There Are Different Attitudes Regarding Recreational Drug Use. Some Approve Of It... Freedom Of Choice?

[Eward]

My brother-in-law is saddled with a horrible addiction to Oxycodone... a potentialy deadly situation. He is 36 and not a child... but we try to regulate money to him so he has enough for only minor expenses but not drugs. Anyway... he has been getting a few hundred dollars now and again from his mother and step dad on the sly. We asked them to stop doing that because we believe it sabotages his success(he spends it on the drugs) and keeps him from looking for a job, etc... he waits on each "hand out" as they come along. One of the problems with his parents... they believe drug abuse is like a joining a political party. They may not agree with ot(and don't agree with drug abuse) but they feel that their son should be able to do what ever he wants and make the choice to take drugs and we should respect that. They send him more money... I have never heard of such an attitude. Doesn't mean anything that he is getting these drugs and taking them criminally. What do you make of it?

[hyun-su]

I take a very liberterian view on drug use... Specifically soft drug use...I do not know that Oxcodone would really fall into that catagory as I am not all that familiar with it.  But...personally I believe once you are an adult you should be allowed to do what you want as long as you are only hurting yourself.  The US spends SO much money on the war on drugs...from law enforcement, to incarcerating people, to trying to stop the manufacture of drugs in other countries, to treatment, to drug related disease(aids)...etc...etc...and what good does it do?  If someone wants to use drugs in this country they basically do it.  It is not hard to get whatever you want...if anything it has gotten far easier over the years.  Who benefits from drug sales...gangs...the mob...criminal organizations...terrorists...corrupt countries...etc... The drug war has failed.   I would far prefer that the US legalize some drugs and tax it and regulate it.  I do not think it would necessarily increase drug use because if you do not believe in using drugs you are not going to start doing them just because they are legal.  The government would earn a lot of money from the tax revenue and that money could be reused to fund treatment programs.  We would save literally billions of dollars a year.  It would stop all of the profits going to criminal enterprises.    I have spent a lot of time in Amsterdam where soft drugs are legal and honestly they have very little problems with drug use there.  I would venture to say the residents do less drugs than the average US city population.  Most of the people using drugs in Amsterdam are tourists.   As for your specific problem...it is basically up to you whether you want to keep supporting your brother in law.  It seems obvious he is going to continue to use no matter what you think.  Until he hits bottom and wants to change you are not going to change him.  Make the decision to support him or take a tough love stance and tell him you want him out of your life until he is clean.    It is just my belief that once I am an adult I no longer need the government babysitting me...give me the freedom to allow me to make choices.  Compound that belief with the thought the government can not do anything to stop drug use...it just makes sense, if you can?t beat them join them...we would be far better off as a country to profit from drug use and spend the money on treating people and keeping people away from a life of crime than the current failed policy.   ChicagoTRS's Recommendations Why Our Drug Laws Have Failed: A Judicial Indictment Of War On Drugs Amazon List Price: $22.95 Used from: $6.98 Average Customer Rating: 4.5 out of 5(based on 21 reviews) Beyond the War on Drugs: Overcoming a Failed Public Policy(Rep) Amazon List Price: $28.00 Used from: $0.68 Undoing Drugs - Beyond Legalization(How We, the People, Can Retake America From the Drug Dealers, Drug Addicts and Drug-Enforcement Agents) Used from: $28.99 ChicagoTRS 72 months ago Please sign in to give a compliment. Please verify your account to give a compliment. Please sign in to send a message. Please verify your account to send a message.

[Jolon]

It seems to me that mom and stepdad are willing to overlook some serious issues in order to continue the relationship with your brother-in-law.    I strongly believe we should all have freedom of choice, but we must also be willing to accept the consequences of our actions.  When loved ones allow a person to avoid the consequences, they are enabling.  Enabling allows the person to do whatever they want, whenever they want, because they know that no matter what happens, someone will always be there to bail them out.    Enabling is doing for things for someone that they can, and should, be doing themselves.  In your situation, your brother-in-law really has no reason to get a job, be responsible, or be a contributing member of society because no one is making him do it.  He doesn't have to; someone else is doing it for him.    So the parents think their son should be able to do whatever he wants.  Fine.  No one can deny him that right.  But he needs to be doing it himself.  Independently.  After all it is his choice to use drugs.  No one is forcing him.  But no one is holding him accountable, either.    Do they realize that what he is doing is illegal?  Self-destructive?  Harmful?    The following is quiz to determine if you(not "you" personally, but a general "you") may be an enabler.  This particular quiz was geared towards alcoholics, but it can pertain to anyone with a substance abuse problem.   Are you an enabler? 1. Have you ever "called in sick" for the alcoholic, lying about his symptoms? 2. Have you accepted part of the blame for his(or her) drinking or behavior? 3. Have you avoided talking about his drinking out of fear of his response? 4. Have you bailed him out of jail or paid for his legal fees? 5. Have you paid bills that he was supposed to have paid himself? 6. Have you loaned him money? 7. Have you tried drinking with him in hopes of strengthening the relationship? 8. Have you given him "one more chance" and then another and another? 9. Have you threatened to leave and didn't? 10. Have you finished a job or project that the alcoholic failed to complete himself?     Of course, if you answered "yes" to any of these questions, you at some point in time have enabled the alcoholic to avoid his own responsibilities. Rather than "help" the alcoholic, you have actually made it easier for him to get worse.   If you answered "yes" to most or all of these questions, you have not only enabled the alcoholic, you have probably become a major contributor to the growing and continuing problem and chances are have become effected by the disease yourself.

