From: dave@bradley.bradley.edu (David Vessell)
Subject: Re: Partial Legalization
Organization: Bradley University
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 92 18:24:38 GMT

rcain@netcom.com (Robert Cain) writes:

>dave@bradley.bradley.edu (David Vessell) writes:
>: 
>: It's the same with drug addiction.  Suppose the folks in Canada are
>: successful in developing a drug that suppresses the compulsion to use that
>: plagues smokers, alcoholics, cokeheads, etc.  This drug could give them the
>: break they need to get out of the vicious circle, but unless they confront
>: why they abuse drugs in the first place, they'll never make any progress.
>: They'll relapse the minute they stop drug treatment, and that will
>: reinforce their feelings of helplessness because they'll basically be
>: choosing between two drugs which they'll be addicted to.  Since one give
>: them a buzz and the other doesn't, it's not hard to see what they will
>: choose.
>
>"Confront why they abuse drugs."  I maintain that for some people and some
>drugs the why *is* the drug.  Simple as that. For those people the best
>confrontation is just that, confronting the drug and the drug alone, not
>any deep seated problems or joining will power gyms.  Someone said that
>these people were pre-addicted and I believe in that phenomenon.

If a person uses a drug out of compulsion, then the person should accept
that as the reason and seek help if necessary to terminate or curb the
compulsive behaviour.  As an ex-smoker, I know what that compulsion feels
like.  But the only way to handle that situation is to CHANGE THE
BEHAVIOUR.  I'm no irone-willed monolith.  If I were I would have quit
smoking on the first try and I would not have needed professional treatment
for depression.  But asking for help does not suggest some congenital
physiological reason for a person's behaviour.


>My original point is that there are some alterants which are predisposed
>to this as well as there are people predisposed and that we must recognize
>that and urge special caution with these alterants.

>Yeah, cocaine may be great and harmless for many people.  But for many
>people it is an accident waiting to happen.  I think we should care about
>those people and not have this psychological Darwinist attitude about the
>losers in the little game of Russian Roulette that is alterant experimentation.

Yes, put that responsibility on the people.  Warn them that *they* may have
these reactions to the drugs.  Stress the individuality of the interaction.
Do not blame the drug.  Blaming the drug suggests that everyone will react
to the drug in the same way all the time, which simply isn't true, and it's
just plain factually wrong to say that it is.

I've never said I didn't care about those people who react adversely to
drug use.  I do care.  If they want help, I want them to get help.  But
that doesn't mean I am willing to absolve them of all responsibility.
They chose to take the drug originally.  And no matter how erratic their
judgement was after that point, every time they used the drug they chose to
do so.  If they had not taken the drug again, they probably would have felt
some discomfort, but it would not have killed them.  Eventually they would
have reverted to how they were before they used it the first time.

-- 
=========*davE*.....making the world safe for intelligent dance music.=========
               Andre Marrou -- Libertarian for President 1992
--(David Vessell)--(Bradley University Computing Services)-(dave@bradley.edu)--
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs,alt.drugs