B.C. Politics Thread

[Warhippy]

15 hours ago, Attila Umbrus said:

I've experienced the same...the ER where i'm living is full of people waiting to be seen while ambulance after ambulance show up with over dose victims that get treated first. I waited 12 hours to be seen by the doctor. An old lady sitting beside me who wasn't dying but in major pain waited LONGER than me to see a doctor, she was in tears and it was tough to watch.

 

I don't blame doctors, triage is triage and they have to follow the code. But something has to change. A lot of people are suffering and are waiting at the back of the line up while over dose victims get to the front of the line and then take up a lot of bed space after as well. We run out of beds constantly at our hospital. People who need to be seen are sent home with pain pills just to get them out of the ER...it's a mess.

 

Honestly I may get roasted for this...but if you keep over dosing...at what point is a health professional allowed to just "let it happen"...like 3 strikes and you're out?

 

I dunno, I feel terrible for saying that. But what else can be done?

 

13 hours ago, Optimist Prime said:

I am of the opinion that reviving a homeless drug addict over and over is akin to waterboarding: if you come across them and they are gone, just have the mercy to leave them gone. I know it isn't a popular opinion, but it is my opinion. And yes I am sorry for your loss, loved ones of the homeless addicts that have OD'd, my opinion doesn't make me a horrible person. 

At some point gentlemen.  It should be a viable choice for medical professionals to show up on site see who it is, check their records and say "no more"

 

I know of individuals in the Penticton area revived or saved no less than 3 times alone in the last month.

 

Ambulance and fire dept responders have almost outright said we don't want to anymore.

 

At some point in time, it deserves to be their choice to OD and the responders choice to let them

[Kootenay Gold]

31 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

 

At some point gentlemen.  It should be a viable choice for medical professionals to show up on site see who it is, check their records and say "no more"

 

I know of individuals in the Penticton area revived or saved no less than 3 times alone in the last month.

 

Ambulance and fire dept responders have almost outright said we don't want to anymore.

 

At some point in time, it deserves to be their choice to OD and the responders choice to let them

Perhaps it is time if they have been attended to more that 3 times to ask them to consent to agreeing to the DNR (do not resuscitate) and wearing a medic bracelet to advise of their consent. One of my uncles who was having repeated heart attacks signed a form requesting this. His wish was granted.

 

 

[Bob Long]

1 minute ago, Kootenay Gold said:

Perhaps it is time if they have been attended to more that 3 times to ask them to consent to agreeing to the DNR (do not resuscitate) and wearing a medic bracelet to advise of their consent. One of my uncles who was having repeated heart attacks signed a form requesting this. His wish was granted.

 

 

 

Not sure it's ethical to obtain consent like that from a mentally ill person.

 

[Kootenay Gold]

Just now, Bob Long said:

 

Not sure it's ethical to obtain consent like that from a mentally ill person.

 

It is a cause for debate for sure. Some are not mentally ill just addicted

[Bob Long]

42 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

 

At some point gentlemen.  It should be a viable choice for medical professionals to show up on site see who it is, check their records and say "no more"

 

I know of individuals in the Penticton area revived or saved no less than 3 times alone in the last month.

 

Ambulance and fire dept responders have almost outright said we don't want to anymore.

 

At some point in time, it deserves to be their choice to OD and the responders choice to let them

 

1/2 of them have a mental illness. You're ok with letting them go?

 

https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/opioids/data-surveillance-research/opioid-related-hospitalizations-mental-disorders.html

[Bob Long]

2 minutes ago, Kootenay Gold said:

It is a cause for debate for sure. Some are not mentally ill just addicted

 

It's about half.

[Warhippy]

49 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

Not sure it's ethical to obtain consent like that from a mentally ill person.

 

 

45 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

1/2 of them have a mental illness. You're ok with letting them go?

 

https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/opioids/data-surveillance-research/opioid-related-hospitalizations-mental-disorders.html

 

45 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

It's about half.

A population approaching an estimated 8.5 billion people on this rock and you think I am going to worry about the ethical ramifications of refusing to give an individual who has chosen to OD on illegal drugs with gods knows what criminal behaviour in their past; a shot of narcan for the 5th or 6th time in a week?

 

All because there is or is not a chance that they may have a mental illness.

 

Sorry mate, I had my addiction struggles as a kid and have buried more than my fair share of friends chums and acquaintances.  When I say I am a small C conservative this is where that comes in to play.  A choice is made.  It is made again and again and again.  At some point you let nature play out because we, the first responders and the government have no say in how that person wants to end their life.  It's their choice.  

