Addiction, Homelessness, and Healthcare

 

I’m really tired today after coming off of working three days in a row. That may not seem like a lot to the regular work-a-day folks, but when you’re in healthcare, the hours are often long and arduous. I’ve worked about 40 hours in the past three days, and I work in a busy Emergency Department in Portland, OR. Every day that I worked, the ED was on divert — meaning ambulances were directed to not come to us because we were so busy.

When I left work last night, there were 30 patients in the waiting room. Many had been waiting three to five hours just to be put in a room; the wait time to see a physician after being roomed was even longer. Staff scurried about looking haggard, pulled in a million directions. At one point I counted 17 patients in the department that had been admitted to inpatient services waiting for a bed, but since the hospital was full they continued to board in the ED. Multiple patients were there with mental health crises that had landed them with psych holds.

Over the past week, many of the patients I cared for were in the hospital because of drug abuse — usually heroin and meth — or mental health or some combination thereof. Most of those patients were also homeless. Another nurse’s patient was put up for discharge back to the streets after she faked an illness in order to come in and sleep indoors, and as I walked by the open door of her room I saw her rummage through the cabinets, stuffing her patient belongings bags full of hospital supplies. She asked me for a fourth cup of coffee and a third boxed lunch when I pulled the hospital pillow out of her bag and told her that she can’t steal supplies from the hospital and she needed to leave. “I just need another cup of coffee, man! I spilled my last one. I need coffee with like four sugars and six creamers.” I told her it was time to leave.

Another homeless guy on heroin came in with some respiratory complaint and was kept overnight for observation. When the provider went to discharge him, he claimed he was going to go kill himself once he left. Social workers were called to talk to him about mental health resources in the community — it was pretty clear he did not actually have any suicidal ideation — but he threatened to jump off a bridge if we discharged him. He ended up staying four days in the ED between his stay for observation and the time it took to arrange his admission to the psych hospital.

Earlier last week, a patient came in for treatment of her abscesses due to daily heroin use. She said she really wanted to get clean, and she was worried that she couldn’t get into rehab if she had an infection. This was one of many admissions to our ED. Multiple times she tried to leave the department (IV in place) to “go to the cafeteria” and the “gift shop.” When she was told that wasn’t allowed, she started yelling and swearing at us, as though we were abusing her. Her son and his friend came to visit, bearing a Pop Tarts box. Another nurse noted some suspicious activity, and when she went in to investigate, the patient was drawing up heroin into a syringe her son had brought. She tried to say she had changed her mind and wasn’t going to shoot up after all, but when the nurse said that she would be calling public safety, the patient stuck the needle into her arm, making eye contact with the nurse the whole time. She then ripped out her IV and told her son they needed to get out of there now.

These are just a couple stories from all that I dealt with this weekend. I estimate about 33-40 percent of the patients I see are drug addicts, homeless, and have serious mental health problems. Injection is the most common way of using, which leads to all sorts of health problems that send people running to the ED for help. Many of these patients present to the ED over and over again with the same infections. IVs have to be placed using ultrasound because even the most experienced ED nurses can’t get a line because the patient’s veins are so sclerosed.

After about 24 hours since they last used, they go from cooperative and apathetic to antsy and abusive as they start jonesing for their substance of choice. I am constantly yelled at for not treating their pain, for letting them suffer, thinking that the hospital should be providing enough oxycodone to satisfy their two or three gram a day habit. Often these people have a “family emergency,” leave against medical advice, or just leave while no one is looking. Our social workers work tirelessly to help people get off the streets and into rehab. I cannot tell you how many times I have had patients decline placement in a shelter in favor of being on the streets. Much of transitional housing has high vacancy rates because of the no drugs and no drinking stipulation.

