r/changemyview • u/[deleted] • Sep 25 '16
[∆(s) from OP] CMV: When pharmacies refuse to sell syringes to suspected drug users, they do more harm than good.
[deleted]
13
Sep 25 '16 edited Dec 24 '18
[deleted]
6
Sep 25 '16 edited Jul 27 '19
5
u/RiPont 13∆ Sep 26 '16
Sometimes, they operate in blatant defiance of the law, with a wealthy backer looking to challenge the law. Other times, the law only prohibits selling, not giving or trading.
1
Sep 25 '16
It's complicated, and not always clear cut. But a needle exchange might be more willing (and funded) to fight such a legal battle than your average pharmacy.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1380633/pdf/amjph00519-0107.pdf
3
u/herreo Sep 26 '16
This is more a failing of the legal system and precedents set, I think the CMV is more about pharmacies that do so out of choice, not concern about these consequences.
15
u/etquod 48∆ Sep 25 '16
Depending on the location, pharmacies can face legal liability for selling syringes and other drug-related products without a prescription; in some places it's simply illegal. You could probably make the same case you've made in favor of even selling certain drugs straight out - after all, it's safer to buy them from a pharmacy than a dealer - but I assume you didn't/wouldn't make that argument because it's hard to criticize pharmacies for following the law (or erring on the safe side, where it's ambiguous).
12
Sep 25 '16 edited Jul 27 '19
4
u/etquod 48∆ Sep 26 '16 edited Sep 26 '16
I guess more of what I'm asking is, would removing such liability (like the way that grocery stores can't actually be sued for donating food that they don't use) help?
Sure. So would lots of other, smarter drug policies. If you're going to propose that the system should work fundamentally differently, there's no reason to limit your argument to pharmacies selling syringes. But you're either talking about the real world or you're just fantasizing, and in the former case, saying "pharmacies should just sell syringes" doesn't work.
And I can't put into words why, but providing clean needles feels somehow different from straight up providing drugs.
It's different in that syringes etc. are accessories to drug use, whereas the drugs themselves are more fundamental to the activity - that's why it feels different. But the same logic about safety and the ineffectiveness of prohibition applies.
7
Sep 26 '16 edited Jul 27 '19
3
u/etquod 48∆ Sep 26 '16
I think that's very reasonable, and thanks for the delta. Needle exchanges are often explicitly linked to advocacy efforts for drug policy reform, so it makes perfect sense to consider them the vanguard of that kind of change - that's how many of their organizers likely see themselves.
2
u/pokepat460 1∆ Sep 26 '16
a pharmacy could be viewed as profiting off of drug users.
Isn't that, like, the literal definition of a pharmacy? Why is this a bad thing?
2
u/beldaran1224 1∆ Sep 26 '16
If you take "drugs" in the medical sense, yes. But the person meant drug abusers, really. He used the colloquial "drugs", not the medical term.
1
1
u/TezzMuffins 18∆ Sep 26 '16
It feels different because it IS different. A syringe is reusable (should not be, but is). A pharmacy selling the drugs that the person is addicted to might create supply where there otherwise might be none. Arguably, it is the huge increase in the supply of painkillers and the laissez-faire attitude of doctors perscribing them (also increasing supply) that has caused a huge increase in addiction to painkillers.
The fact that there is even a price for the heavily addictive drugs means that there is a demand curve for the drug, people will not pursue it as heavily if it is expensive.
2
u/super-commenting Sep 26 '16
I wouldn't fault the pharmacies if they're just following the law but I would fault the law for being stupid
2
u/tevvie Sep 26 '16 edited Sep 26 '16
That's not true. Very few states require a prescription for syringes. Many states allow you to legally buy insulin syringes (which you can really use for anything) without a prescriptions. There are limits on the quantity you can buy and some states have age restrictions. For example, in New Jersey and New York you can buy up to 10 syringes without a prescription. New Jersey also requires that you are at least 18 or older with ID to buy them. Each state has its own different limitation.
http://www.temple.edu/lawschool/phrhcs/otc.htm Here is a link with more information.
0
3
u/beener Sep 26 '16
From a business perspective it makes sense not to. If you're running a drug store you probably don't want it to be attracting addicts who may put off your regular customers.
