On January 10, 2022 I attended the Does Safe Consumption Work to Treat Drug Addiction? debate at Manny’s, an incredible community space in the Mission District of San Francisco, California.
Don't forget, Erica, that the Salvation Army offers high quality residential recovery services at no charge! And they will come alongside anyone who wants to recover as many times as it takes, with a marvelously high success rate of helping people achieve transformed lives!
Mary - Thanks for mentioning the Salvation Army. A long time friend of mine just retired from there where he told us he was in charge of managing their $60M new construction project in the TI I think. I know nothing about it. Maybe you or Erica will share more?
Also I wonder what the success rate is? And what the fall back rate is. I'm sure that a lot has been learned over the decades of fighting these battles.
Harm reduction safe consummation sites in no way create a “gap” between the “haves and have nots”. This just another outlandish generalization by you and without any data to support it. HRS never dissuades someone from treatment of any kind. It saves lives (rich, poor, or in between). Logically, your false generalization cannot possibly be true. You embrace death and would rather people die instead of use drugs. And the majority of people who use do not get addicted. Harm reduction is for everyone who doesn’t want to die. Poor as well as rich cyclist benefit from helmets as well as the public at large. Just like Harm reduction sites. And helmets are harm reduction, as well as seatbelts, earthquake retrofitting, and vaccines. Lets just do away with all that and outlaw driving, cycling, buildings, and going out in public all together. Thats where your ridiculous generalizations take us. One last thing. Abstinence only programs have a miserable record of keeping people sober. And are often time the pre curser to ODs because people go out after loosing their tolerance to whatever they use, then use the same amount they were using before getting sober and OD/die. I’d rather not live in the mythical world you do.
DavidC - You're right about drug use sites not "creating a treatment gap" between the rich and the poor, however you are wrong about just about everything else you said. Never dissuades people from treatment was not a charge Erica was making. You disagree with her example that people who don't get help stay stuck at a hole in the cold lake at the brink of death. OK, but then you offer a bunch of BS false analogies and suggest that getting clean increases a person's OD risk when they fall off the wagon.
You sound like someone who works for a drug site operator. Or maybe you are a dealer?
I would applaud your comment as at least being thoughtful but everything went bad when you made the misinformed and miss diagnosis of who I am, my experience, and who I work for. You’re not even close and because of that you have no credibility, at least in my eyes. So I now will disregard and ignore you no matter how blatantly ad hominem your comments become.
Disregard as you wish. I did not misdiagnose anything, I said "maybe". You also mischaracterize my comments as attacks on you which they are not. I think you just got wound up and read things in that were not intended. It all OK.
Clearly you need to re-examine your intentions. “ You sound like someone who works for a drug site operator. Or maybe you are a dealer?” And you would do better by demonstrating where my analogies rather than qualifying them without reason to do so.
I would applaud your comment as at least being thoughtful but everything went bad when you made the misinformed and miss diagnosis of who I am, my experience, and who I work for. You’re not even close and because of that you have no credibility, at least in my eyes. So I now will disregard and ignore you no matter how blatantly ad hominem your comments become.
what comment, David? I don't know who you are and certainly didn't diagnosis you. of course you're free to stay or go, but I'm totally confused by this message.
Erica - On of our favorite old TV shows is called Da Vinci's Inquest @1998; set in Vancouver, it feels very much like San Francisco. Domenic Da Vinci is a compassionate City Coroner whos also a divorced alcoholic and a big advocate for Safe Injection Sites aimed at stemming the tide of ODs and murders he sees related to the normal drug trafficing. Just a story, and doesn't get too close to the tragedies of real life, but it opens the public debate.
I was wondering if I'd hear from you after the reply I wrote about how we might actually attack the illegal drug trades, but that was a long slog.
The key on this topic at the moment is who's program(s) are working?
To what extent are they working?
By what metrics are they judged to be working?
The only two programs I am at all familiar with are Delancey Street, and the Salvation Army. I know next to nothing about either.
Please correct me, but my sense is the City is contracting with non-profits to build, or manage these drug sites, and they operate as police free open use with private supervision? Is there no requirement that the sites also provide counseling and treatment? Is there no requirement that the sites provide a free ride to another facility that provides counseling and treatment? Is there no incentive for these sites to work to put themselves out of business?
There are more BIG Qs than answers. If the addict/users/guests of these sites are still required to buy their own illegal drugs from street dealers, then the City is just enabling the addict, and also enabling the dealers, while disabling the police. Since the police still get paid the same whether they arrest dealers or not, the only party that loses in this dance is the small businesses, tourists and residents who get preyed on to support the illegal drug purchases. How about that?
The only way these supposed compassionate drug use sites will help at all, it if we can totally disrupt the illegal drug sales model, by the government supplying the free drugs so the users no longer have any need to do daily crimes to buy their drugs.
Knowing nothing much, my guess is that we would see both more ODs at least in the beginning, and fewer new users, and a hug reduction in crime. Except for one big problem. This model can't work unless it is national, because otherwise we become what are now - a magnet for users.