Walking in downtown Portland is not safe. I personally know two people that have been stabbed by homeless guys on the street with no provocation. A man was arrested for a stabbing after he said that his wife, Taylor Swift, told him to kill the guy that happened to walk by. Tent cities are everywhere, and one cannot drive through downtown without seeing shopping cart after shopping cart being pushed by someone mumbling to themselves.

There is a big call for legalization of drugs by the left and the libertarians. But how does that work? If we legalize drugs, making them easy to obtain and removing the stigma, how will that decrease the number of people coming to the ED with MRSA abscesses and endocarditis? While I agree that people have the right to make their own choices in life, how do we handle the stress placed on the country by these addicts? This patient population rarely has health insurance, or if they do it’s Medicaid, and they rack up tremendous hospital bills for their 48-hour stay in the ED to get treatment for their infections. The taxpayer pays for it any which way.

While decriminalizing drugs might save money from the prisons, courts, and police, it does up the cost of healthcare. We cannot turn patients away from treatment. There is no “three strikes and you’re out” policy in the hospital that allows us to tell a patient that we’ve already treated them three times before for injection-related infections so we can’t treat them again. Hospitals, nurses, and doctors would be sued six ways to Sunday if we did.

I’m all for individual freedoms, but I cannot see how legalizing drugs will do anything but hurt our society.

Published in General
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 173 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Mike H (View Comment):

    Vicryl Contessa (View Comment):

    Mike H (View Comment):
    I don’t think there’d be an excessive increase in hospitalization with increased access to drugs. There’d probably be some, but there’s offsetting benefits in drug safety when it’s taken out of the black market.

    The people who are the biggest potential problem are already using. Marginal users would mostly do so responsibly. There’d be some flashy tragic stories, but not in proportion to the amount of hand wringing over them.

    And no, I don’t expect to convince anyone. It gets too exhausting and nobody’s budging.

    The reason why I don’t think this would be the case is out here there’s a very lax attitude towards drugs. Drugs are pretty cheap and easy to come by, and the police don’t really crack down on IV drug use. I’ve never seen so many people with drug related problems in the ED as I have here. And I’ve been in EDs in the south as well- there was not nearly this amount of healthcare consumption. Where I think the difference between alcohol and drugs lays is in the fact that street drugs are highly addictive. Very few IV drug users use casually or socially or occasionally. They usually use daily. And those are the people that end up in my ED.

    Wait, so how is legalization going to make it worse? Sounds like everyone’s already doing drugs. Get rid of the black market and it’s not out of the question that things would get incrementally better. Less likely people will OD. It doesn’t sound like people are shy about going to the hospital now, but I imagine some people don’t get help when they should because it’s still illegal, but maybe Portland doesn’t have this problem because of the culture.

    Again, if something can be sold at the Quicktrip then it is more likely to be bought. Being illegal causes more people to try it.

    Saying people will be less likely to OD is also not really supported by facts. People will OD on well made Heroin. Also, the idea that black markets will go away is priceless. Of course they won’t. Smoking is legal right now in all 50 states. Guess what? Organized Crime is still involved heavily. Ever see the show Moonshiners? Running shine is still a thing. How is that? Alcohol is legal, and easily obtainable everywhere. Yet, people run shine.

    Crime cartels also still grow pot in Colorado. Imagine that.

    • #91
  2. C. U. Douglas Coolidge
    C. U. Douglas
    @CUDouglas

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    PHenry (View Comment):
    And I ask, do you really believe the reason more people are not using drugs like heroin and meth is just because they are illegal? Or too hard to get?

    The whole “The War on Drugs has failed, therefore all we can do it legalize it all” is a false statement. There are lots of things we can do differently instead of the current approach that are not “legalize crystal meth now!”

    Exactly. I get the arguments that the War on Drugs has been a costly endeavor and has circumvented the Constitution in many ways, but the argument “The War on Drugs has failed therefore legalization is the only other option!” comes off as a false dichotomy.

