Heartland

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6142416.stm

Any thoughts?

Had they been on Heroin itself on entry to prison and then sued, then it would have been a bit silly, provided that no treatment had been offered. However, since they were on heroin substitutes at the time, I'd consider this as valid a complaint as if they'd swapped any other kind of medication.

No. And i find it extremely depressing that someone would think so.

Just shows that people have absolutely no respect for fellow creatures.

Just like i find it extremely depressing that some people just can't get it through to their heads why prisons are ideally correctional facilities, and not institutes for punishment.

The society is f**ked up and everyone knows it. So people who don't condone to the rules of the f**ked up society, or behave in a manner someone f**ked up might find offensive, or worst of all, cause some expenses to the society that is supposed to be for the people to begin with!, shouldn't be put through more unnecessary torment than the f**ked up society already does.

Never mind (a fragment).

Phuq'em. They take heroin, they commit crime to fund the habit or under the influence, and they're whining that the detox programme in prison is shorter than the one outside? Cry me a river. If they liked the programme they were on before they were banged up, then they should have made more of an effort to stay on the outside.

EDIT
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6143810.stm
This ex-skell says it all: "I effectively went cold turkey in Pentonville Prison because it took the drugs detox team 12 days to come and see me when I was last in. By the time the detox team did see me and my cellmate, who was in the same position, we didn't want any drugs because we were over the worst of it [withdrawal]. It has helped me give up. I don't want to go back on drugs because I don't want to go through that again."

An Absolute Disgrace

What's next, free porn for child molesters?

Makes me sick, still nice to see itnAklipse talking out his arse as usual...

No, counseling for child molesters.

Please compare apples with apples.

Motz wrote:No, counseling for child molesters.

Please compare apples with apples.

I suppose they were in jail because there was a mix up at court?
No, they broke the law f**k 'Em

Bleed for me:

• 25 years of full employment
  paid into pension fund all those years
  Government moves goalposts - now I have to work an extra 5 years
  Employer runs Job Evaluation - my wages are frozen for 3 years - this affects my pension contributions
  I then get what amounts to a £6,000 cut in salary after those 3 years - this also affects my pension contributions

pass the heroin dear...

weebleswobble wrote:

Motz wrote:No, counseling for child molesters.

Please compare apples with apples.

I suppose they were in jail because there was a mix up at court?
No, they broke the law f**k 'Em

None of which equates medical treatment with pornography.

Appeal to emotion doesn't validate argumentum ad tangent

itnAklipse wrote:
Just like i find it extremely depressing that some people just can't get it through to their heads why prisons are ideally correctional facilities, and not institutes for punishment.

.

Correctional facilities...?? IMO prisons are there for three reasons: to punish offenders, protect society and if possible rehabilitate.

If someone wants to get off heroin, then they should be supported. If they are weaned onto a weaker drug, then given the opportunity to go cold turkey so the effects aren't as harsh as with heroin, then so be it.
If they're forced off it, though it may work, it's still not always the best thing at the time. Once a user is in the right environment to just drop the drug, only then is it really right to take away the drug.

An environment where one can try and make oneself as comfortable as possible whilst coming off a drug using the cold turkey method is infinitely more useful than an environment where the user will have no comfort.

Could someone more familiar with the state of the prison system enlighten us as to how freely heroin is available? I'd suspect that anyone forced to go cold turkey in an environment where it was widely distributed would give up far quicker than someone on a substitute in the same environment.

Motz wrote:

weebleswobble wrote:

Motz wrote:No, counseling for child molesters.

Please compare apples with apples.

I suppose they were in jail because there was a mix up at court?
No, they broke the law f**k 'Em

None of which equates medical treatment with pornography.

Appeal to emotion doesn't validate argumentum ad tangent

Sorry wee man but you are talking Pure Pish...NEXT!

I deal with "drug addicts" every day regarding methadone, heroin etc.... I think the way this has been reported is rather misleading. I saw the report on the BBC news this morning and thought "oh well of course they shouldn't!" but then when I acutally listened to the report I thought differently.

