Supervised Injection Sites Essay
Toronto is talking drugs again, but this time it’s not about Rob Fords recreational habits. Injection sites in Toronto have been a hot topic of conversation lately. The city’s medical officer of health, Dr. David McKeown, is calling for the development of a safe injection site for illegal drug users. The Toronto Board of Health will discuss the recommendation on July 10 and if approved, the measure will move forward for consideration by city council.
What is an injection site? You may ask… Supervised injection sites are legally approved and medically supervised facilities designed to reduce nuisance from public drug use and provide a hygienic and stress-free environment for drug users when consuming drugs, mostly injected drugs. The sites …show more content…
will provide sterile needles, information about drugs and basic health care, treatment referrals, and access to medical staff. Some offer counseling, hygienic and other services of use to itinerant and impoverished individuals.
There are currently two injection sites in Canada, both of them being located in Vancouver. They are proposing of bringing three sites to Toronto at the: Queen West Central Toronto Community Health Centre on Bathurst St, the Works at Toronto Public Health’s building on Victoria St, and the South Riverdale Community Health Centre on Queen St. East near Carlaw Ave. These areas are known to have higher injection drug use and overdose rates than average.
If approved, the sites would allow drug users to bring in their own illicit drugs to be injected under the supervision of a nurse. After injecting, the users will then move over to a “chill out” room to be monitored for overdose. Counselors and social workers will be available to help addicts who want to make a bid to change their lives. By having counselors and social workers in this environment, addicts may be able to create relationships with other people, which may then increase their desire to seek help and make better for themselves.
A quote from Diana VanderMeulen: “This neighbourhood is pretty crazy anyways. There’s a lot happening and I think as neighbourhoods become gentrified … it’s really important to respect the people who already exist in that neighbourhood. So I don’t really think it would cause further disruption at all,” she said. “They’re already here, is what I’m saying. It’s their neighbourhood.” - Diana VanderMeulen
Supporters say:
It saves lives:
There have been no overdose deaths at Insite since it opened in 2003. On average, nearly 600 injections occur daily at the site and last year alone there were more than 200 “overdose interventions” by Insite staff who provide oxygen or drugs to users who are in danger of overdosing. A paper published in the Lancet in April of this year found fatal overdoses within 500 metres of Insite decreased by 35 per cent after the facility opened compared to a decrease of nine per cent in the rest of Vancouver.
………
However this may raise some concern with residents living within these communities. Some may feel threatened and or worried that this may attract more users to their neighborhoods. It raises a safety concern for not only themselves but for their children as well. I know that if one of these sites were to come to my neighborhood I personally would not feel comfortable. Residents also believe that these sites will have a negative impact on the value of their house.
Despite the research studies backing Insite and its harm-reduction approach, there is still profound discomfort for many with any facility that gives addicts a green light to inject illegal drugs and flout the law.
Governments, they argue, should not be facilitating illegal, dangerous activities. “The state has no constitutional obligation to facilitate drug use at a specific location by hardcore addicts, the mildly addicted, frequent users or occasional users,” federal prosecutors Robert Frater and W. Paul Riley said in written submissions to the court.
There have been arguments that money spent on Insite would be better spent on services such as treatment and that government’s support of supervised injection sites sends a mixed message to young people who might be considering illicit drug use.
Some also believe that; Supervised injection sites do nothing to deter drug use or help drug addicts:
Part of the federal government’s argument is that drug laws are not an unreasonable restriction on individuals’ liberty. “Unsafe injection or, for that matter, consumption by injection at all, is a choice made by the consumer,” the federal prosecutors say in their brief to the Supreme Court.
There are also arguments that supervised injection sites are a magnet for drug dealers and predators, and that public safety demands that illegal drugs be tightly controlled.
…
Are you pro injection sites or anti injection
sites?
What is an injection site? You may ask… Supervised injection sites are legally approved and medically supervised facilities designed to reduce nuisance from public drug use and provide a hygienic and stress-free environment for drug users when consuming drugs, mostly injected drugs. The sites …show more content…
will provide sterile needles, information about drugs and basic health care, treatment referrals, and access to medical staff. Some offer counseling, hygienic and other services of use to itinerant and impoverished individuals.
There are currently two injection sites in Canada, both of them being located in Vancouver. They are proposing of bringing three sites to Toronto at the: Queen West Central Toronto Community Health Centre on Bathurst St, the Works at Toronto Public Health’s building on Victoria St, and the South Riverdale Community Health Centre on Queen St. East near Carlaw Ave. These areas are known to have higher injection drug use and overdose rates than average.
If approved, the sites would allow drug users to bring in their own illicit drugs to be injected under the supervision of a nurse. After injecting, the users will then move over to a “chill out” room to be monitored for overdose. Counselors and social workers will be available to help addicts who want to make a bid to change their lives. By having counselors and social workers in this environment, addicts may be able to create relationships with other people, which may then increase their desire to seek help and make better for themselves.
A quote from Diana VanderMeulen: “This neighbourhood is pretty crazy anyways. There’s a lot happening and I think as neighbourhoods become gentrified … it’s really important to respect the people who already exist in that neighbourhood. So I don’t really think it would cause further disruption at all,” she said. “They’re already here, is what I’m saying. It’s their neighbourhood.” - Diana VanderMeulen
Supporters say:
It saves lives:
There have been no overdose deaths at Insite since it opened in 2003. On average, nearly 600 injections occur daily at the site and last year alone there were more than 200 “overdose interventions” by Insite staff who provide oxygen or drugs to users who are in danger of overdosing. A paper published in the Lancet in April of this year found fatal overdoses within 500 metres of Insite decreased by 35 per cent after the facility opened compared to a decrease of nine per cent in the rest of Vancouver.
………
However this may raise some concern with residents living within these communities. Some may feel threatened and or worried that this may attract more users to their neighborhoods. It raises a safety concern for not only themselves but for their children as well. I know that if one of these sites were to come to my neighborhood I personally would not feel comfortable. Residents also believe that these sites will have a negative impact on the value of their house.
Despite the research studies backing Insite and its harm-reduction approach, there is still profound discomfort for many with any facility that gives addicts a green light to inject illegal drugs and flout the law.
Governments, they argue, should not be facilitating illegal, dangerous activities. “The state has no constitutional obligation to facilitate drug use at a specific location by hardcore addicts, the mildly addicted, frequent users or occasional users,” federal prosecutors Robert Frater and W. Paul Riley said in written submissions to the court.
There have been arguments that money spent on Insite would be better spent on services such as treatment and that government’s support of supervised injection sites sends a mixed message to young people who might be considering illicit drug use.
Some also believe that; Supervised injection sites do nothing to deter drug use or help drug addicts:
Part of the federal government’s argument is that drug laws are not an unreasonable restriction on individuals’ liberty. “Unsafe injection or, for that matter, consumption by injection at all, is a choice made by the consumer,” the federal prosecutors say in their brief to the Supreme Court.
There are also arguments that supervised injection sites are a magnet for drug dealers and predators, and that public safety demands that illegal drugs be tightly controlled.
…
Are you pro injection sites or anti injection
sites?