    • #92
  3. PHenry Inactive
    PHenry
    @PHenry

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):
    I do believe that is heroin and meth are sold in the corner store, that yes, more people will try them because they are easier to get. This seems to be so obvious, I don’t understand questioning it.

    Then, to raise my earlier point, why aren’t more people trying ‘huffing’ spray paint?  It’s available at the corner store.  Yet somehow most people are not walking around with silver faces…

    • #93
  4. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    PHenry (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):
    I do believe that is heroin and meth are sold in the corner store, that yes, more people will try them because they are easier to get. This seems to be so obvious, I don’t understand questioning it.

    Then, to raise my earlier point, why aren’t more people trying ‘huffing’ spray paint? It’s available at the corner store. Yet somehow most people are not walking around with silver faces…

    Because people don’t socially huff paint. Not to mention, it is a lousy high.

    • #94
  5. Mike H Inactive
    Mike H
    @MikeH

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    PHenry (View Comment):
    And I ask, do you really believe the reason more people are not using drugs like heroin and meth is just because they are illegal? Or too hard to get?

    If something is legal, it gains some degree of moral-ness, while things that are illegal have some sense of immoral-ness. I do believe that is heroin and meth are sold in the corner store, that yes, more people will try them because they are easier to get. This seems to be so obvious, I don’t understand questioning it.

    Further, if I can make having drugs on you a crime, then I have leverage to force you into treatment. Note, I am not saying that this happens now, but that it could.

    The whole “The War on Drugs has failed, therefore all we can do it legalize it all” is a false statement. There are lots of things we can do differently instead of the current approach that are not “legalize crystal meth now!”

    Ending the war on drugs without legalizing anything would be such a massive improvement over the status quo I’d probably just shut up about the whole thing.

    • #95
  6. Mike H Inactive
    Mike H
    @MikeH

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Mike H (View Comment):

    Vicryl Contessa (View Comment):

    Mike H (View Comment):
    I don’t think there’d be an excessive increase in hospitalization with increased access to drugs. There’d probably be some, but there’s offsetting benefits in drug safety when it’s taken out of the black market.

    The people who are the biggest potential problem are already using. Marginal users would mostly do so responsibly. There’d be some flashy tragic stories, but not in proportion to the amount of hand wringing over them.

    And no, I don’t expect to convince anyone. It gets too exhausting and nobody’s budging.

    The reason why I don’t think this would be the case is out here there’s a very lax attitude towards drugs. Drugs are pretty cheap and easy to come by, and the police don’t really crack down on IV drug use. I’ve never seen so many people with drug related problems in the ED as I have here. And I’ve been in EDs in the south as well- there was not nearly this amount of healthcare consumption. Where I think the difference between alcohol and drugs lays is in the fact that street drugs are highly addictive. Very few IV drug users use casually or socially or occasionally. They usually use daily. And those are the people that end up in my ED.

    Wait, so how is legalization going to make it worse? Sounds like everyone’s already doing drugs. Get rid of the black market and it’s not out of the question that things would get incrementally better. Less likely people will OD. It doesn’t sound like people are shy about going to the hospital now, but I imagine some people don’t get help when they should because it’s still illegal, but maybe Portland doesn’t have this problem because of the culture.

    Again, if something can be sold at the Quicktrip then it is more likely to be bought. Being illegal causes more people to try it.

    Saying people will be less likely to OD is also not really supported by facts. People will OD on well made Heroin. Also, the idea that black markets will go away is priceless. Of course they won’t. Smoking is legal right now in all 50 states. Guess what? Organized Crime is still involved heavily. Ever see the show Moonshiners? Running shine is still a thing. How is that? Alcohol is legal, and easily obtainable everywhere. Yet, people run shine.

    Because there’s still a market for it. That’s what will happen if the regulations and/or taxes are too high for something desirable.

    • #96
  7. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Mike H (View Comment):
    Because there’s still a market for it. That’s what will happen if the regulations and/or taxes are too high for something desirable.

    And that will happen with other drugs too.