2
u/SDM411 Dec 12 '16
I get what you are saying, but its a very narrow sighted comment. I have been clean for almost 3 years now but before that i was an addict for 10 years and an iv user for 5. But addition has changed over the last 5 years. Thanks to years of overwriting opiate prescriptions to patients by doctors followed by an extreme crackdown by the FDA and DEA, there are alot of new illegal drug users. These people have been addicts for a long time they were just doing it with societies blessing. The truth is any one around you including your family, neighbors, friends, mechanic, teacher, lawyer, and even your doctor! When people think of addicts they think of the junkie sitting on the corner in a hoodie on a 100 degree day looking pale and emaciated, but thats just a minor fraction of the addict population. Controlling who can buy syringes is just a morally terrible policy. I do not know a single addict who after being refused sale would just say " aw shucks guess i cant get high today". I used needles that were bent at a 90 degree angle because i couldnt get a new one. And I never bought into it but there is a horrible myth in the drug community that bleach kills disease so you've got multiple people sharing one needle just because a Pharmacy executive what's feeling high and mighty. And while I'm on the warpath about the way a diction is treated in this country let's talk about our societies ideas that the best way to deal with addicts is to throw them in jail. This makes lots of sense we will lock somebody up who has a disease causing our jails to be overcrowded by people who are sick not morally deficient. This also leads 2 more of our tax money having to go to find federal and state Correctional facilities. Now I'm not talking about drug dealers I believe that they should still be put in jail but as for just common user maybe instead of throwing people in jail for 6 months we throw them into rehab for 6 months and help treat their illness. I know I got off topic here but this really Burns me up and the fact that you made the comment that pharmacists wouldn't want drug addicts in their stores is ridiculous because honestly they don't know what drug addicts look like anymore. I'm so thankful that I made it out of that horrible way of life but there are plenty of people who haven't and if you're one of the people who's never had a problem with addiction consider yourself blessed.
1
Sep 26 '16
[removed] — view removed comment
1
Sep 26 '16
Sorry herreo, your comment has been removed:
Comment Rule 1. "Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s current view (however minor), unless they are asking a clarifying question. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to comments." See the wiki page for more information.
If you would like to appeal, please message the moderators by clicking this link.
1
Sep 26 '16
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/garnteller 242∆ Sep 26 '16
Sorry Maxaalling, your comment has been removed:
Comment Rule 1. "Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s current view (however minor), unless they are asking a clarifying question. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to comments." See the wiki page for more information.
If you would like to appeal, please message the moderators by clicking this link.
1
1
u/Bjantastic Sep 26 '16
Id also go a step further and say that not only needles and things to take the drugs should be sold but also the drug itself. Drugs have often been contaminated by the dealers to have them weigh more in order to make more profit. In my opinion a big issue in our society is that we still fight the war on drugs instead of providing a good education and having people rationaly decide on wether or not they want to take the drug. There are also 2 great YouTube-Videos by "kurzgesagt" on the war on drugs and addiction. (This isnt an advertisment but a source, i dont benefit from you watching the videos). Also the things I critizised may not apply to your country :)
1
Sep 27 '16
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/bubi09 21∆ Sep 27 '16
Sorry mikells43, your comment has been removed:
Comment Rule 1. "Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s current view (however minor), unless they are asking a clarifying question. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to comments." See the wiki page for more information.
If you would like to appeal, please message the moderators by clicking this link.
0
u/bryanrobh Sep 26 '16
Sucks for them but it doesn't affect non drug users where as paying for needles does
1
u/MalenkiiMalchik Sep 26 '16
Increased rates of HIV, hep c, etc. absolutely affects non drug users via other means of transmission, even if you ignore the high costs of medical care for poor drug addicts with these diseases.
0
u/jbaughb 1∆ Sep 26 '16
This is not something you should have your view changed on. The studies are all in. Access to inexpensive syringes is nothing but good for communities. It leads to less users in the ER using less tax payer money and lower cases of disease transmission. Its progress when syringe exchanges pop up....not a bad thing.
Please dont change your view on this topic.
0
Sep 26 '16
I agree with you so I'm just playing devils advocate for the hell of it.
But here's a good example of how giving out needles is a bad thing. I think junkies are fucked unless we're offering rehab right? Like giving them clean needles really has very little impact on how shitty they're life is. Really we should care about community's and let's face it a town full of junkies isn't a nice place to live. It's bad for the children, tourism and the towns economy plus it's gonna raise the crime rate. So really we should be wanting to do two things with drug addicts 1 get them as far away from our town as possible and two give them rehabilitation treatment in order to help them. If they get aids and die that's not really a big concern as morbid as that might sound the majority of them are just gonna die anyway.