 

Whether they are mentally ill, have psychological issues or are just awful people.  Eventually it comes down to the clear and present choice to do that to themselves and who are we to take that right away from them.

 

for myself, if this is how it's going to go.  Then give the street level dealers an insanely high potent form of carfentanil or whatever that is and just let them go blissfully unaware of what is going on around them folded up in a puddle of their own making.  Cart them out an hour later before the kids get out of school.

 

Harsh?  Ya.  Ya it is.  But at some point there HAS to be a point in which we let nature take its course

[Bob Long]

7 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

 

 

A population approaching an estimated 8.5 billion people on this rock and you think I am going to worry about the ethical ramifications of refusing to give an individual who has chosen to OD on illegal drugs with gods knows what criminal behaviour in their past; a shot of narcan for the 5th or 6th time in a week?

 

All because there is or is not a chance that they may have a mental illness.

 

Sorry mate, I had my addiction struggles as a kid and have buried more than my fair share of friends chums and acquaintances.  When I say I am a small C conservative this is where that comes in to play.  A choice is made.  It is made again and again and again.  At some point you let nature play out because we, the first responders and the government have no say in how that person wants to end their life.  It's their choice.  

 

Whether they are mentally ill, have psychological issues or are just awful people.  Eventually it comes down to the clear and present choice to do that to themselves and who are we to take that right away from them.

 

for myself, if this is how it's going to go.  Then give the street level dealers an insanely high potent form of carfentanil or whatever that is and just let them go blissfully unaware of what is going on around them folded up in a puddle of their own making.  Cart them out an hour later before the kids get out of school.

 

Harsh?  Ya.  Ya it is.  But at some point there HAS to be a point in which we let nature take its course

 

It's not maybe half, it is half.

 

We haven't tried all we can yet.

 

We are trying to use a tool that wasn't designed for the job to handle it, and not surprisingly it's not going well.

 

[Warhippy]

2 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

It's not maybe half, it is half.

 

We haven't tried all we can yet.

 

We are trying to use a tool that wasn't designed for the job to handle it, and not surprisingly it's not going well.

 

That's a bold claim.  it is half?

 

Even if that is true.  So what.

 

8.5 billion coming up.  If some are making the choice to essentially kill themselves 2-3 times a week and taking thousands of dollars a trip to be brought back.  It's a choice.  Let nature take its course because we kind of need the room.

[Bob Long]

Just now, Warhippy said:

That's a bold claim.  it is half?

 

Even if that is true.  So what.

 

So what? 

 

First Nations people are also over represented in the addiction crisis. Do we so what them too? Of course we don't.

 

Just now, Warhippy said:

8.5 billion coming up.  If some are making the choice to essentially kill themselves 2-3 times a week and taking thousands of dollars a trip to be brought back.  It's a choice.  Let nature take its course because we kind of need the room.

 

Are 8.5 billion people moving to Canada tomorrow? That's grasping.

 

 

[112]

I don't like addicts. I think they made the conscious choice to become detriments to their communities and nation. But letting anyone die when we have the full ability to save their life is not right.

[Jester13]

1 hour ago, Warhippy said:

 

 

A population approaching an estimated 8.5 billion people on this rock and you think I am going to worry about the ethical ramifications of refusing to give an individual who has chosen to OD on illegal drugs with gods knows what criminal behaviour in their past; a shot of narcan for the 5th or 6th time in a week?

 

All because there is or is not a chance that they may have a mental illness.

 

Sorry mate, I had my addiction struggles as a kid and have buried more than my fair share of friends chums and acquaintances.  When I say I am a small C conservative this is where that comes in to play.  A choice is made.  It is made again and again and again.  At some point you let nature play out because we, the first responders and the government have no say in how that person wants to end their life.  It's their choice.  

 

Whether they are mentally ill, have psychological issues or are just awful people.  Eventually it comes down to the clear and present choice to do that to themselves and who are we to take that right away from them.

 

for myself, if this is how it's going to go.  Then give the street level dealers an insanely high potent form of carfentanil or whatever that is and just let them go blissfully unaware of what is going on around them folded up in a puddle of their own making.  Cart them out an hour later before the kids get out of school.

 

Harsh?  Ya.  Ya it is.  But at some point there HAS to be a point in which we let nature take its course

I would argue that free will is an illusion and that the person didn't actually make the choice like you think they did; thus, the need for more empathy comes into play in this sort of a situation. 

[4petesake]

29 minutes ago, Jester13 said:

I would argue that free will is an illusion and that the person didn't actually make the choice like you think they did; thus, the need for more empathy comes into play in this sort of a situation. 