    I hate to break it to the libertarians, but there will never be any such thing as a totally free market. There will always be regulations and taxes.

    • #97
  8. Vicryl Contessa Thatcher
    Vicryl Contessa
    @VicrylContessa

    One thing that I’ve seen happen with the legalization of marijuana up here is the lack of understanding that just because it’s legal doesn’t mean you are excused from the consequences of using it. I’ve had many people complain that since weed is legal, they shouldn’t be fired for popping positive on a drug screen. They don’t understand that just because it’s legal doesn’t mean employers can’t prohibit its use. We’ve also seen a big uptick in car crashes where the driver had weed on board. There’s lots of data on drunk driving but almost none on high driving. That’s why my hospital is doing a big study on MJ and motor vehicle crashes.

     

    • #98
  9. Mike H Inactive
    Mike H
    @MikeH

    Vicryl Contessa (View Comment):
    One thing that I’ve seen happen with the legalization of marijuana up here is the lack of understanding that just because it’s legal doesn’t mean you are excused from the consequences of using it. I’ve had many people complain that since weed is legal, they shouldn’t be fired for popping positive on a drug screen. They don’t understand that just because it’s legal doesn’t mean employers can’t prohibit its use. We’ve also seen a big uptick in car crashes where the driver had weed on board. There’s lots of data on drunk driving but almost none on high driving. That’s why my hospital is doing a big study on MJ and motor vehicle crashes.

    Is it going to be one of those studies where if weed was found in either car, or even if the person not at fault had weed in their system, it will be categorized as “weed involved” accident and leave everyone with a false impression of the magnitude of the problem the same way they do with “alcohol involved” accidents?

    • #99
  10. Ontheleftcoast Inactive
    Ontheleftcoast
    @Ontheleftcoast

    PHenry (View Comment):
    I didn’t mean to equate them in that way. I’m just pointing out that prohibition of guns will do nothing to remove guns from the streets, just as prohibiting drugs has done nothing to remove them.

    The Left tends to believe that guns are drugs, but they’re especially magical since you don’t have consume them.  Instead, they are psychoactive objects turn the bearer into a killer.

    However, they tend to want to legalize the drugs that one uses by inhalation, injection, ingestion, etc. and of course almost always want to “ban” or “eliminate” guns; the logical consequence of the latter position is that they want door to door raids to confiscate guns.

     

    • #100
  11. Ontheleftcoast Inactive
    Ontheleftcoast
    @Ontheleftcoast

    Mike H (View Comment):
    That’s why my hospital is doing a big study on MJ and motor vehicle crashes.

    If they haven’t already thought of it, please encourage them to seek additional funding to freeze samples for long-term storage and possible reanalysis; I wouldn’t be surprised if over time patterns of phytochemicals and metabolites in the blood become useful tools for identifying being under the influence in a legal sense rather than merely having some present in the system. If all they’re looking for now is THCa, THC, and direct metabolites, they might miss something.

    • #101
  12. Vicryl Contessa Thatcher
    Vicryl Contessa
    @VicrylContessa

    I completely agree with Bryan’s assessment that the way these drugs work on the brain changes them in a way that alters the person’s ability to think rationally.  Yesterday was my Friday (thank the Lord!), and I spent two hours getting yelled at and fighting with drug addicts that we were trying to discharge. How can I describe what it’s like arguing with a an addict? If you take the irrationality of a 5 year old, the free will of an adult, and the vocabulary of a sailor, mix those together. Add some facial piercings and tattoos. Now tell that person that you’re not giving them a prescription for pain medicine and they need to leave the comforts of the clean bed, free food, and cable TV for the streets from whence they came. But remember they have the irrationality of a child, so this is like walking down the cereal aisle after they just had Coco Puffs at a friend’s house for the first time the other day- all they want is Coco Puffs, and you’re saying no. And the meltdown ensues. The threats to go hurt themselves, the name calling, the yelling, the crying, the whining. Things no grown adult would normally do. The drugs seems to make them revert to the reasoning ability they had as kindergarteners.

