harm-reduction strategy.

@ See related article page 50

Editor's take

•Homeless people with severe alcoholism are frequent users of health care services, especially the emergency department, and have high rates of hospital admission and death. Treatment programs involving abstinence rarely succeed.

•Based on a framework of harm reduction, this homeless shelter program dispensed alcohol on an hourly basis to alcoholics in the shelter.

•Program participants consumed less alcohol, visited emergency departments less often and had fewer police encounters. Staff and clients reported improvements in hygiene, general health and compliance with medical care.

Clinical implications: Harm reduction is now a mainstream approach to drug abuse. This pilot project demonstrates that the strategy may be successful even in this very-difficult-to-treat group of longstanding homeless people addicted to alcohol.

This article has been peer reviewed.

Contributors: Tiina Podymow, Jeff Turnbull and George Wells contributed to the study conception and design, and the data acquisition and analysis, and drafted and revised this article. Elizabeth Yetisir did the statistical analysis, and Doug Coyle, the cost analysis. All of the authors approved the final version and support the findings of the study.

Acknowledgements: We are indebted to the following for their assistance: Pat Hayes, superintendent, Emergency Operations Division, Ottawa Police Service; Vela Tadic, who helped with data management; and Wendy Muckle, Director, Ottawa Inner City Health Project.

This work was supported by a grant from the Human Resources Development Corporation, Government of Canada, for the Inner City Health Project.

Competing interests: None declared.

edited to remove foot note numbering, highlight is mine.

So, gentleman, this study proves that by assisting alcohol habit with controled, measured, and reduced doses of alcohol, the load on society, health care and police is greatly reduced.  The shelter is actually assisting these chronically ill and burdening persons to get better, or atleast give them the right conditions to head off in the right direction.


 
Armymedic said:
Gentlemen,
The easiest and most effective way to control disease, any disease, is to simply kill the person who exhibits the first symptom of the disease. This way the disease is stopped with no worries of progression and transmission. That course of action is, of course, immoral and illegal. Then we must look at "treating" such condition.
Alcohol dependance is a medical disease, and needs to be treated medically. If this study proves that programs like this will help in not having me or other medics routinely called out to pick this class of frequent flyer, I am all for it.

There are a few items which are not highlighted in the article about this study.

full story here:
http://www.cmaj.ca/cgi/content/full/174/1/45

edited to remove foot note numbering, highlight is mine.

So, gentleman, this study proves that by assisting alcohol habit with controled, measured, and reduced doses of alcohol, the load on society, health care and police is greatly reduced.  The shelter is actually assisting these chronically ill and burdening persons to get better, or atleast give them the right conditions to head off in the right direction.

So by your logic we should assisting people with other substance abuse habits (crack, heroin) have free unmitigated access to the poison of thier choice.  Yeah that makes perfect sense.
 
I like the part where it says after feeding them alcohol every hour, they are less likely to commit a crime. *duh* they're probably too drunk to get off their asses and rob the candy man.
 
Hatchet Man said:
So by your logic we should assisting people with other substance abuse habits (crack, heroin) have free unmitigated access to the poison of thier choice.  Yeah that makes perfect sense.

Actually I like that idea.  They'd probably OD within a year, and if the "substance" is government produced, the cost to taxpayers would be minimal.  If they want to kill themselves off by using drugs, I have no problem with it.
 
NavComm said:
I like the part where it says after feeding them alcohol every hour, they are less likely to commit a crime. *duh* they're probably too drunk to get off their asses and rob the candy man.

One glass of wine an hour?  You don't think these guys have a tolerance to alcohol, being, you know, DRUNKS?  ;)
 
Hatchet Man said:
They have been giving out free booze to alky's in Toronto's downtown core for years now.  They call it "harm reduction", and this so-called "study" will be used to further entrench this program (and other programs, like the safe crack kit).  These ideas are insane.  Man I really wish Toronto would elect a mayor with some nuts, who can come in and tell all the people who run/come up with these programs, your funding is cut there is the door.

So what would your solution be then?  Put all the drunks out on the street, and then put all the social workers out of work and on the street with them?

It's easy to identify problems, not as easy to reach sensible and moral solutions, as Armymedic points out.
 
Hatchet Man said:
So by your logic we should assisting people with other substance abuse habits (crack, heroin) have free unmitigated access to the poison of their choice.  Yeah that makes perfect sense.

"sigh"  ::) umm, no.

they do not get
free unmitigated access to the poison of their choice
but measured, controlled and supervised dosages. Alcohol is a drug...and if treated as such, can be part of the treatment.

And by my logic...they already do assist people who abuse other substances in this similar way (thats what certain types of detox entails, its called weaning).

Its just never been done before with such long term chronic alcohol abusers as these.

 
IS this thing for real ? giving people free booze? I hope that its not coming from my Taxes I work Full time and trying to save up for my first home . Now the Government wants to give homeless people some of my taxes so they keep them drunk its sad truly sad . I would rather see that money go else where like to proper health care or to the military.  I think this is just another sad waste of tax payers money if it is true god I hope that it isn't . Just my two cents worth rant off  ::)
 
Michael Dorosh said:
One glass of wine an hour?  You don't think these guys have a tolerance to alcohol, being, you know, DRUNKS?  ;)

Michael, well then give them two glasses! And some rum cake too. Keep those levels up in order to keep the alcoholics down.