 

Paul Weishapl is an addictions counselor in Omaha Nebraska after recovering from his own addictions, whic began with prescription painkillers at 16. He was saved by Naloxone seven times.

 

 

[bishopshodan]

1 hour ago, 112 said:

I don't like addicts. I think they made the conscious choice to become detriments to their communities and nation. But letting anyone die when we have the full ability to save their life is not right.

 

Addiction is not a conscious desicion. It's compulsive. 

 

Being detriments to the nation or not, is based on their socioeconomic status, imo.

 

I agree with your last sentence.

 

[Warhippy]

2 hours ago, Bob Long said:

 

So what? 

 

First Nations people are also over represented in the addiction crisis. Do we so what them too? Of course we don't.

 

 

Are 8.5 billion people moving to Canada tomorrow? That's grasping.

 

 

8.5 billion on the planet.  I won't cry over a few hundred a week.

 

Natives are not necessarily over represented, but they do make up a disproportionate number which involves a different conversation 

[112]

28 minutes ago, bishopshodan said:

 

Addiction is not a conscious desicion. It's compulsive. 

 

Being detriments to the nation or not, is based on their socioeconomic status, imo.

 

I agree with your last sentence.

 

Addiction becomes compulsive after several conscious decisions to use an addictive substance. It doesn't just happen to people.

 

e: And socioeconomics isn't something I consider pertinent to the issue as there's nothing about being poor or homeless that compels someone to inject down. I've spent several years of my life either chronically or episodically homeless and have never fallen into hard drug addiction.

Edited August 14 by 112

[bishopshodan]

Just now, 112 said:

Addiction becomes compulsive after several conscious decisions to use an addictive substance. It doesn't just happen to people.

 

 

Nah, actually to amend my statement a bit, addiction is actually worse  than compulsion. Compulsion is an insatiable urge...addiction is a need.

You might say...after several conscious decisions to use, you become compulsive, then addicted.

 

Once you are addicted, it is not a conscious decision to be a detriment. 

If you are a rich addict, you're less likely, if all, to be a detriment.

 

So, maybe what you are saying is....if you're poor and might end up making a mess of the streets and a drain on our resources, be smart enough not to take drugs in the first place?

 

[bishopshodan]

cpu keeps double posting....

 

...i'll reboot

Edited August 14 by bishopshodan

[bishopshodan]

43 minutes ago, 112 said:

Addiction becomes compulsive after several conscious decisions to use an addictive substance. It doesn't just happen to people.

 

e: And socioeconomics isn't something I consider pertinent to the issue as there's nothing about being poor or homeless that compels someone to inject down. I've spent several years of my life either chronically or episodically homeless and have never fallen into hard drug addiction.

 

Quoting you again since I didnt see your edit.

 

Youre a strong person then or not as vulnerable, even genetics can play a role in who gets addicted ( some people are higher risk). I know many people from the streets that claim that to ease the pain ( emotional and physical), they turn to drugs, they have lost hope.

 

My point is that if you have money you can be an addict and therefore addicts are not a detriment.

In fact many people are, society is full of addicts.

There is a reason liquor stores were considered essential services during the pandemic. And man are those drinkers a detriment on our system then, I guess. That legal evil drug should have warning labels.

 

 Alcohol use disorder is one of the toughest addictions to overcome.

In my work, there is no worse withdrawl witnessed than from alc. 

Edited August 14 by bishopshodan

[Bob Long]

38 minutes ago, bishopshodan said:

 

Quoting you again since I didnt see your edit.

 

Youre a strong person then or not as vulnerable, even genetics can play a role in who gets addicted ( some people are higher risk). I know many people from the streets that claim that to ease the pain ( emotional and physical), they turn to drugs, they have lost hope.

 

My point is that if you have money you can be an addict and therefore addicts are not a detriment.

In fact many people are, society is full of addicts.

There is a reason liquor stores were considered essential services during the pandemic. And man are those drinkers a detriment on our system then, I guess. That legal evil drug should have warning labels.

 

 Alcohol use disorder is one of the toughest addictions to overcome.

In my work, there is no worse withdrawl witnessed than from alc. 

 

If we are going to openly start throwing away certain addicts, why stop at opioids? I have had a few functional alcoholics in my family, I suppose it would have been a lot easier to take them out early. 

[Bob Long]

1 hour ago, Warhippy said:

 

Natives are not necessarily over represented, but they do make up a disproportionate number which involves a different conversation 

 

It does require a deeper conversation for sure. 

