CP: Should the Government Sponsor Safe Injection Sites?

Legal injection sites are a relatively modern concept that have been considered for widespread implementation in many of the world’s most industrialized nations for the last decade. In basic terms, a legal injection site is a location where heroin addicts can bring their illegally-bought drugs to ‘shoot up’ under the supervision of nurses and clean medical equipment. The idea branches from the umbrella concept of ‘heroin maintenance,’ which is a concept employed in many of the world’s more socialized states (like Switzerland, Belgium and the United Kingdom). Heroin maintenance is a process in which the state provides opiates to a drug addict who cannot seem to respond to drug treatment, in an effort to avoid the spread of disease through syringes and the crime associated with obtaining cash for narcotics. However, to be clear, a legal injection site does not involve the distribution of opiates to drug users, just a safe location for addicts to inject themselves.

In 2003, a legal injection site, labelled  ‘Insite’, was opened in the Downtown Eastside district of Vancouver, an area notable for excess drug use and crime. Currently, a battle is occurring in the Supreme Court between the provincial and federal governments as to who controls the jurisdiction of this site. If the federal government regains jurisdiction from the province of British Columbia, they would likely shut down the site. Both the legality and the ethics of Insite have been greatly argued since opening its doors in 2003. However, regardless of the legal implications, we, as Canadians, must first ask ourselves, is Insite the right or wrong thing to do? After consideration, the answer is that Insite is unambiguously wrong.

We are lucky to live in a country that prides itself on taking care of its own citizens.  No matter what disability you may suffer from, the fiscal situation you may face or the background you come from, you can live knowing that the state will take (relatively good) care of you.  However, do not let this image distort your perception of reality. Drugs, especially heroin, kill. The concept of Insite is to provide a ‘safe’ location for addicts to shoot up. My argument against this logic is that there is no ‘safe’ place to do drugs. Admittedly, the chances of overdose may be much lower at Insite, but whether you are doing drugs in a back alley with a dirty needle or in a doctor’s office, heroin still kills. Long-term usage of heroin leads to liver, lung and heart disease as well as a weakened immune and nervous system.  A person hardly needs to overdose on heroin to die; prolonged usage of lower doses will eventually kill you, even if it is long and indirect in doing so.  Heroin use is, in many ways, suicidal, and by promoting legal injection sites, the state is effectively facilitating such behaviour.  Heavy drug use for extended periods of time is nothing more than a prolonged death sentence, and the government should not, in any way, condone this behaviour. If we want to facilitate suicide, there are more humane ways to do it. I, for one, do not want to assist suicide; however, this is exactly what legal injection sites like Insite are essentially doing.

Furthermore, legal injection sites directly assist in the usage of drugs bought from drug dealers; men who are committing numerous federal crimes and destroying people’s lives. Using taxpayer’s money to support facilities that provide locations where one can use this destructive product, which is provided by a federal criminal and definite low life, is ludicrous. Paying nurses that are sorely needed in the public health system (which is already crowded with citizens who are sick through no fault of their own) to help with this process is even more sickening.

Many will argue against my points by claiming drug use is an ‘unfortunate reality’ we have to live with and that, if we cannot stop drug use, we must make it safer. It is very difficult to argue against this. There will always be drug use in our society, just as there always will be murder, suicide and rape.  Some may call this comparison unfair but under close inspection, it is not. Just like murder, suicide and rape, drug use has a profound negative effect not only on the perpetrator, but on that person’s loved ones, the surrounding community and society as a whole. Any doctor or scientist will tell you that drugs affect how you think and, therefore, how you act. It can make you more violent, more irrational, more dangerous and detached from your sober self. Drug use fuels addiction which, in turn,  fuels crime to feed said addiction. Drug use fuels ill mental health which can then destroy relationships and rip families apart. Drug use is one of the saddest and most widespread tragedies society faces. Facilitating a habit with such destructive consequences is not the right thing to do.

It is also fair to ask if this is an ethical way to make use of taxpayer’s money. Although a strong model for the rest of the world, the social services in this country still suffer from serious flaws that need to be addressed. In a tight fiscal environment, many citizens would be uncomfortable with the idea that their tax dollars are funding a site that facilitates drug use, despite the fact that sick people in the health care system still have to wait three months for a critical operation. By no means am I advocating for less money to be spent on drug treatment or prevention, but I am wholeheartedly arguing against funding for the facilitation of drug use.

This society can fight drug use.  Thousands of people are cured from the sickness of drug addiction every year through government programs that are already lacking in funding and official support.  By closing down Insite and pouring more money into these programs, we will be much more productive and socially ethical. Furthermore, it is time we address the root problems of drug use in general. Whether addicts come from broken homes, mental illness or desperation, these problems can be remedied.  By admitting the ‘inevitable reality’ of drug use, Insite is losing sight of the real objective that is helping those that are addicted to narcotics. To clarify my point, if a man wants to kill himself, do you lend him a loaded gun or an open hand? These are the question we have to ask ourselves when we try to justify Insite. I hope that our nation has the common sense to take away the loaded gun and extend an open hand instead.