[Dyami]

Enabling comes to mind. It seems to me that mom and stepdad are willing to overlook some serious issues in order to continue the relationship with your brother-in-law.    I strongly believe we should all have freedom of choice, but we must also be willing to accept the consequences of our actions.  When loved ones allow a person to avoid the consequences, they are enabling.  Enabling allows the person to do whatever they want, whenever they want, because they know that no matter what happens, someone will always be there to bail them out.    Enabling is doing for things for someone that they can, and should, be doing themselves.  In your situation, your brother-in-law really has no reason to get a job, be responsible, or be a contributing member of society because no one is making him do it.  He doesn't have to; someone else is doing it for him.    So the parents think their son should be able to do whatever he wants.  Fine.  No one can deny him that right.  But he needs to be doing it himself.  Independently.  After all it is his choice to use drugs.  No one is forcing him.  But no one is holding him accountable, either.    Do they realize that what he is doing is illegal?  Self-destructive?  Harmful?    The following is quiz to determine if you(not "you" personally, but a general "you") may be an enabler.  This particular quiz was geared towards alcoholics, but it can pertain to anyone with a substance abuse problem.   Are you an enabler? 1. Have you ever "called in sick" for the alcoholic, lying about his symptoms? 2. Have you accepted part of the blame for his(or her) drinking or behavior? 3. Have you avoided talking about his drinking out of fear of his response? 4. Have you bailed him out of jail or paid for his legal fees? 5. Have you paid bills that he was supposed to have paid himself? 6. Have you loaned him money? 7. Have you tried drinking with him in hopes of strengthening the relationship? 8. Have you given him "one more chance" and then another and another? 9. Have you threatened to leave and didn't? 10. Have you finished a job or project that the alcoholic failed to complete himself?     Of course, if you answered "yes" to any of these questions, you at some point in time have enabled the alcoholic to avoid his own responsibilities. Rather than "help" the alcoholic, you have actually made it easier for him to get worse.   If you answered "yes" to most or all of these questions, you have not only enabled the alcoholic, you have probably become a major contributor to the growing and continuing problem and chances are have become effected by the disease yourself. Sources: alcoholism.about.com confuzzled 72 months ago Please sign in to give a compliment. Please verify your account to give a compliment. Please sign in to send a message. Please verify your account to send a message.

[ring]

It's not going to be possible to regulate all self-destructive behaviors. There are just too many of them, and many are done with common items(from huffing to cutting). Addictive drugs like heroin or oxycontin are in a hazy area between the two.  They affect the brain in such a way as to make it hard NOT to turn your self-destructive behavior on others.  The drug becomes an overriding concern, above all other ethical obligations.  Even before actual dangerous behavior starts, the path to it is essentially guaranteed.  So drug behavior is not as much of his choice as his parents would like to believe. There are other knock-on effects, which are harder to trace down.  It does make sense, because of the addictive properties, to regulate those drugs, but that creates a black market, and black markets are always violent.  Even if your brother-in-law never commits a crime to obtain drugs, the profitability of selling drugs to him keeps the market available, and others ARE committing crimes to support that habit. We might fix that by legalizing the drug, but that's not guaranteed: the addictive behavior will make otherwise moral people commit crimes.  Whenever we have to strike a balance like this there is no one perfect balance: we will always end up depriving people of things they could use wisely, and simultaneously making dangerous things available. I've been talking thus far largely about public policy and legalization.  Your question is more personal, and the answer is actually rather easier. His parents are enabling a behavior which is destructive, not just to himself but to other people.  They are helping him create a market which depends on, and causes, criminal behavior.  He himself may be supporting his habit with legally obtained money, but he's one more customer keeping the market open for people who will buy their drugs illegally. If he were using a less addictive drug, like marijuana, we'd have a harder balance to strike.  Marijuana is far less addictive than oxycontin; it's not without various forms of harm, but they're also more localized.  The whole scheme of illegal drugs is tied together, though not nearly in the "gateway drug" scenario beloved of alarmists.  Although it is helping to keep the whole illegal(and therefore dangerous) drug market open, I think that marijuana should so clearly be legalized that his choice could be rationalized against the overall damage done. Not so with a clearly addictive drug like oxycontin.  It's hard even to think of it as a "choice" at this point: his brain is so driven to obtain the drug that choice hardly even enters into it. I think his parents are doing a deep disservice to the community by supporting his habit.  They may or may not also be doing a disservice to him, which can be reconciled as their choice and his, but the knock-on effects are far too serious to allow them their choice, or his choice, freely.