Don't forget, Erica, that the Salvation Army offers high quality residential recovery services at no charge! And they will come alongside anyone who wants to recover as many times as it takes, with a marvelously high success rate of helping people achieve transformed lives!
thank you Mary. such an important point. in fact, I'll add it in now.
Mary - Thanks for mentioning the Salvation Army. A long time friend of mine just retired from there where he told us he was in charge of managing their $60M new construction project in the TI I think. I know nothing about it. Maybe you or Erica will share more?
Also I wonder what the success rate is? And what the fall back rate is. I'm sure that a lot has been learned over the decades of fighting these battles.
Harm reduction safe consummation sites in no way create a “gap” between the “haves and have nots”. This just another outlandish generalization by you and without any data to support it. HRS never dissuades someone from treatment of any kind. It saves lives (rich, poor, or in between). Logically, your false generalization cannot possibly be true. You embrace death and would rather people die instead of use drugs. And the majority of people who use do not get addicted. Harm reduction is for everyone who doesn’t want to die. Poor as well as rich cyclist benefit from helmets as well as the public at large. Just like Harm reduction sites. And helmets are harm reduction, as well as seatbelts, earthquake retrofitting, and vaccines. Lets just do away with all that and outlaw driving, cycling, buildings, and going out in public all together. Thats where your ridiculous generalizations take us. One last thing. Abstinence only programs have a miserable record of keeping people sober. And are often time the pre curser to ODs because people go out after loosing their tolerance to whatever they use, then use the same amount they were using before getting sober and OD/die. I’d rather not live in the mythical world you do.
DavidC - You're right about drug use sites not "creating a treatment gap" between the rich and the poor, however you are wrong about just about everything else you said. Never dissuades people from treatment was not a charge Erica was making. You disagree with her example that people who don't get help stay stuck at a hole in the cold lake at the brink of death. OK, but then you offer a bunch of BS false analogies and suggest that getting clean increases a person's OD risk when they fall off the wagon.
You sound like someone who works for a drug site operator. Or maybe you are a dealer?
I would applaud your comment as at least being thoughtful but everything went bad when you made the misinformed and miss diagnosis of who I am, my experience, and who I work for. You’re not even close and because of that you have no credibility, at least in my eyes. So I now will disregard and ignore you no matter how blatantly ad hominem your comments become.
Disregard as you wish. I did not misdiagnose anything, I said "maybe". You also mischaracterize my comments as attacks on you which they are not. I think you just got wound up and read things in that were not intended. It all OK.
Clearly you need to re-examine your intentions. “ You sound like someone who works for a drug site operator. Or maybe you are a dealer?” And you would do better by demonstrating where my analogies rather than qualifying them without reason to do so.
What drivel
Great and clear article Erica!
Savannah Hernandez on twitter. I think we've seen this episode before...
I would applaud your comment as at least being thoughtful but everything went bad when you made the misinformed and miss diagnosis of who I am, my experience, and who I work for. You’re not even close and because of that you have no credibility, at least in my eyes. So I now will disregard and ignore you no matter how blatantly ad hominem your comments become.
what comment, David? I don't know who you are and certainly didn't diagnosis you. of course you're free to stay or go, but I'm totally confused by this message.
My apology Erica and you’re correct. I’m on my phone and its ios makes navigating here difficult. The comment was in reply to another. Thank you.
no problem!
Thank you Erica for your civility. It’s duly noted and respected.
Erica - On of our favorite old TV shows is called Da Vinci's Inquest @1998; set in Vancouver, it feels very much like San Francisco. Domenic Da Vinci is a compassionate City Coroner whos also a divorced alcoholic and a big advocate for Safe Injection Sites aimed at stemming the tide of ODs and murders he sees related to the normal drug trafficing. Just a story, and doesn't get too close to the tragedies of real life, but it opens the public debate.
I was wondering if I'd hear from you after the reply I wrote about how we might actually attack the illegal drug trades, but that was a long slog.
The key on this topic at the moment is who's program(s) are working?
To what extent are they working?
By what metrics are they judged to be working?
The only two programs I am at all familiar with are Delancey Street, and the Salvation Army. I know next to nothing about either.
Please correct me, but my sense is the City is contracting with non-profits to build, or manage these drug sites, and they operate as police free open use with private supervision? Is there no requirement that the sites also provide counseling and treatment? Is there no requirement that the sites provide a free ride to another facility that provides counseling and treatment? Is there no incentive for these sites to work to put themselves out of business?
There are more BIG Qs than answers. If the addict/users/guests of these sites are still required to buy their own illegal drugs from street dealers, then the City is just enabling the addict, and also enabling the dealers, while disabling the police. Since the police still get paid the same whether they arrest dealers or not, the only party that loses in this dance is the small businesses, tourists and residents who get preyed on to support the illegal drug purchases. How about that?
The only way these supposed compassionate drug use sites will help at all, it if we can totally disrupt the illegal drug sales model, by the government supplying the free drugs so the users no longer have any need to do daily crimes to buy their drugs.
Knowing nothing much, my guess is that we would see both more ODs at least in the beginning, and fewer new users, and a hug reduction in crime. Except for one big problem. This model can't work unless it is national, because otherwise we become what are now - a magnet for users.
Bravo!!!!