Drug addiction is an illness and I know there is such a thing as junkie scum and people who will play the system but you will get this wherever you go. There are decent people that get addicted. I used to go out with an ex-addict and I still live with him even now and he is one of the sweetest people I know and I trust him whole-heartedly.

If these people are going to get off heroin and the like for good then they need their treatment to be continued, and not left to go cold turkey.

weebleswobble wrote:...NEXT!

Not until you give me something at least resembling a reason why someone being denied a basic right like medical treatment is justified in the same way as denying them a luxury item such as pornography. In a country where the death penalty is outlawed, there can be no moral justification for withholding necessary medication and incarcerated patients really shouldn't have their treatment changed without an impartial second opinion from outside of the prison service.

Motz wrote:

weebleswobble wrote:...NEXT!

Not until you give me something at least resembling a reason why someone being denied a basic right like medical treatment is justified in the same way as denying them a luxury item such as pornography. In a country where the death penalty is outlawed, there can be no moral justification for withholding necessary medication and incarcerated patients really shouldn't have their treatment changed without an impartial second opinion from outside of the prison service.

Heroin is hardly "medical treatment", that would surely be insulin or drugs to control epilepsy etc, but not Heroin, they do not need Heroin, they choose to take it, they're unlikley to die going through Cold Turkey, unlike a Diabetic being denied their drugs.

scotty wrote:they're unlikley to die going through Cold Turkey.

Not true

Heroin withdrawal is a nasty experience

Wikipedia wrote:Sudden withdrawal from drugs such as benzodiazepines and barbiturates can be extremely dangerous, leading to potentially fatal seizures

Heroin withdrawal can also lead to seizures

scotty wrote:Heroin is hardly "medical treatment", that would surely be insulin or drugs to control epilepsy etc, but not Heroin, they do not need Heroin

BBC wrote:The claimants had been using heroin and other opiates and were understood to been receiving alternative treatment before going to prison.

Methadone is a medical treatment.

However, should they take the medical argument out of the equation, then Cold Turkey purely and simply becomes a Cruel and Unusual Punishment and is outright illegal.

Brideoffrankenstein wrote: Drug addiction is an illness

Drug addiction is not an illness, it's self inflicted destruction ( or as the name says an addiction).

I'm not saying however that drug addicts should nt have proper treatment, they should, even in jail. If they were denied that treatment in jail they should be given an apology and another chance at rehabilitating if they need it, this time using proper procedure/medication etc

A money payment in my opinion does go to far.

... so no one bled for me, I expected as much...

This country has finally gone Fuckin' Mad Mental Tea-Tray Bovril Cuntbubble MacScoosh aff its Rocker, Daft!

IMO

Motz wrote:

weebleswobble wrote:...NEXT!

Not until you give me something at least resembling a reason why someone being denied a basic right like medical treatment is justified in the same way as denying them a luxury item such as pornography.

I don't give a flying toss about the pron, christ use an analogy and the world goes to pot
However giving these people money is just plain f**king wrong

Undoubtedly. However, withdrawing their medical treatment is also wrong and the way that our society is heading is that two wrongs plus lots of money make a right. I don't agree with cash handouts for anything other than covering damage, but if this is the only legal recourse they have, then so be it.

Life! is the name of the game
And I wanna
Play the game
With you

Next!

I'm being made to say that far too often

The whole thing is disgusting. Alcoholics aren’t thrown in jail, they’re given treatment. It should be the same for all addicts. Sure, throw them in jail if they’re stealing to feed their habit just like you would any thief, but don’t shove them in there simply for being addicts.

A paedophile junkie awarded £3,800 for going 'cold turkey' in jail last night dismissed the sum as "insulting". Ian Crellin 43, has more than 130 convictions for theft, burglary-and having sex with a 15 year old girl.

"six or eight grand would have sufficed for what I went through"

He breached an ASBO going shoplifting and tested positive for drugs despite a rehab order

I can feel the steam coming out my ears, defend if you wish, I'm a Grumpy Old Man and I eat Bleeding Hearts for breakfast!