Pubdate: Thu, 02 Jun 2011 Source: Victoria Times-Colonist (CN BC) Copyright: 2011 Times Colonist Contact: http://www2.canada.com/victoriatimescolonist/letters.html Website: http://www.timescolonist.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/481 Author: J. Peter Stein, Times Colonist HARM-REDUCTION MODEL BEST FOR COMMUNITIES As a former member of the LeDain Royal Commission Of Inquiry Into The NonMedical Use of Drugs in the 1960s, I am writing to weigh in on the harm-reduction debate. I favour these supervised sites because they have the potential to reduce harm to the community, not because they reduce harm to the users. Taxpayers are being badly served by the exclusiveness of the abstinence model. I understand that many, if not most of the people using these sites may not seek to stop their drug use. What the chemically dependent person does or doesn't do in regard to his or her addiction will in part turn on the help that is available in the sites, but, in the end, their self-centered lives are secondary to the protection of the community. Reducing court and policing costs, along with health costs, which is at least possible in a controlled setting, trumps the probability that these folks will remain socially unproductive for most of their lives. J. Peter Stein Victoria - --- MAP posted-by: Richard R Smith Jr.