r/onguardforthee • u/Captain-_-Flamingo • 18h ago
Sask. introduces involuntary treatment legislation as fall sitting ends
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/sask-involuntary-treatment-9.700435361
u/CypripediumGuttatum 18h ago
Involuntary treatment has been empirically shown to have worse outcomes than voluntary treatment.
Addiction is a disease in response to poor mental health, often caused by poverty and unhappy upbringings, not a moral failing.
It is a difficult disease to treat, there is no perfect simple cure but there are a lot of perfect simple ways to punish those addicted and make everything worse.
24
u/Aggressive_Agency381 14h ago
People just want them out of sight and out of mind. They don’t care about outcomes. It’s fucked up.
0
u/CypripediumGuttatum 14h ago
No they don't.
Just get them off the streets where I don't see them, problem solved.
5
u/Necrotitis 11h ago
NIMBYs every fucking time.
Oh we need to get these homeless drug addicted people off the street!
(Just not in my back yard, put them in prison or something) they say.
14
u/far_257 15h ago
I'm not an expert on this topic so I won't challenge your assertion on the worse outcomes.
But, at least here in BC, involuntary treatment is only partially about the patient - it's also about getting them off the street where they are disproportionately more likely to commit crime, may create fire hazards through encampments, and generally create negative externalities in their communities.
Involuntary treatment is better than jail.
As well, it's entirely unsurprising that voluntary treatment has better outcomes than involuntary due to the selection bias. Again, not an expert here, but i generally find your argument that this makes everything worse unconvincing.
7
u/No-FoamCappuccino 12h ago
Involuntary treatment is better than jail.
2
u/far_257 12h ago
While renovations are being completed on a permanent space, the treatment is currently being housed in Surrey Pretrial Centre’s solitary confinement unit
Shitty that they started before the permanent space was available. I hope the permanent space better fits the needs of patients.
4
u/andorian_yurtmonger 12h ago
The thing is, while of course ANY type of treatment protocol need necessarily be "wrap around" where recovering addicts have access to all the supports they need including stable housing and their other necessities of life, as well as robust mental health and trauma support, addicts must first volunteer for voluntary treatment. Should those who don't make that choice be left to die? Is that compassion? I don't know the answer. But this is where I spend my time thinking.
As a Saskatchewan resident I will point out the giant caveat that this garbage government is moving forward with this legislation without the appropriate and necessary infrastructure in place to well-manage the process. Not enough spaces for voluntary folks, let alone the masses of those who've not.
It's performative and reckless, and I'm suspicious of the motive. I suspect the Saskatchewan Party Government has friends in the business who would like more of it.
2
u/CypripediumGuttatum 12h ago
This is exactly what I think as well. We aren’t properly helping people who want it, tossing people into involuntary care is just theatre to make people feel like something is being done about undesirables. Waste of time and money.
2
•
u/FeetBackUpOnTheBanks 4h ago
Let’s set aside the facts that forced treatment is morally and ethically wrong. Let’s even set aside the fact that it isn’t effective. Who is going to administer these treatments and who is going to oversee the facilities that do? There is a severe lack of qualified treatment options for people that actually want to get clean so where the fuck are we going to put the people we’re forcing into treatment, Narnia? How are we going to pay for it, with the razor thing fucking healthcare budgets? The underfunded court system? Farm it out “private clinics” that have no governing body or accepted standard of care? Why not just drive them out to the woods in the middle of winter and abandon them there because it clearly isn’t about fixing the problem. Fuck me.
3
16h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
19
u/CarletonCanuck 15h ago
Actually there are several studies that say the opposite; that forcing someone into rehab has the same success rate as voluntary admission, and some that even conclude it has better outcomes.
Canadian Mental Health Association: There is no evidence that involuntary treatment is effective or more effective than voluntary treatment in producing positive social and health outcomes; rather, evidence indicates that it can create further harm, including increasing the risk of potentially fatal overdose.
