That's first offense though. Mandatory random drug testing afterwards and jail time for subsequent incidents are also on my idea list.

 

Jail hasn't worked which is why I prefer a more comprehensive form of rehabilitation. A lot of rehabilitation places say they can't make people stay. IMO they need to make people stay.

Jail hasn't worked which is why I prefer a more comprehensive form of rehabilitation. A lot of rehabilitation places say they can't make people stay. IMO they need to make people stay.

 

I agree with that.

Sure. Are they not being billed for the medical services?

 

It's my understanding that they leave the hospital without paying anything. I could be wrong on that though.

 

If you send them a bill, very high likelihood you never see a dime from them. They should make them pay before they leave.

 

Every day in NKY police and fire are dispatched for well being checks of people that OD, leave the hospital and don't even bother taking their IV out. Usually they are in search of more heroin.

 

I haven't seen the statistics but I would like to.

Agreed. As much money that has been put into the private prison industry it'd be nice to see that same amount of money put into some kind of comprehensive and competent rehabilitation services. A citation and a mandatory sentence to rehabilitation is something I would get behind. Seems like the known purchase of illegal drugs along with possession of illegal drugs could bring charges of something which would bring about a citation at the least.

 

This would be great. But a lot of money is made from keeping people incarcerated.

I've said it to members in private but the one thing about the current heroin epidemic are the demographics are changing. White kids in the suburbs are dying. If anything will cause us to change our course of action, it's that.

Are we saying that if a person is culpable in their health issue (ie heroin OD) that taxpayers should not be on the hook? Is that true for fat people who have heart attacks? Smokers who get cancer? Drunks who crash their cars?

 

And if they're at the hospital and can't pay (as someone suggested earlier as something to consider) what do we do? Put them in jail?

 

I realize we all are spread on on the religion spectrum but for those of you who claim to be Christians I'd ask you to think about the teachings of your bible and see if you're aligned properly.

 

Of course, I also think you don't punish the child of a welfare recipient but I know that's not a universal belief on BGP.

It just seems crazy to me that we wouldn't try to save someone we could. In my mind it's never to ok to hold someone "accountable" by letting them die, regardless of what got them to that point. And withholding care based on whether someone can pay or not is equally disgusting.

Who knew wanting junkies to actually pay for the life-saving treatment and care they receive would be such a controversial opinion....:idunno:

I still find it obscene that Narcan (I've actually been trained to administer it) has been made readilly available but Epipens cost a fortune.

 

This is what I was going to bring up but I wasn't sure on the facts of it. I've read a lot lately that Epinephrine costs are through the roof. I'm all for keeping people alive, but its a little crazy to me the cost difference.

I'm just confused how those that OD are not punished the majority of the time. Did they not commit a crime? Is it because they are not currently in possession of the drug? It confuses me.

 

If I get pulled over and have heroin on me, I probably go to jail. If you revive me after I OD'd and there is a needle on the floor, I don't?

Who knew wanting junkies to actually pay for the life-saving treatment and care they receive would be such a controversial opinion....:idunno:

 

Making them pay for it and letting them die are two different issues.

I'm just confused how those that OD are not punished the majority of the time. Did they not commit a crime? Is it because they are not currently in possession of the drug? It confuses me.

 

If I get pulled over and have heroin on me, I probably go to jail. If you revive me after I OD'd and there is a needle on the floor, I don't?

 

I've always wondered the same thing.

Making them pay for it and letting them die are two different issues.

 

As I said in post 56...."It's not the reviving the people that I have an issue with. It's that taxpayers are made to foot the bill. That shouldn't be the case. "

As I said in post 56...."It's not the reviving the people that I have an issue with. It's that taxpayers are made to foot the bill. That shouldn't be the case. "

 

I feel you. Just pointing out how post 54 is still going to stir up emotions.

Who knew wanting junkies to actually pay for the life-saving treatment and care they receive would be such a controversial opinion....:idunno:

 

It's not just junkies that walk out without paying because they can't afford it. It would be great if everyone could either afford it or had insurance that covered it, but that's a different topic. I'm ok with billing them, and collections processes or other alternative methods. I'm not ok with letting them die based on financial situation. I pray I don't need a million dollars of medical care one day....because I know I can't afford that. And if the rule was I had to pay for it or not get it, that would suck.