For progressives, results are irrelevant, only virtuous intent matters, and only inasmuch as it allows others to see just how much you care, proving what a moral and righteous person you are. And if you don't get the results you want, double down, never question.
"I was just trying to be nice!"
Thank you for your dedication to fixing this mess, Michael. Apocalypse Never was a work of art, I can't wait to get my hands on your latest.
It should not surprise anyone that progressive policies do not help the drug adicted. They do not care. Policy is more important. If they all died the Progressive would cheer; there is no place for drug adicted in the communist system...
Rereading this for the fourth time, I have concluded that the author has a schizophrenic attitude towards "drug treatment" which I have to assume means rehab.
He says "Rather than arresting hard drug users when they break laws, and giving them the choice of jail or drug treatment, the only strategy proven to work,"
"here is a better way. San Francisco and other progressive cities should arrest addicts who break the law, offer drug treatment as an alternative to jail and prison, and make cash and housing for addicts contingent upon drug treatment."
But then he states (accurately) a "Researchers have known since 1997 that “patients who have been forced to enter a substance abuse treatment have shown during and post treatment results that are quite similar to those shown by supposedly ‘internally motivated’ patients.”"
Rehab doesn't work. 82% relapse. The success rate of kicking addiction for people who enter rehab is the same as for those who try to quit on their own. Drug addictions overwhelmingly "age out" of addiction and 60-80% of those addicted in their 20s are no longer addicted 10 years later. All without any intervention whatsoever.
Rather than infantilizing addicts, we need to hold them accountable for their behavior. And that includes any criminal activity that they commit when high or in search of drugs or money to buy drugs. This is the intervention we need, not wasting money and time on a solution of dubious value at best.
The one-time rehab seems to be modestly effective is when the addict is in jail. The forced recovery and enforced mental health treatment, combined with rehab has been shown to have some benefit.
I don't believe that traditional rehabilitation using self-help methods is effective. In fact, the data suggest that they're not much better than spontaneous rates of recovery. For alcoholism, up to a quarter of people respond on their own, and a lot of recovery centers have rates that are not even that high. So-called rehabilitation centers should publish their rates of improvement, and they should be required by law to do so. Cancer centers do. But rehabs are just this black box.
In summary: self-change in drug addiction is a much more common choice for solving the problem than treatment is; a substantial percentage of self-changers are successful; a significant percentage of those who were formerly addicted continue to use drugs occasionally without returning to addiction-level use, and they maintain these changes fairly well over time; and those who seek treatment usually have more severe problems than those who do not.
A survey by Gene Heyman, a research psychologist at McLean Hospital in Massachusetts, found that between 60 to 80 percent of people who were addicted in their teens and 20s were substance-free by their 30s, and they avoided addiction in subsequent decades. Other studies on Vietnam War veterans suggest that the majority of soldiers who became addicted to narcotics overseas later stopped using them without therapy.
The War on (some) Drugs has been a complete failure with no reduction in potently, costs or overdoses as a result of increasingly aggressive police action and increased incarceration. The criminal justice system did succeed in ruining the lives of hundreds of thousands of Black men. Blacks are 7-8 times as likely to be jailed for drug crimes even though usage rates are similar between Whites and Blacks.
In the Face of this injustice something needs to be done. It is fair to criticize the failings of current efforts but harm reduction saved thousands of lives every year.
Drug addicts are the ones responsible for their own actions. Addiction is a choice and a bad one. Most drug addicts “age out” of addiction without any treatment whatsoever. If they wanted to quit they would.
Treating drug use as a public health issue instead of a criminal issue has worked wherever it has been tried. In San Francisco we have the worst of both worlds: low criminal enforcement and not enough spent on housing given the high costs.
Many of the people who are on drugs have severe mental problems. We used to confine them to mental institutions. Then they discovered medications that would control the problem, so they shut down the mental institutions and decided to rely on the crazies to take their meds.
Shellenberger repeatedly uses phrase like “Progressives justify their withholding of the best-available medical treatment of drug addiction” without stating what that treatment is.
What is that treatment Micheal? You stated, correctly, in the essay that rehab is pretty much useless. What treatment do you have in mind?
For progressives, results are irrelevant, only virtuous intent matters, and only inasmuch as it allows others to see just how much you care, proving what a moral and righteous person you are. And if you don't get the results you want, double down, never question.
