Sterilisation for Drug Addicts- The way forward?

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by Ispeakcrabandpongo, Apr 27, 2010.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Watching early morning news and an item came up about an American firm that pays druggies $300 (£200) to get long term contraception or permanent sterilisation.

    Usual pro and anti arguments, the anti quoting that it was a direct 'lift from Nazi policy', the pro stating that there are thousands of children who are born as addicts or die because mum/dad cannot or will not look after them.

    Whats the feeling? I know where I stand, but is this an extreme form of genetic engineering?
     
  2. I can understand the economic pragmatism but is it socially moral? I'd need some severe checks and balances in place to be comfortable with it.

    The thin edge of the wedge and all that.
     
  3. We need to sit down and take a serious look at our drugs policy, we currently spend millions on the disaster that is drug addiction whilst the dealers make millions, our policy of criminalisation does not work.

    Perhaps the answer is regulation, it would not remove the curse of drug addiction but it would remove the criminal element that surrounds the trade. Putting all the dealers and drugs gangs out of business at one stroke can't be a bad thing which would allow us to concentrate our efforts on the addicts themselves.

    I don't think sterilisation would have any effect at all.
     
  4. What I forgot to add, busy skinning up, was the firm are now coming to UK and starting to market the idea. For the aforementioned £200 they will provide long term contraception or sterilisation. Their argument is that most women on drugs just want to shoot up, or prostitute themselves for money for another hit and dont think or care about the possibility of getting pregnant. Also, if druggies cannot breed, then there will be less drug dependant kids around. I must admit, it gets my vote IF it is voluntary. But which druggie in a sane state will offer their parts up for the snip for a mere £200?
     
  5. Good idea and should be extended to career criminals and doley's.
     
  6. Just shoot them. I hate them, and the scum that supply them.
     
  7. I'd happily kick out their wombs for free. What a complete waste of money.
     
  8. What temperature is required to achieve sterilisation? :?
     
  9. Having been close to a girl hooked on heroin and seen how she treated her daughter (I called social services but they said off the record that there were so many others in her daughters position that they could only deal with the most extreme cases), I couldn't agree more with this policy.
    The overwhelming majority of junkie mothers would be only too pleased to get hold of the £200 and society would benefit too.
     
  10. CQMS: Agree with your first statement, your second statement about regulation I also warm towards BUT if the Government can't even regulate 'themselves' in a proper pragmatic system then the drugs industry is very simialr to the 'immigration policy' in which not many want to properly debate the issue but just spurt off figures!

    All the lefties want rehabilation,the right want harsher radical measures to tackle this major problem, it is a desease which will never go away & untill MP's/Government tackle it realistically it will be a never ending battle,

    Financial initiatives mostly always run out of funding & last time I looked the UK is fiscally skint?
     
  11. This and sterilisation for smackheads is the way forward. Prohibition doesn't work, and costs billions in crime, insurance, courts, prison and hospitals.

    Buying pharmacological-grade drugs will be cheap, so addicts can get their fixes. The market and profit margin for dealers disappears so there's no incentive for them to hand out freebies to get new people hooked. A win-win situation all round.
     
  12. Your suggestion has merit :D
     
  13. Distasteful as it is, The Government must decriminalize drug use and make it free.
    Once you Choose to take this path then Nothing from State bar your fix.
    Sterilization does seem very Nazi/Commei but Kids have rights and spaced out parents are not one of them.
    There are no shortage of decent folk who want to adopt.
    Everyone recievng government Pay must be drug tested and the Judiciary, Houses of Parliment must lead the way. At high level positions any Drugies must find new employment, out gone bye bye.
    john
    Strange that where I live everyone understands High Level involvement in the Drugs Trade yet in the West never happens, just low level criminals.
     
  14. Biped

    Biped LE Book Reviewer

    Well, I think that in solving the issue this way, the victim pays the price, not the criminal. Sure enough, if the addict is so incapable of looking after their offspring due to their addiction, or may drop one without thought or care, and will also accept the money to be sterilised, then job's a good'un; except for the fact that the scumbag who makes a living out of the chemicals that destroy the lives of the weak walks away.

    By all means, offer the sterilisation to the weak and the stupid, because they'll not pass anything onto their offspring that will stand them in good stead in society as they grow, but at the same time, find and kill those who run the gangs that import and distribute the stuff. The Proceeds of Crime Act is not a sufficient deterrent to those who make it their business to sell misery and addiction. Death is the ultimate deterrent and fix for the problem.
     
  15. Nazi Germany had compulsory sterilisation for chronic alcoholics, but not, apparently, for other drug addictions (Which was good for some, as Goering was a raging junkie)

    It fitted in with the popular 1930's 'Eugenics' philosophy that saw thousands of poor/black/mad people sterilised in the USA for public health reasons, and to 'improve the breed.'.

    This is a very dangerous road to go down. If, in this case, it is a simple commercial transaction, where the patient has a choice, then I can't see a problem. However, from there on, if it starts being offered to those 'Behind closed walls' in care or custody, its a short step for that element of choice to disappear, and the unfortunate patient to wake up one fine morning minus his tackle...'For his own good'.