HLAD 3099 SESC Safe Injections Medication at Home Discussion

Directions:  In this assignment, you will respond to three posts. Each response has to be at least 100 words or more. Proper grammar and spelling. Deviations from this will hurt your grade. I also expect courtesy in discussion. Scholars disagree with each other all the time, and do it politely and with respect. It is better to lean excessively in the direction of courtesy than to have any chance at crossing the line of acceptable discourse. Be sure to use APA format where needed (ex; references).

1. Safe injection sites were created in response to the rising death rates amongst drug addicts. This is considered to be a big problem that affects everyone in the community. Taking drug addicts into consideration could be treated and, therefore, the life could be saved if they got an opportunity to obtain safe injections or professional supervision, which could prevent them from overdosing and other problems related to the process of taking drugs. In contrast, the making of safe injection sites was a real challenge to the public morale, and the places evoke a strong opposition from the conservative part of the public because many people considered safety injection sites unsafe for the people and, what is more, they viewed these sites as a threat to the local communities.  Some of the advantages of having this site safe injection sites in your neighborhood are preventing drug addicts to overdose. Prevention of diseases will overall affect your community and the possibility of assistance to addicts and their recovery. There are always two sides to a story, and that means there are cons against having injection sites. The few significant drawbacks of safe injection sites are the risk of increasing crime rates, and that safe injection sites encourage people to start taking drugs because it is in a controlled environment. I would consider this situation to be correlated with the Principle of Double Effect. This ethical principle is a rule of conduct frequently used in moral theology to determine when a person may lawfully perform an action from which two effects will follow, one bad and the other good. In this situation, doing drugs and enabling them to do it safely is terrible, but the ability to do the drugs in a safe environment is a good thing. Overall, I would not be part of this system, and I am ethically against it. The overall bad is greater than the greater good.

Response:

2. When thinking about the safe injection sites I couldn’t help but think about it in terms of being a parent. Many parents advocate allowing their kids to drink, or smoke weed if it is in their home. Their rationale is that they are doing it in a safe place.  I have thought about this a lot as a parent as my kids have discussed other parents that they know who allow their kids to do it. I have had to question my own ethics because as a parent I do not want to condone any behavior that I view as being harmful but at the same time I want my kid to be safe. Personally, and ethically, it is my obligation to prevent harmful behavior and not encourage it. I am honestly ethically torn about these sites and wonder how much good they are really doing.

Response:

3.  Safe Injection sites have grown in Europe and Canada to provide a safe place for drug addicts to inject illegal substances.  These sites have provided a clean, safe place to inject with clean supplies, caring and compassionate staff who are trained to provide Naloxone, an overdose antidote, and advice and information regarding drug treatment options.  The city of Vancouver’s website even lists the benefits they have found, such as reducing the number of overdose deaths, reducing HIV and hepatitis C transmission and reduced risk to the community from improperly disposed of syringes.  Overall, the majority of information suggests that the benefit of reduction in deaths is there, but the attempt to get people off drugs is not as noticeable.

I feel the ethical principle most affecting this situation is the principle of justice.  “We Americans are convinced that it is unjust to treat one person better or worse than another similar person in similar circumstances unless there is a good reason for the differential in treatment.” (Tong, 2009) You ask who is not being treated fairly?  How many diabetics or asthmatics go without their medication because they can’t afford it?  How many elderly go without their medications?  We are providing a safe environment for people to inject illegal substances. Illegal!  A safe injection site in Toronto, Canada cost $4.1 million to operate.  There are already scarce medical resources, but we look to provide what is left for illegal injections.  What I have also found is that many of the articles I looked through, and there were a lot, only the one I found about Toronto even states how much a facility cost to run.  In 2017, at least three people died from rationing of their diabetic insulin and at least another 3 in 2018.  Many others succumb to other health issues caused by poorly treated diabetes.  I’m not saying that we don’t need to assist these drug addicts, but others should not suffer because of it.

Response: HLAD 3099 SESC Safe Injections Medication at Home Discussion