Honestly though, it burns my hiney that as taxpayers we have to pay to maintain someone else's addiction. I realize that addiction is a medical issue and I know plenty of functioning alcoholics. They buy their own booze.

I travel from my home to my job through the poorest neighbourhood in Canada (the downtown Eastside) and before I did that, I too, had sympathy for all the poor people living there.

After 6 months of seeing the same losers on the street every single day, I don't feel so sympathetic anymore. I'm fed up with being asked for cigarettes and money every time I go to work. Downtown Vancouver is full of beggars and drug addicts that lie around all day long begging. I say if they've got the energy to panhandle for 8 hours a day, why don't they get a job?

Then on Xmas eve I went to feed the homeless and talked to several people who are legitimately trying to improve their lot in life. I met quite a few drug addicts and alcoholics too. The difference in my mind, is that the drug addicts and alcoholics seem to think the rest of society owes them some comforts and the others know they have to struggle to make their lives better.

I have no problem with social programs that result in people being able to improve their lot in life. I have a serious problem with my tax dollars funding programs to keep drunks drunk and drug addicts high.

The government doesn't give me money when I want to sustain a boozy fog for a weekend, I have to rely on my rich friends to do that.  ;)
 
karl28 said:
IS this thing for real ? giving people free booze? I hope that its not coming from my Taxes I work Full time and trying to save up for my first home . Now the Government wants to give homeless people some of my taxes so they keep them drunk its sad truly sad . I would rather see that money go else where like to proper health care or to the military.  I think this is just another sad waste of tax payers money if it is true god I hope that it isn't . Just my two cents worth rant off  ::)
NavComm said:
Michael, well then give them two glasses! And some rum cake too. Keep those levels up in order to keep the alcoholics down.
Honestly though, it burns my hiney that as taxpayers we have to pay to maintain someone else's addiction. I realize that addiction is a medical issue and I know plenty of functioning alcoholics. They buy their own booze.

Good then, if you want to save your taxes then you have 2 options for these people:
1. kill them,
2. ban alcohol.

If your not in favour of that, then what is the option..do nothing and wait for them to die?
Can't do that, they will take up hospital beds and time from police, paramedics and hospital staff.

If you don't want support the people looking for a solution, then just sum up!

adding more because of the reboot:

Further if its solely your tax dollars you are pumping hot air about, then you don't have an arguement either.
Reseach such as this under the University of Ottawa and Ottawa Health Research Institute is privately funded.
The province of Ontairo provides support to the shelter:
The managed alcohol project was launched in 2001 by the Inner City Health Project, in partnership with the Shepherds of Good Hope, the University of Ottawa and other social agencies. Ontario's ministry of health contributes $1.4 million to the Inner City Health Project, which funds a palliative care, alcohol management and short-stay infirmary program for the homeless.

The program, which offers participants meals and a place to sleep in addition to the alcohol, costs $771 per participant each month. The study estimated that the program reduced costs to police and emergency health services by an average of $447 a month for each client.

 
Armymedic said:
Good then, if you want to save your taxes then you have 2 options for these people:
1. kill them,
2. ban alcohol.

If your not in favour of that, then what is the option..do nothing and wait for them to die?
Can't do that, they will take up hospital beds and time from police, paramedics and hospital staff.

If you don't want support the people looking for a solution, then just sum up!

You're over-complicating the problem. We do not have to kill them. They are killing themselves. Why hospitalize them? If the hospitals and treatment centres stopped giving them alcohol, they would stop using those facilities because their needs will not be met there.

I suppose they will die of their disease just as cancer patients will die of their disease. The difference being that the cancer isn't self-inflicted and until the sufferer reaches a certain stage, it doesn't render that person completely useless to themselves and society.

Yes, I know I've heard all about how addicts can't stop, but then explain to me people who have overcome addictions? Why do some people overcome addictions and others don't? Maybe the ones who overcame the addiction realized that if they didn't help themselves no one else would. That if they continued along that particular path, they would be living in the streets taking hand outs from social workers and being shunned by the rest of society.

I would rather see my tax dollars spent on better education and early intervention of at-risk groups than to maintain a chronic alcoholic's addiction. Let the poor man suffer for all I care, his addiction is not my problem and I shouldn't have to fund it.

Medical intervention for people with chronic addictions who refuse to help themselves should be limited to life saving measures only, not so they can get a good night's sleep in a warm bed.

The people who support this type of systemic abuse of tax dollars are the same people who willingly take the blame for all of societies other ills. Instead of blaming ourselves for the high rate of crime, addiction, suicide and general uselessness of certain segments of society, why not intervene early by:

  • providing sports programs free to youth from impoverished homes and make it mandatory for them to attend
  • providing parenting classes to at-risk groups and make it mandatory to attend
  • providing relief to at-risk parents by offering child minding services so that they can join sports programs (fully funded) or interest groups outside the home to promote a healthy life style - and I don't mean bingo or boozing it up
  • volunteering with Big Brothers and Big Sisters to provide kids with positive roll models


That list is in no way definitive, it's just a few things I could think of right now. I'm sure there are a lot of other solutions to this problem and IMO we could better spend those tax dollars on the people who have a chance of over-coming their problems instead of wasting it on people we can't really help anyways.