[Satchmo]

3 hours ago, 112 said:

Addiction becomes compulsive after several conscious decisions to use an addictive substance. It doesn't just happen to people.

 

e: And socioeconomics isn't something I consider pertinent to the issue as there's nothing about being poor or homeless that compels someone to inject down. I've spent several years of my life either chronically or episodically homeless and have never fallen into hard drug addiction.

Some people are just more prone to addiction than others.   The opioid crisis showed us that some people considered to fine, upstanding, citizens can fall into it. 

 

I applaud anyone who can climb out of it, and those who help them to do so

[4petesake]

2 hours ago, bishopshodan said:

 

Quoting you again since I didnt see your edit.

 

Youre a strong person then or not as vulnerable, even genetics can play a role in who gets addicted ( some people are higher risk). I know many people from the streets that claim that to ease the pain ( emotional and physical), they turn to drugs, they have lost hope.

 

My point is that if you have money you can be an addict and therefore addicts are not a detriment.

In fact many people are, society is full of addicts.

There is a reason liquor stores were considered essential services during the pandemic. And man are those drinkers a detriment on our system then, I guess. That legal evil drug should have warning labels.

 

 Alcohol use disorder is one of the toughest addictions to overcome.

In my work, there is no worse withdrawl witnessed than from alc. 

 

 

9 minutes ago, Satchmo said:

Some people are just more prone to addiction than others.   The opioid crisis showed us that some people considered to fine, upstanding, citizens can fall into it. 

 

I applaud anyone who can climb out of it, and those who help them to do so

One of my brothers broke his back in a car accident when he was seventeen, laid up and on prescription meds for nearly a year. When the doctor quit prescribing opioids for his pain he was already addicted so he turned to the streets. I would have called him barely functioning as everyone who met him liked him right off but couldn’t see his addiction, he could get good jobs but couldn’t hold onto them or the friends for long. 
 

His marriage ended,  he lost a leg and couldn’t quit, lost the other the following year and still couldn’t quit, died in his forties. I asked him once why he chose to do drugs and he said “I didn’t, I just can’t choose not to.”  

[bishopshodan]

16 minutes ago, 4petesake said:

 

One of my brothers broke his back in a car accident when he was seventeen, laid up and on prescription meds for nearly a year. When the doctor quit prescribing opioids for his pain he was already addicted so he turned to the streets. I would have called him barely functioning as everyone who met him liked him right off but couldn’t see his addiction, he could get good jobs but couldn’t hold onto them or the friends for long. 
 

His marriage ended,  he lost a leg and couldn’t quit, lost the other the following year and still couldn’t quit, died in his forties. I asked him once why he chose to do drugs and he said “I didn’t, I just can’t choose not to.”  

 

Shit Pete, I'm sorry.

 

Thanks for sharing. It means a lot to hear that tough reality.

Working in the prison has opened my eyes quite a bit. I thought I knew from my years running a business in th DTES but now I get to have long talks with these guys about  addictions.

They open up so much when doing time, you can see that they were all someones little boy once. A innocent that the world dealt some hard knocks mixed with some dumb choices. Some are just bad apples but most really arn't.

Anyway, thanks again. I have been debating going back to work at all. I am off with a bit of a hip injury. It's a hard job and I sometimes wonder why I am doing it. 

Your story is reminding me why. Using drugs should not be seen as a criminal offense, like your bro, some of these guys just cant stop. They need as much support as we can give them. 

 

[4petesake]

53 minutes ago, bishopshodan said:

 

Shit Pete, I'm sorry.

 

Thanks for sharing. It means a lot to hear that tough reality.

Working in the prison has opened my eyes quite a bit. I thought I knew from my years running a business in th DTES but now I get to have long talks with these guys about  addictions.

They open up so much when doing time, you can see that they were all someones little boy once. A innocent that the world dealt some hard knocks mixed with some dumb choices. Some are just bad apples but most really arn't.

Anyway, thanks again. I have been debating going back to work at all. I am off with a bit of a hip injury. It's a hard job and I sometimes wonder why I am doing it. 

Your story is reminding me why. Using drugs should not be seen as a criminal offense, like your bro, some of these guys just cant stop. They need as much support as we can give them. 

 

 

Thanks.

 

It’s quite a few years ago now when I was a younger version of my  father with little empathy and even less understanding of addiction. I’ve made peace with the mistakes I made in dealing with him. My mom and my sister never gave up and tried to the end to get him the help he desperately needed, waiting for the day he would be ready to accept help. You never know when someone will be receptive …

 

Best of luck with your health should you decide to go back. Somebody’s mother/sister/brother may be grateful to you one day without either of you knowing it!