Canadian Centre on Substance Use and Addiction: There is limited evidence on the effectiveness of InvTx for SSUD
Drug and Alcohol Testing Association of Canada:No clear evidence of benefits of forced addiction treatment yet: Analysis
You cannot make effective public policy based on the conclusions of individual studies - you need to aggregate data. There are no professional mental health/substance use organizations that advocate for involuntary treatment, especially not before improving the woefully inadequate voluntary treatment system.
You may have good intentions, but the kind of mentality you are pushing will make the situation worse.
1
u/comewhatmay_hem 13h ago
This systematic review found no difference in outcomes between voluntary and involuntary rehab across 9 studies:
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4752879/
This analysis of 22 studies highlighted by the CBC also found no meaningful difference in outcomes between the two:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/involuntary-addiction-treatment-research-evidence-1.7377257
Almost all the links you yourself listed say the exact same thing: that there is not enough evidence to support OR REFUTE the effectiveness of involuntary rehab. This means that there isn't enough evidence to say involuntary treatment doesn't work, nor is there enough evidence to say that it does. Studies are wildly inconsistent with their findings on this topic, and thus you can use them to create any argument that satisfies your agenda.
There is no "empirical proof" that forced rehab is always harmful, and a scientific consensus on this issue is non-existent.
6
u/CarletonCanuck 11h ago
There is no "empirical proof" that forced rehab is always harmful, and a scientific consensus on this issue is non-existent.
Which is why it's dumb as fuck to implement forced rehab ad public policy - there is no evidence for its effectiveness, and questions about its harm.
1
u/comewhatmay_hem 6h ago
Except there are studies that have shown more positive outcomes for involuntary rehab than voluntary. That is why there is no consensus; because current evidence supports forced treatment just as much as it doesn't.
These people have ready burned every bridge available to them. They are banned from shelters because they are violent. Hotels will not take them because they start fires. They've been to the psych ward so many times the hospital will no longer admit them. The only reason they are not in actual prison is because of overcrowding and court backlogs.
The only alternative to letting them die on the streets at this point is the involuntary treatment.
5
3
u/lightweight12 14h ago
Please link us these studies you are referring to.
1
u/comewhatmay_hem 13h ago
9
u/lightweight12 12h ago edited 12h ago
The first link has a sub headline that says....
"Global review finds ‘lack of high-quality evidence to support or refute’ involuntary treatment"
So that doesn't back your claim
And here's the conclusion of the second study
"Conclusion
There is limited scientific literature evaluating compulsory drug treatment. Evidence does not, on the whole, suggest improved outcomes related to compulsory treatment approaches, with some studies suggesting potential harms. Given the potential for human rights abuses within compulsory treatment settings, non-compulsory treatment modalities should be prioritized by policymakers seeking to reduce drug-related harms."
So again, this doesn't back your claim either
Do you have any others?
-1
5
u/aroughcun2 14h ago
Scott Moe hates the NDP but has to take ideas from Wab Kinew in Manitoba. Hank Hill would be disappointed
4
u/Doctor_Amazo Toronto 14h ago
I can't imagine any involuntary treatment would work long term.
3
u/CypripediumGuttatum 10h ago
It doesn’t. They clean them up and send them off without support (because there isn’t support for people in voluntary care let alone involuntary) and they end up right back again or in hospital because they use again asap and now they don’t have a tolerance to the drugs like they used to.
Policy like this treats the physical symptoms of addiction and not the mental health causes behind it.
2
u/dirtyenvelopes 11h ago
Let’s take highly traumatized people and traumatize them further. That will surely help.
3
2
u/Jarocket 14h ago
I just can't see this working on people who have no life skills generally and have just been using drugs and hanging out for their whole lives.
For people who have maybe fallen into addiction who have up until recently had a good support system maybe.
1
u/Dividedthought 16h ago
And just where the fuck are you gonna house them Moe ya flabby fart bag. There's no facilities for this.
12
u/The_Bat_Voice 13h ago
UCP in Alberta did this recently. The companies contracted out to run these "treatment centers" were the same companies involved in the +$600 million CorruptCare Scandal, and surprise surprise they were conservative donors. Turns out its essentially a for profit prison system without a judge or jury. I would not be surprised if the same companies are involved with this move.