    • #102
  13. Vicryl Contessa Thatcher
    Vicryl Contessa
    @VicrylContessa

    Mike H (View Comment):

    Vicryl Contessa (View Comment):
    One thing that I’ve seen happen with the legalization of marijuana up here is the lack of understanding that just because it’s legal doesn’t mean you are excused from the consequences of using it. I’ve had many people complain that since weed is legal, they shouldn’t be fired for popping positive on a drug screen. They don’t understand that just because it’s legal doesn’t mean employers can’t prohibit its use. We’ve also seen a big uptick in car crashes where the driver had weed on board. There’s lots of data on drunk driving but almost none on high driving. That’s why my hospital is doing a big study on MJ and motor vehicle crashes.

    Is it going to be one of those studies where if weed was found in either car, or even if the person not at fault had weed in their system, it will be categorized as “weed involved” accident and leave everyone with a false impression of the magnitude of the problem the same way they do with “alcohol involved” accidents?

    No, we have no way of knowing if weed was just “in the car.” The data is drawn my lab testing alone in patients that present to the ED after an MVC.

    • #103
  14. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Vicryl Contessa (View Comment):
    I completely agree with Bryan’s assessment that the way these drugs work on the brain changes them in a way that alters the person’s ability to think rationally. Yesterday was my Friday (thank the Lord!), and I spent two hours getting yelled at and fighting with drug addicts that we were trying to discharge. How can I describe what it’s like arguing with a an addict? If you take the irrationality of a 5 year old, the free will of an adult, and the vocabulary of a sailor, mix those together. Add some facial piercings and tattoos. Now tell that person that you’re not giving them a prescription for pain medicine and they need to leave the comforts of the clean bed, free food, and cable TV for the streets from whence they came. But remember they have the irrationality of a child, so this is like walking down the cereal aisle after they just had Coco Puffs at a friend’s house for the first time the other day- all they want is Coco Puffs, and you’re saying no. And the meltdown ensues. The threats to go hurt themselves, the name calling, the yelling, the crying, the whining. Things no grown adult would normally do. The drugs seems to make them revert to the reasoning ability they had as kindergarteners.

    Good way to put it.

    • #104
  15. Joseph Stanko Coolidge
    Joseph Stanko
    @JosephStanko

    Vicryl Contessa (View Comment):
    I’ve had many people complain that since weed is legal, they shouldn’t be fired for popping positive on a drug screen. They don’t understand that just because it’s legal doesn’t mean employers can’t prohibit its use.

    To take the other side of that argument, while I agree that technically they can, I’m not convinced in most cases they should.  Clearly if someone shows up for work high and it affects their job performance, they should be disciplined and perhaps fired.  Same as if they show up for work drunk.

    On the other hand if my employer implemented a policy prohibiting me from drinking even on my own time after work and on weekends, I’d find another job.  If an employee wants to relax on their off time using (legal) weed, why is that any of the employer’s business?

    • #105
  16. Vicryl Contessa Thatcher
    Vicryl Contessa
    @VicrylContessa

    Joseph Stanko (View Comment):

    Vicryl Contessa (View Comment):
    I’ve had many people complain that since weed is legal, they shouldn’t be fired for popping positive on a drug screen. They don’t understand that just because it’s legal doesn’t mean employers can’t prohibit its use.

    To take the other side of that argument, while I agree that technically they can, I’m not convinced in most cases they should. Clearly if someone shows up for work high and it affects their job performance, they should be disciplined and perhaps fired. Same as if they show up for work drunk.

    On the other hand if my employer implemented a policy prohibiting me from drinking even on my own time after work and on weekends, I’d find another job. If an employee wants to relax on their off time using (legal) weed, why is that any of the employer’s business?