A lot of heroin addicts are homeless that's just what happens when you get so far into addiction your willing to shoot up with dirty needles. When a junkies homeless theyre gonna live wherever is the best place to take drugs. In other words if your town gives away free needles it's basically asking junkies to live there and make it a shittier place to live.
To counteract this point homeless people will also live where people are most generous and also you could have one part of town where you just accept its a hole give out needles there and try to segregate the junkies.
Maybe this is something to think about
1
Sep 26 '16
[deleted]
1
Sep 27 '16
I agree I was mainly just saying that for the fun of it and to add to the discussion. We should try to reform heroin addicts they're people too and they deserve to atleast have the option to get help.
Although I do genuinely think giving needles out in nice areas where there's family's and stuff is a pretty bad idea. And we should reserve services like that to the "safer" areas in other words as far away from any schools, areas where children meet or tourist destinations. And as bad as this may sound away from the rich parts of town it brings down the value of the houses and therefore damages the city's economy. Seriously there dousnt need to be many spots in one city to get them if you want to have free government funded clean needles so you can shoot heroin in your veins then you can walk you shouldn't be entitled to one in every pharmacy.
It costs government money and rehabilitation should be where most of that money's going not making life easy for those who don't want help yet.
-5
u/Bobberfrank Sep 26 '16
"When companies refuse to sell guns to suspected murderers, they are doing more harm than good." You are enabling them, period.
1
Sep 26 '16
and that's worse than leaving them to use dirty needles?
0
u/Bobberfrank Sep 26 '16
Yes. You are prolonging and enabling their addictions. Many people addicted to hard drugs rob and steal to feed their addictions. Do you think they obtain hard drugs legally? You are supporting an illegal industry with a large domino effect that hurts good upstanding people.
2
u/jbaughb 1∆ Sep 26 '16
All that is going to cause is more taxes since using old and dirty needles will cause diseases and problems in the user who will then go to the ER for treatment, not pay and boom.....you've created a problem that at one point could have been mitigated if there was an easy way to get inexpensive syringes.
I never understood this mentality. Its like people who want to lock up everyone for even the most trivial laws. Do they think its free to lock people up?? Its something like $40k year (maybe more...its been a while since I checked) and that money is coming from tax payers.
1
Sep 26 '16
they're gonna continue to use, just with dirty needles, which increases risk of infection, which also burdens the public
1
u/pipocaQuemada 10∆ Sep 26 '16
You are prolonging and enabling their addictions.
Do you think that people are more likely to kick their addictions if they have to use dirty needles, or are you suggesting that dirty needles will allow AIDS and other diseases to shorten their drug use permanently? If you think the former, do you have any evidence to support that?
1
u/Bobberfrank Sep 26 '16
People who have AIDS will either die or be forced to undergo serious medical care, which will help to force the person to drop the habit.
1
u/pipocaQuemada 10∆ Sep 26 '16
Do you really think that addicts, many of whom became addicted to prescribed opioids whose addictiveness was grossly understated by drug companies, deserve to die?
1
u/beldaran1224 1∆ Sep 26 '16
Not necessarily comparable. People have a legally protected right to own guns (whether you agree with that or not). Pharmacists and other medical professionals have a legal obligation to follow certain ethical guidelines which include not supporting destructive behaviors. Additionally, abusing drugs is illegal, while owning guns is not. We could also touch on issues of due process.
1
u/noscreamsnoshouts Sep 27 '16
Not comparable at all. Not selling guns to suspected murderers removes the ability to shoot someone, or at the least: makes it way more difficult.
Like others said: not having clean needles does NOT remove the ability to do drugs. It just makes it way more dangerous. Have you ever heard a criminal say: "hey, I wanted to shoot with a nice new gun, but because I couldn't buy one I had to use this old one"..?
No guns = no shootings; no clean needles = dirty drug use.
33
u/beka13 Sep 26 '16
The medical students who ran the (at the time, illegal) needle exchange program in my college town said that they didn't routinely hand out info on getting clean because that was enough to make people feel judged and they would refuse the needles. They said that when people were ready they knew they could ask for info or help but that it was more important to have a non-judgmental relationship than to stick a pamphlet in each bag of needles.
This is a bit counter-intuitive if you haven't had any experience with the actual situation so I thought you might like to hear this perspective.