"I was just trying to be nice!"
Thank you for your dedication to fixing this mess, Michael. Apocalypse Never was a work of art, I can't wait to get my hands on your latest.
It should not surprise anyone that progressive policies do not help the drug adicted. They do not care. Policy is more important. If they all died the Progressive would cheer; there is no place for drug adicted in the communist system...
Rereading this for the fourth time, I have concluded that the author has a schizophrenic attitude towards "drug treatment" which I have to assume means rehab.
He says "Rather than arresting hard drug users when they break laws, and giving them the choice of jail or drug treatment, the only strategy proven to work,"
"here is a better way. San Francisco and other progressive cities should arrest addicts who break the law, offer drug treatment as an alternative to jail and prison, and make cash and housing for addicts contingent upon drug treatment."
But then he states (accurately) a "Researchers have known since 1997 that “patients who have been forced to enter a substance abuse treatment have shown during and post treatment results that are quite similar to those shown by supposedly ‘internally motivated’ patients.”"
Rehab doesn't work. 82% relapse. The success rate of kicking addiction for people who enter rehab is the same as for those who try to quit on their own. Drug addictions overwhelmingly "age out" of addiction and 60-80% of those addicted in their 20s are no longer addicted 10 years later. All without any intervention whatsoever.
Rather than infantilizing addicts, we need to hold them accountable for their behavior. And that includes any criminal activity that they commit when high or in search of drugs or money to buy drugs. This is the intervention we need, not wasting money and time on a solution of dubious value at best.
The one-time rehab seems to be modestly effective is when the addict is in jail. The forced recovery and enforced mental health treatment, combined with rehab has been shown to have some benefit.
Sources:
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/does-rehab-work/
How well does traditional rehab work?
I don't believe that traditional rehabilitation using self-help methods is effective. In fact, the data suggest that they're not much better than spontaneous rates of recovery. For alcoholism, up to a quarter of people respond on their own, and a lot of recovery centers have rates that are not even that high. So-called rehabilitation centers should publish their rates of improvement, and they should be required by law to do so. Cancer centers do. But rehabs are just this black box.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/do-it-yourself-addiction-cures/
In summary: self-change in drug addiction is a much more common choice for solving the problem than treatment is; a substantial percentage of self-changers are successful; a significant percentage of those who were formerly addicted continue to use drugs occasionally without returning to addiction-level use, and they maintain these changes fairly well over time; and those who seek treatment usually have more severe problems than those who do not.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/can-you-cure-yourself-of-addiction/
A survey by Gene Heyman, a research psychologist at McLean Hospital in Massachusetts, found that between 60 to 80 percent of people who were addicted in their teens and 20s were substance-free by their 30s, and they avoided addiction in subsequent decades. Other studies on Vietnam War veterans suggest that the majority of soldiers who became addicted to narcotics overseas later stopped using them without therapy.
The War on (some) Drugs has been a complete failure with no reduction in potently, costs or overdoses as a result of increasingly aggressive police action and increased incarceration. The criminal justice system did succeed in ruining the lives of hundreds of thousands of Black men. Blacks are 7-8 times as likely to be jailed for drug crimes even though usage rates are similar between Whites and Blacks.
In the Face of this injustice something needs to be done. It is fair to criticize the failings of current efforts but harm reduction saved thousands of lives every year.
Drug addicts are the ones responsible for their own actions. Addiction is a choice and a bad one. Most drug addicts “age out” of addiction without any treatment whatsoever. If they wanted to quit they would.
Treating drug use as a public health issue instead of a criminal issue has worked wherever it has been tried. In San Francisco we have the worst of both worlds: low criminal enforcement and not enough spent on housing given the high costs.
Many of the people who are on drugs have severe mental problems. We used to confine them to mental institutions. Then they discovered medications that would control the problem, so they shut down the mental institutions and decided to rely on the crazies to take their meds.
Shellenberger repeatedly uses phrase like “Progressives justify their withholding of the best-available medical treatment of drug addiction” without stating what that treatment is.
What is that treatment Micheal? You stated, correctly, in the essay that rehab is pretty much useless. What treatment do you have in mind?
"Indeed, San Francisco is engaged in an unethical refusal to mandate proven medical treatment to drug addicts..." nothing more need be said.