    The problem with smoking weed is that unlike alcohol weed does not metabolize at a defined rate.

    • #106
  17. Stad Coolidge
    Stad
    @Stad

    milkchaser (View Comment):
    Our masters in DC have decided that they can make anything they want into a federal crime.

    And this is a problem . . .

    • #107
  18. Joseph Stanko Coolidge
    Joseph Stanko
    @JosephStanko

    Vicryl Contessa (View Comment):
    The problem with smoking weed is that unlike alcohol weed does not metabolize at a defined rate.

    You don’t think someone can smoke a joint on Saturday night and show up able to do their job Monday morning?

     

    • #108
  19. Vicryl Contessa Thatcher
    Vicryl Contessa
    @VicrylContessa

    Joseph Stanko (View Comment):

    Vicryl Contessa (View Comment):
    The problem with smoking weed is that unlike alcohol weed does not metabolize at a defined rate.

    You don’t think someone can smoke a joint on Saturday night and show up able to do their job Monday morning?

    Not necessarily. There’s also a cumulative effect that happens. People that smoke weed regularly have consistently slowed thinking and responses even when they’re not toking up. Alcohol doesn’t have that same effect until you get to the point of cirrhosis and get hepatic encephalopathy.

    • #109
  20. Joseph Stanko Coolidge
    Joseph Stanko
    @JosephStanko

    Vicryl Contessa (View Comment):
    Not necessarily. There’s also a cumulative effect that happens. People that smoke weed regularly have consistently slowed thinking and responses even when they’re not toking up.

    So evaluate people based on their job performance, and punish them if it degrades.  Don’t try to micro-manage their lives outside work.

    It seems to me the whole foundation of conservatism rests on the idea that we have to treat adults as responsible for their own choices.  I realize you’re dealing with people who’ve manifestly failed in that responsibility, and that raises tricky questions.  But once you start down the path of “people can’t be trusted with X” you quickly end up with the entire progressive nanny state:

    • Some people smoke too much weed, so no one should be allowed to have any weed.
    • Some people use guns to commit crime, so one one should be allowed to own guns.
    • Some people don’t save enough money for retirement, so everyone should be forced into Social Security.
    • Some people don’t plan ahead for medical expenses, so everyone should be forced to buy Obamacare.
    • etc etc etc
    • #110
  21. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Joseph Stanko (View Comment):

    Vicryl Contessa (View Comment):
    Not necessarily. There’s also a cumulative effect that happens. People that smoke weed regularly have consistently slowed thinking and responses even when they’re not toking up.

    So evaluate people based on their job performance, and punish them if it degrades. Don’t try to micro-manage their lives outside work.

    It seems to me the whole foundation of conservatism rests on the idea that we have to treat adults as responsible for their own choices. I realize you’re dealing with people who’ve manifestly failed in that responsibility, and that raises tricky questions. But once you start down the path of “people can’t be trusted with X” you quickly end up with the entire progressive nanny state:

    • Some people smoke too much weed, so no one should be allowed to have any weed.
    • Some people use guns to commit crime, so one one should be allowed to own guns.
    • Some people don’t save enough money for retirement, so everyone should be forced into Social Security.
    • Some people don’t plan ahead for medical expenses, so everyone should be forced to buy Obamacare.
    • etc etc etc

    Or, I can drug test and say you cannot work for me if you smoke pot.

    Or do you think as a private business owner I don’t have the right to tell people they cannot come to work impared?

    Pot shows up as a + drug screen for weeks. Smoke a joint on the weekend, and I can tell with a urnine screen. Get trashed on Sat night? No one can tell with blood work on Monday (unless you keep drinking).

    Them’s the breaks.

    Or do you want to wait until your Doctor’s performance degrades?

    • #111
  22. Chris Campion Coolidge
    Chris Campion
    @ChrisCampion

    MarciN (View Comment):

    Chris Campion (View Comment):
    A couple of comments talked about hospitals and jails, separately.