[Schylar]

You don't have to be smart to be a parent Sounds like everyone would be better off if the parents got hooked on the Oxy and the guy was straight.  Wow.  People who supply money to their kids(at any age) for drugs really raise the bar for enabling.  Being hooked isn?t recreation, it?s degeneration.  An occasional drug experience is common to some of the greatest minds and artists this world has known.  But to ?re-create? it to the point of addiction is a downward spiral.  Sounds like this man needs someone to be strong enough for him, and care enough about him for an intervention.  After all, the addiction is only a symptom of a deeper problem.  Some part of his being is calling out for help.   But an intervention would involve the people around him getting their priorities straight first, because they have to be very clear about no longer doing the things they did to assist him towards the pearly gates.  There?s no easy way out.  The spell can only be broken by a severe change in venue and professional help.  Your brother-in-law has to feel he has hit the bottom.  An intervention would allow him to see how affected the people around him are, and how important he is to them.  This is often the straw that breaks the monster?s back and the person finally says yes to help.  As you say, he is a grown man, but a man who is mentality is crippled, having no more self control at this point when it comes to this drug, than a small child.  So, can he make that decision for himself ?  An addict?s perception of reality is distorted, and they often can?t discern what is good, productive, or even logical for themselves or anyone else anymore, because they are so powerfully driven by their chemistry hungering for substance. They only want relief, and eventually everything else falls by the wayside.  There is a show on A&E called ?Intervention?.  Stuff exactly like you?re talking about.  Alot of these poor kids are hooked on meth and heroin and they?ve really got it bad.  The counselor always urges the family to cut the druggy off completely from the family unit until  he/she goes to rehab.  Someone is there to take them immediately from the intervention to rehab.  It sounds harsh, but it has to be to match the pull of their addiction.  it?s not easy for the family, but there?s no easy way out, and at that point, the family has gone through so much, anything is an improvement.  If his family wants to really show him love, they have to stop helping him hurt his mind, body, and life via his addiction.  There are people out there who are ready to help families in need of assistence.  I?m sorry I don?t know just who, but I?m sure the pyche department of any hospital could start you on your way.  I would hope his parents could get counseling.  They are way off base on this one. I wish you the very best of luck. Skylight 72 months ago Please sign in to give a compliment. Please verify your account to give a compliment. Please sign in to send a message. Please verify your account to send a message.

[Nathalia]

Sounds like everyone would be better off if the parents got hooked on the Oxy and the guy was straight.  Wow.  People who supply money to their kids(at any age) for drugs really raise the bar for enabling.  Being hooked isn?t recreation, it?s degeneration.  An occasional drug experience is common to some of the greatest minds and artists this world has known.  But to ?re-create? it to the point of addiction is a downward spiral.  Sounds like this man needs someone to be strong enough for him, and care enough about him for an intervention.  After all, the addiction is only a symptom of a deeper problem.  Some part of his being is calling out for help.   But an intervention would involve the people around him getting their priorities straight first, because they have to be very clear about no longer doing the things they did to assist him towards the pearly gates.  There?s no easy way out.  The spell can only be broken by a severe change in venue and professional help.  Your brother-in-law has to feel he has hit the bottom.  An intervention would allow him to see how affected the people around him are, and how important he is to them.  This is often the straw that breaks the monster?s back and the person finally says yes to help.  As you say, he is a grown man, but a man who is mentality is crippled, having no more self control at this point when it comes to this drug, than a small child.  So, can he make that decision for himself ?  An addict?s perception of reality is distorted, and they often can?t discern what is good, productive, or even logical for themselves or anyone else anymore, because they are so powerfully driven by their chemistry hungering for substance. They only want relief, and eventually everything else falls by the wayside.  There is a show on A&E called ?Intervention?.  Stuff exactly like you?re talking about.  Alot of these poor kids are hooked on meth and heroin and they?ve really got it bad.  The counselor always urges the family to cut the druggy off completely from the family unit until  he/she goes to rehab.  Someone is there to take them immediately from the intervention to rehab.  It sounds harsh, but it has to be to match the pull of their addiction.  it?s not easy for the family, but there?s no easy way out, and at that point, the family has gone through so much, anything is an improvement.  If his family wants to really show him love, they have to stop helping him hurt his mind, body, and life via his addiction.  There are people out there who are ready to help families in need of assistence.  I?m sorry I don?t know just who, but I?m sure the pyche department of any hospital could start you on your way.  I would hope his parents could get counseling.  They are way off base on this one. I wish you the very best of luck.