A recent probe into the 2007 death of a boy in a privately run drug treatment facility has caused many Canadians to become uncomfortably aware that there are no regulations (outside Quebec) restricting the accreditation of private drug facilities.
With drug treatment being such a volatile circumstance and so many factors, dangers, and various pitfalls included in the process of weaning someone off drugs, there really should be some sort of limit on the quality of the center. At first, I must admit I thought, "why couldn't the parents/guardians/individual check out the fitness of the center on their own?" but then I realized, I don't check out the kitchen of every restaurant I eat at, even though the consequences could be quite severe; I rely on the government for that, because they're bigger, meaner, and have access to smart people with lab coats and stuff.
What I disagree with is the instigating factor in this situation. The victim was left alone on his bedroom floor because he was staggering around and peeing on himself, the result of drinking anti-freeze found in "an unlocked garage" (where the garage was located is not specified). The federal government has decided the institution was at fault for the incident, citing that the man supervising the patient was "woefully unprepared to deal with anything out of the ordinary". Pardon me, but how the hell is staggering around, peeing on yourself "out of the ordinary" for a drug-treatment center? The parents were upset that the boy's life "meant so little to everybody" but there is no sign that the center acted callously or indeed any different than they would have treated any patient who entered the facility appearing to be drunk.
I agree that the center should be regulated, this is far too important of a process to be left to chance, but regulation is unlikely to ensure this incident does not repeat itself, and we need to guard against becoming so narrow sighted, trying to prevent this occurrence, that we miss out on other aspect that are critical. It is just the nature of the beast.
With drug treatment being such a volatile circumstance and so many factors, dangers, and various pitfalls included in the process of weaning someone off drugs, there really should be some sort of limit on the quality of the center. At first, I must admit I thought, "why couldn't the parents/guardians/individual check out the fitness of the center on their own?" but then I realized, I don't check out the kitchen of every restaurant I eat at, even though the consequences could be quite severe; I rely on the government for that, because they're bigger, meaner, and have access to smart people with lab coats and stuff.
What I disagree with is the instigating factor in this situation. The victim was left alone on his bedroom floor because he was staggering around and peeing on himself, the result of drinking anti-freeze found in "an unlocked garage" (where the garage was located is not specified). The federal government has decided the institution was at fault for the incident, citing that the man supervising the patient was "woefully unprepared to deal with anything out of the ordinary". Pardon me, but how the hell is staggering around, peeing on yourself "out of the ordinary" for a drug-treatment center? The parents were upset that the boy's life "meant so little to everybody" but there is no sign that the center acted callously or indeed any different than they would have treated any patient who entered the facility appearing to be drunk.
I agree that the center should be regulated, this is far too important of a process to be left to chance, but regulation is unlikely to ensure this incident does not repeat itself, and we need to guard against becoming so narrow sighted, trying to prevent this occurrence, that we miss out on other aspect that are critical. It is just the nature of the beast.
No comments:
Post a Comment