 
I am not over complicating this...there are two options
1. look for a solution or,
2. do nothing

If your chosing #2 then you are endorsing the waste and strain on our healthcare system.

I would rather see my tax dollars spent on better education and early intervention of at-risk groups than to maintain a chronic alcoholic's addiction. Let the poor man suffer for all I care, his addiction is not my problem and I shouldn't have to fund it.

:brickwall:



NavComm,
read the CMAJ article I have posted up...In fact, anyone else who posts up on this thread read the above article before you spout off...

read why the study was conducted...read how the effects of thier research will benefit all of us.



 
Army Medic I don't want to kill these people yes they need help . But I do not agree with giving them more booze. I just don't see how that can help them there still addicted if any thing that would seem cruel from my point of view .  As for my Tax payers dollars being spent on that . I stated that i didn't now if that was true( I think this is just another sad waste of tax payers money true if it is true god I hope that it isn't . Just my two cents worth rant off  )    I do agree with NavComms postion on what should be done I would have no problem supporting these ideas

*-providing sports programs free to youth from impoverished homes and make it mandatory for them to attend
*-providing parenting classes to at-risk groups and make it mandatory to attend
*-providing relief to at-risk parents by offering child minding services so that they can join sports programs (fully funded) or interest groups outside the home to promote a healthy life style - and I don't mean bingo or boozing it up

**Army Medic if I had offended you that was not my attention. I just don't agree with funding a booze fund with any ones tax money, and I am glad to here that it is privately funded . As you now your self money is not easy to come by. I am saving all that I can for my first home witch is my bigest goal right now . I just would like to see public money being used wisely thats all that I meant by my statements
 
Prevention is good, and someday when it actually works, we won't need programs like this.
 
Armymedic said:
I am not over complicating this...there are two options
1. look for a solution or,
2. do nothing

If your chosing #2 then you are endorsing the waste and strain on our healthcare system.

:brickwall:



NavComm,
read the CMAJ article I have posted up...In fact, anyone else who posts up on this thread read the above article before you spout off...

read why the study was conducted...read how the effects of thier research will benefit all of us.

I respect the fact that you have empathy for these people. Thank God for people like you, because if it were up to people like me, this is what a day in the life of a downtown Eastside drug addict would look like:

- Day break: marching band arrives and plays God Save the Queen and Oh Canada to rouse them from their drunken/drug induced stupors
- Get them washed up, clean clothes and a hearty breakfast
- give them the tools to get busy and clean up their neighbourhood, paint some decrepit buildings, wash windows, sweep sidewalks, pick up garbage
- lunch time, feed them a hearty lunch
- play some nice music while they are working and eating - pipe it into the neighbourhood, music is good for the soul (even the troubled soul)
- back to improving the neighbourhood
- supper time - feed them a hearty supper
- back to improving the neighbourhood and maybe a baseball game or some sports
- dusk: take them to the empty school and rec centres, provide them with cots and pillows and blankets, tooth brushes and shaving kits, give them some board games or cards, socialize until 11 p.m. lights out
- daybreak the marching band again and it starts over

I chose Oh Canada and God Save the Queen because these people should be thankful they live in a country that not only tolerates their anti-social lifestyle, but some people even feel responsible enough to want to fund it!

Believe me, my little plan might benefit us all too. It just doesn't include pandering to alcoholics and drug addicts.
 
You know, I agree with you 100% on that daily schedule. Compliance might become an issue as the addiction becomes too strong. But, combine that plan with the program above, and we might just be able to do something that will benefit both them and us.

Personally, I would rather put them all onto a boat for a 1000 km trip across the Pacific with only 500 kms of fuel food and water....but that would not be moral.

I am passionate about this because when I first read the article, I thought to myself that finally someone has a plan to do something about the homeless and drunken. A news article I saw on CTV Ottawa portrated a couple of the people from the program who are now undergoing AA, newly employed and actually doing something after 20+ yrs of drunken homelessness.

During my time (medic OJT) riding on Toronto area ambulances, we picked up atleast 2 drunk/homeless a week just to take them to the hospital. What a waste of my time, and what a waste of our money. I have heard people talk about homeless and getting rid of them over the last 10 yrs. If a dollar was donated for every time someone thought or spoke about having the homeless removed from the streets, this program would be paid for across Canada.

I am getting upset (and sorry to all if its getting personal, cause I am trying not to) at the fact that people attack a plan to counteract the effects of a chronic illness and reduce the strain on our society caused by this illness. This study actually has a plan to help those who were previously helpless, or unwilling to help themselves.

I think this is good because in helps relieve the strain on the police and health care system. Gov't money already goes toward to homeless shelters. The status quo has not been the answer. We waste more taxpayer money on less noble causes.

 
Back
Top