(11-15-2020, 01:23 AM)unity100 Wrote: I think i was misunderstood.
I said that if the person is going to die from lack of the drug, or overdose of the drug if s/he was not given a drug, i meant that the drug should be given.
Temporary relief, addressing the immediate situation, then addressing the actual, underlying problem behind the need for drug usage -> thats the route. The 'Portugal method', if you will.
Not at all leaving people be to 'avoid enabling addiction'. The addiction rarely exists for addiction's sake - in majority of cases, it is an escape from something intolerable and unbearable.
No, I understood you
and I am aware that other nations (outside of NA and US) has facilities that helps addicts by "controlled" dosage and slowly get them off of their vices. Therefore giving them a "temporary relief" may help them, because quitting cold turkey or not having the drug all of a sudden can also cause death by sudden withdrawal.
What I meant in my response to you was that, this is something that professionals should handle, giving a junkie cash to get his/her next hit is usually fatal in some cases. That part of my response wasn't directed at your statement. I should have separated my response to you and the general. My apology.
Also, of course, under every pain, addiction, and suffering, there is a "cause" or "trauma"