Drug use in public: What about the children?
BC Premier "will do something" about drug use in shared outdoor spaces
When asked what he plans to do about the problem of people using drugs in public/outdoor spaces frequented by children, BC (NDP) Premier David Eby replied, “Nobody wants this activity [drug use] affecting our kids.”
Then, according to opinionated Vancouver Sun columnist Vaughn Palmer, Eby was rather vague about his plan to protect BC kids from the harms caused by sharing parks and other spaces with people using drugs. “We will do something,” he said.
Opposition members are not satisfied. They want to ban drug use in public places, like parks and “children’s playgrounds.” In fact, “thirty members of the Lower Mainland Local Government Association passed a resolution last week asking for drug use in public spaces, including parks and libraries, be banned.”
Why?
Wellllll. Palmer doesn’t really explain why this ban is so urgent. He calls it “incredible” that it took Eby so long to address the issue. He quotes MLA Opposition member Shirley Bond, who claims that BC families are “shocked by the premier’s stubborn refusal to do something.”
But why? Because people are using drugs in places also frequented by parents and their kids? Right. And what, do they suppose, will happen to these kids if a ban on public drug use is not implemented?
Maybe it goes without saying. But I need to know more.
For example: How many children have been been harmed by sharing park space with people who use drugs (PWUD)? And what are the current risk projections?
If open air drug use is indeed one of the “unintended consequence” of BC’s decrim pilot program, where is the supporting data? I don’t claim to know that it doesn’t exist (and I will surely look around for it), but I want Palmer, and his parents/politicians, to at least back up their concerns — with evidence.
For now, I will not assume to know their specific concerns, because banning public drug use is not my issue.
But here’s what I will say:
Many folks use drugs outside because they are not fortunate enough to own or rent private/indoor spaces.
Safe consumption sites are not easily accessible for many in Vancouver/Lower mainland. Most sites are concentrated in the Downtown Eastside and downtown core (e.g. St. Paul’s Hospital). When folks can’t access these sites without trains, buses and automobiles, they are unlikely to show up. Residential areas are still painfully under-served (or unserved). It is unreasonable to expect a dopesick person (for example) to make the trip (provided they have the means, of course).
Recent removal of citizen-owned tents lining East Hastings St. sidewalks — stretching approx from Jackson St. to Carroll St. has made public drug consumption even more visible.
The BC Coroner’s stats reveal that folks at most risk of drug-related deaths are drying indoors, alone. Therefore, can’t we assume that using drugs outdoors, where the good samaritans are alleged to abound, is safer than using inside.
Using “children” as a reason to impose a ban that, let’s face it, will be near-impossible to implement — given Vancouver’s shortage of indoor/drug-friendly spaces — is designed to manipulate and sway voters.
Please, do not be easily swayed. Ask for the data.
Furthermore, it strikes me that hiding children from drug use is irresponsible; it stinks of fear and denial.
We can’t just cover up what we don’t understand and expect it to go away. We do not live in a bubble — especially in Vancouver.
Oh, and, one more thing before we sign off: PWUD also care about children; many are parents themselves. Therefore, it is common practice for folks who spot a child on the block to alert other folks, by calling, “Kids on the block!” This is an intentional attempt to shield children from drugs and drug use.
Some don’t listen — because that’s life. But those who do, will hide their straws and pipes until the kids are out of site.
The “ohhh what about the kids” is one of the most tiring excuses in politics. I worked as an intern for a conservatives state government in the USA (ik I can’t wait to leave trust me haha) but conservatives use this “kids” argument for everything from public drug use, to criminalizing homelessness and attacking Transgender communities. It’s a bad faith argument, especially considering it comes from the people, at least in the United States, who are always talking about the parents, right to control what their child is seeing. How about we fix some underlying problems, instead of hiding them.