    What about hospital jail?

    It sounds stupid but I’m not joking, and maybe it already exists. But build a small wing in every large hospital, staff it with guards (not health care personnel), and when addicts come in and act as a danger to others or themselves, put ’em in hospital jail. For a week. No access to drugs. Just a room, food, water, etc, but that’s it.

    In other words, create the incentive to keep them out of hospitals. And maybe the one week slot of sobriety starts to change things, for a few of them.

    The two words just clanged in my head, and I haven’t thought it through much. But we’re already paying for them to stay at the ED, which is the most expensive part of the hospital. Build a wing to move them to, internally, so they don’t have to be transported anywhere else. Offer counseling and support, on site.

    But get them out of the hospital.

    We have a jail program on Cape Cod that has been noticed around the country because of its success. I don’t know if it would work elsewhere, but Sheriff Cummings has turned around a lot of lives, and he gives talks to cities and towns around New England where they are interested in setting up this type of program:

    In 2012, the Barnstable County Correctional facility became the first adult detention center in Massachusetts to launch a Vivitrol program, and statistics show it has reduced recidivism. According to Sheriff Jim Cummings, 82 percent of the 178 inmates given an injection of the opioid blocker at release have not been incarcerated again.

    We also have a special healthcare facility next door to Cape Cod Hospital that treats patients who are sick but not in need of emergency room life-saving services. The Duffy Health Center is geared to the homeless and other at-risk populations on Cape Cod.

    A separate healthcare facility apart from a hospital’s main emergency room would help alleviate a lot of the problems in the hospitals in our major cities, and the people in the separate facility get to specialize in treating this particular patient population. It is a good idea. The Duffy Health Center patients have a good relationship with the staff.

    Thanks Marci – hadn’t seen that before, the jail program.

    • #112
  23. Vicryl Contessa Thatcher
    Vicryl Contessa
    @VicrylContessa

    Joseph Stanko (View Comment):

    Vicryl Contessa (View Comment):
    Not necessarily. There’s also a cumulative effect that happens. People that smoke weed regularly have consistently slowed thinking and responses even when they’re not toking up.

    So evaluate people based on their job performance, and punish them if it degrades. Don’t try to micro-manage their lives outside work.

    It seems to me the whole foundation of conservatism rests on the idea that we have to treat adults as responsible for their own choices. I realize you’re dealing with people who’ve manifestly failed in that responsibility, and that raises tricky questions. But once you start down the path of “people can’t be trusted with X” you quickly end up with the entire progressive nanny state:

    • Some people smoke too much weed, so no one should be allowed to have any weed.
    • Some people use guns to commit crime, so one one should be allowed to own guns.
    • Some people don’t save enough money for retirement, so everyone should be forced into Social Security.
    • Some people don’t plan ahead for medical expenses, so everyone should be forced to buy Obamacare.
    • etc etc etc

    So if a nurse screws up and gives a fatally wrong medication or punctures an artery doing an arterial blood gas draw, then we fire them? What about the surgeon who gets a little loopy after smoking weed on his off time and botched a surgery? Or the trucker driving a semi whose reaction times are a little off after smoking up the night before? But they did it on their off time so…no harm, right?

    • #113
  24. Chris Campion Coolidge
    Chris Campion
    @ChrisCampion

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    LibertyDefender (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):
    Forcing addicts into treatment works to get them on the “fix thyself” path.

    Can you define “works” in this context?

    As I recall from my research on the subject in the late 80s, the success rate for voluntary attendees of 30 day rehab programs was frustratingly low. As I recall, success was defined as clean and sober for one year following treatment, and few if any programs could claim a success rate as high as 50 percent. Most were under 20 percent.

    The program I outlined is over two years of wrap around services. That is far, far more than 30 day rehab. The clean and sober rate a year out (or no hospitalization) for the Drug Court and Mental Health Courts the place I used to work in, pushed 80%.

