There is a trend that seems to be percolating through the United States where governments are in the process of implementing “supervised drug injection sites.” These sites are places where addicts will be provided with clean needles and medical care, free of charge, as they use hard drugs like heroin and fentanyl in the presence of trained staff. It is based on the idea of “harm reduction.”
The stated objectives of these sites are to stem the surge of overdose deaths and help prevent the transmission of diseases like HIV. These sites will also supposedly serve to connect drug users to treatment possibilities for addiction and other social services.
The surging drug addiction crisis is real. More than 100,000 people have died from a drug overdose in the last year. The drug war obviously isn’t helping. Decriminalization of drugs is something I support for various reasons. But this is a different conversation. Subsidizing drug use? No. I don’t think this will produce the desired outcome.
Ronald Reagan is attributed with the quote,
“If you want more of something, subsidize it.”
It’s very simple economic logic. Subsides result in more of that which is subsidized. Subsidies are an encouragement and an incentive. Instead of treating the underlying problems, this idea of subsidizing “harm reduction” only deals with the problem at the surface at that moment. It is like putting a “band-aid on cancer,” as they say.
New York
In New York City, Mayor Bill de Blasio announced the opening of overdose prevention center (OPC) services, otherwise known as supervised drug consumption sites — the first in the nation. People can now inject heroin and other hard drugs under the care of medical professionals with clean needles provided free of charge. The centers located in Manhattan will be operated by a new nonprofit group called OnPoint NYC.
Boston
In Boston, there is potential legislation in the works that would create a 10-year pilot program to establish drug consumption sites supervised by trained staff. The site would also provide sterile injection supplies, free of charge.
Rhode Island
In July, Rhode Island Gov. Daniel McKee signed into law a bill authorizing the opening of these so-called “harm reduction centers” where people can take heroin and other hard drugs under the supervision of medical professionals. This makes Rhode Island the first in the nation to enact such a statewide measure.
Philadelphia
A group in Philadelphia known as, Safehouse, finds itself in legal battles in an attempt to open their very own supervised injection site.
San Francisco
San Francisco Mayor London Breed is pushing to open a supervised drug consumption site as early as Spring 2022. The move comes as she faces increased pressure to address the city’s overdose crisis, which has killed a record number of people since last year. There’s also the growing problem of discarded needles everywhere.
San Francisco hands out an estimated 400,000 free syringes each month to drug users through various social programs. Only roughly half of those are discarded through the city’s syringe access and disposal sites. The other half ends up on the streets, sidewalks, parks, etc.
Terry Morris, a former director of the Harm Reduction Center in San Fransisco describes the mentality behind offering free needles:
“If you don’t want people sharing equipment, you have to give people adequate supplies so that they never have to share. When people save their syringes for reuse, because of scarcity, they’re more likely to loan them to someone else. If they immediately throw used syringes into a sharps container for disposal, because they’re not worried about scarcity, they’re going to be safer.”
The city has no plans to stop giving away unlimited amounts of needles for free to whoever requests them. Again, when you subsidize something, you get more of it, as is obvious with the discarded needle crisis of San Fransisco.
In fact, a bleaker picture of the reality of this “harm reduction” experiment in San Fransisco has taken shape. Michael Shellenberger argues in his book, San Fransicko, that the underlying problem isn’t a lack of housing or money for social programs. The real problem is an ideology that goes beyond tolerating destructive behaviors to actually enabling them.
These “harm reduction” sites may technically save lives if you consider on-site overdose treatment. And certainly, clean needles will help prevent other diseases at that moment. This is what is “seen.” But, what is “unseen?” If that addicted person simply returns later in the day to start the process all over again, is that really a measure of success?
In reality, these supervised injection sites may make the problem of addiction only grow with a vengeance. On the surface, the streets may look a bit cleaner and overdose rates may in fact go down in the short term. Only time will tell. But what will happen to those that are addicted in the long run?
Perhaps an addict has to hit rock-bottom before they realize they need to change their ways. I’m not an addict, so I have no clue. But to encourage drug use is different than to simply decriminalize drug use. The two should not be conflated. Decriminalizing allows an addict to seek treatment without fear of incarceration. But free needles and overdose protection will likely only lead to an addict seeking out more free needles and overdose protection.