Skip to main content

“I am a Canadian, free to speak without fear, free to worship in my own way, free to stand for what I think right, free to oppose what I believe wrong, or free to choose those who shall govern my country. This heritage of freedom I pledge to uphold for myself and all mankind.” ~~ John G. Diefenbaker

SANDY Macdougall: If you tell drug addicts and alcoholics that it's alright to continue their destructive lifestyles, that is exactly what they will do



This is a column that Sandy wrote one year ago yesterday.  He asked me to share it with you, and I am -- not just because he asked me, but because it's just as true today as it was then!  Sadly, those with the resources (government), just don't get it   :(


I am not a trained social worker and I have no scientific background upon which to base my opinion and attitude regarding low barrier, harm reduction, projects.


I am totally in favour of providing realistic treatment and services but only where that approach leads to success for those suffering from addictive, abusive use of drugs or alcohol or those suffering from mental illnesses. This approach to treatment should also save the surrounding community free of fear from the behaviour of the program participants.


What has led me to forming my current stance on these subjects is my own personal story combined with the anecdotal evidence of stories of people whom I cherished but whose lives were lost on the altar of permissiveness and enablement such as that promoted in low barrier/harm reduction models.


I am 77 years old, and a recovering alcoholic, with more than 50 years of sobriety behind me. Until I was placed in a position where I was forced to quit drinking, I spent too many years being a pain in the rear to this community.


I was frequently in trouble with the courts, police and my family but I was always treated in a very permissive manner. In short, I was never held accountable for my own actions and shameful behaviour which had resulted from various character defects combined with too much alcohol.


My anti-social activities came to a screeching halt when I crossed a line and a judge ceased offering me permissive solutions.  He sent me to jail where I had no easy access to alcohol and was forced for the first time to accept the responsibility for my own actions.


As a ruse to gain early release, I attended some 12-step meetings and was eventually released back into this same community where I have since enjoyed the privileges, and pleasures, of a sober lifestyle for more than 50 years.  A few years after my release, I was even granted a pardon for the misdeeds of my past.



In the years since, I have served in many capacities with public organizations and even sat for six years on Maple Ridge municipal council.


My point in relating these things is simply to assure you that none of these successes would have been possible if I had continued to exist in a low barrier, harm reduction, model.


I readily admit that, given enough time and patience within the surrounding community, a few of those existing in a low barrier environment will succeed and return to otherwise normal and socially acceptable roles.


These success stories will be too few in number and the community will be left to deal with the chaos, criminal activity, and violence that too often accompany such projects.  To relieve addicts and alcoholics from any demand to cease their addictive behaviours is only to guarantee the continuation of those activities.


In other words, if you tell drug addicts and alcoholics that it's alright to continue their destructive lifestyles, that is exactly what they will do.


I currently reside a few hundred feet from the temporary shelter to which many of us in this neighbourhood were opposed. The fears of our skepticism have been realized by continued drug use, prostitution, major and minor crimes and violence in and around the shelter. The drug overdose death rate is approaching epidemic proportions and in our stairwells we still find too many needles, used condoms and other detritus of people with no direction and no responsibilities.


We have no reason to believe that using that same permissive approach at any proposed facility will result in any improvements.  I am totally willing to do my part in helping people rehabilitate their lifestyles but not at the sacrifice of our own sense of community and security.


Any successful projects aimed at dealing with these enormous social and legal issues must include greater public input and transparency and must be developed apart from existing residential and business districts.


Hopefully, our pleas to reject this proposal will not fall on deaf ears and we can all join together in finding an effective, acceptable approach.



SANDY MacDOUGALL is a retired newspaper reporter, formerly employed by the Maple Ridge News and the Tri-City News; he resides in Maple Ridge.

Sandy was elected for three consecutive terms to Maple Ridge municipal council in the late 1970s and early 1980s, and also ran for the Progressive Conservatives in Kim Campbell's ill-fated federal election campaign

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

RCMP gag order comes after BC NDP catch heat for diverted safe supply (Northern Beat)

In the wake of several high-profile police drug seizures of suspected safer supply that put the BC NDP government on the defensive last month, BC RCMP “E” division issued a gag order on detachments, directing them to run all communications on “hot button” public safety issues through headquarters in the lead-up to the provincial election. “It is very clear we are in a pre-election time period and the topic of ‘public safety’ is very much an issue that governments and voters are discussing,” writes a senior RCMP communications official in an email dated Mar. 11 in what appears to have gone out to all BC RCMP detachments . . . . CLICK HERE for the full story

KRUGELL: BC NDP turns its attention from BC United to BC Conservatives

The BC NDP turning its attention, from BC United, to BC Conservatives was reported over the weekend from a variety of sources. It is the result of the surge in the BC Conservative's polling numbers and the subsequent collapse of BC United. The NDP has largely ignored the BC Conservatives, instead they opt to talk about issues directly or attack their old foes BC United. Practical politics says that parties closer to the centre tend to ultimately prevail over the long haul. They do wane but often make comebacks. A good example is the federal Liberals going from third party to government in 2015. Centrism has a lot of appeal on voting day. The NDP shifting its fire from United to Conservative is a reflection of reality. BC United did buy advertising online and radio over the last few months. Did that shift the polls back to them? Nope. The reality is today, the BC Conservatives are the party of the Opposition, and day by day the Conservatives are looking like a party not ready to fig

Baldrey: 2024 meets 1991? How B.C. election history could repeat itself (Times Colonist)

NOTE ... not the original image from Keith Baldrey's op/ed 1991 BC general election -- Wikipedia   A veteran NDP cabinet minister stopped me in the legislature hallway last week and revealed what he thinks is the biggest vulnerability facing his government in the fall provincial election. It’s not housing, health care, affordability or any of the other hot button issues identified by pollsters. "I think we are way too complacent,” he told me. “Too many people on our side think winning elections are easy.” He referenced the 1991 election campaign as something that could repeat itself. What was supposed to be an easy NDP victory then almost turned into an upset win for the fledgling BC Liberal Party. Indeed, the parallels between that campaign and the coming fall contest are striking ... CLICK HERE for the full story

Labels

Show more