    What was the universe, in terms of patients admitted to this program?  What was the selection criteria?  My assumption is that the failure rate if everyone were allowed into that type of program, with no evaluations or screens, etc, no criteria to meet to get into the program, would be much higher.

    I completely agree that it can’t be a short-term thing for people whose lives have completely exploded into nothingness.  It depends on the degree of the destruction, how much support they might still have left from family and friends, and if they can live consistently in a place where their prior lives have no purchase.

    Which is a tall order for those deep in the throes of self-destruction.  That said, if they don’t show up – meaning they’re not actively committed to being sober, and changing their lives – then all the support is absolutely and 100% meaningless.

    • #114
  25. Joseph Stanko Coolidge
    Joseph Stanko
    @JosephStanko

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):
    Or do you want to wait until your Doctor’s performance degrades?

    Correct.

    I don’t care if my doctor smokes a joint on Saturday as long as he does his job well.

    • #115
  26. Joseph Stanko Coolidge
    Joseph Stanko
    @JosephStanko

    Vicryl Contessa (View Comment):
    So if a nurse screws up and gives a fatally wrong medication or punctures an artery doing an arterial blood gas draw, then we fire them? What about the surgeon who gets a little loopy after smoking weed on his off time and botched a surgery? Or the trucker driving a semi whose reaction times are a little off after smoking up the night before?

    What about the nurse who screws up because she was up all night caring for a screaming baby and didn’t get enough sleep, or the doctor who’s a little loopy after sneaking a martini at lunch, or the trucker whose reaction times are off because he’s caught up in a conversation on his CB radio?  Life is risky, accidents happen, we can’t adopt a zero tolerance policy towards everything that might possibly impair someone’s on-the-job performance.

    Again I think we have to treat people as adults and then hold them accountable for their mistakes.

     

    • #116
  27. Vicryl Contessa Thatcher
    Vicryl Contessa
    @VicrylContessa

    Joseph Stanko (View Comment):

    Vicryl Contessa (View Comment):
    So if a nurse screws up and gives a fatally wrong medication or punctures an artery doing an arterial blood gas draw, then we fire them? What about the surgeon who gets a little loopy after smoking weed on his off time and botched a surgery? Or the trucker driving a semi whose reaction times are a little off after smoking up the night before?

    What about the nurse who screws up because she was up all night caring for a screaming baby and didn’t get enough sleep, or the doctor who’s a little loopy after sneaking a martini at lunch, or the trucker whose reaction times are off because he’s caught up in a conversation on his CB radio? Life is risky, accidents happen, we can’t adopt a zero tolerance policy towards everything that might possibly impair someone’s on-the-job performance.

    Again I think we have to treat people as adults and then hold them accountable for their mistakes.

    That’s the rub- holding people accountable. We don’t hold people accountable in healthcare. We fix things, and we treat without judgement, but that doesn’t hold people accountable.

    • #117
  28. Joseph Stanko Coolidge
    Joseph Stanko
    @JosephStanko

    Vicryl Contessa (View Comment):
    That’s the rub- holding people accountable. We don’t hold people accountable in healthcare. We fix things, and we treat without judgement, but that doesn’t hold people accountable.

    True, that is a big problem.  It’s also the reason we’re well down the road to socialized medicine: if we aren’t willing to deny care to irresponsible people, then we have to find some way to pay for the ever-increasing costs of treating them.

    • #118
  29. Zafar Member
    Zafar
    @Zafar

    Sometimes people don’t really want to be as responsible for their own actions as they claim to.

    • #119
  30. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Joseph Stanko (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):
    Or do you want to wait until your Doctor’s performance degrades?

    Correct.

    I don’t care if my doctor smokes a joint on Saturday as long as he does his job well.

    You are out of your mind. As a patient, I want a pot free doctor. And, I will go to a company that has a drug policy. And fly airlines with drug policies.

     

    • #120
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.