Ohio Sheriff Refuses to let Officers Carry Narcan

[publicunofficial]

In one of the areas hardest hit by the opioid epidemic, one asshole stands in the way:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

What a putzhead

[NewYorkExpress]

What a putzhead

I agree with the sentiment, but really, isn't profanity of any language against the terms of service (including Yiddish)?

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

What a putzhead

I agree with the sentiment, but really, isn't profanity of any language against the terms of service (including Yiddish)?

If he was writing in Yiddish, yes as it is a vulgarity in Yiddish (but not profanity), but he wrote in English where that word doesn't have the literal meaning it does in Yiddish, so it's just an insult, which as long as it isn't towards another poster, doesn't violate the ToS.

[dead0man]

What an asshole!

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

This is the same guy who wanted to sue Mexico for reparations for crimes committed by illegal immigrants.

[JA]

This is the logical conclusion of perceiving drugs, crime, and other anti-social behavior as "evil" and merely personal choice. We need to get moralists out of positions of power.

[Reaganfan]

This is the logical conclusion of perceiving drugs, crime, and other anti-social behavior as "evil" and merely personal choice. We need to get moralists out of positions of power.

Nah nah it's the opposite. We need to get emotion out of the equation and things that aren't real like "social justice".

[Frozen Sky Ever Why]

This is the logical conclusion of perceiving drugs, crime, and other anti-social behavior as "evil" and merely personal choice. We need to get moralists out of positions of power.

Nah nah it's the opposite. We need to get emotion out of the equation and things that aren't real like "social justice".

You people are the problem not only with American politics, but the world. Devoid of empathy and human compassion.

[JA]

This is the logical conclusion of perceiving drugs, crime, and other anti-social behavior as "evil" and merely personal choice. We need to get moralists out of positions of power.

Nah nah it's the opposite. We need to get emotion out of the equation and things that aren't real like "social justice".

You people are the problem not only with American politics, but the world. Devoid of empathy and human compassion.

Not to mention logic and reason. All credible social science affirms the position that treating social problems as moral failures result in more social problems. If we accepted the position of someone like Reaganfan, there would be an escalating number of addicts, crimes, domestic abuse, overdoses, and so on, while everyone just goes around preaching nonsense that does absolutely nothing to address the causes of the problem. So, him and people like him, can take their irrational, counterfactual, and uninformed views and shove them where the sun doesn't shine.

[SoLongAtlas]

Completely agree with him. If these folks keep using drugs time and time again, it should not be on society and taxpayers to keep them alive. This is not like having cops or EMTs carrying epipens or portable defribilators on clean folks having a reaction or heart troubles. These are people that made the choice to get hooked and stay hooked knowing the potential deadly consequences.

[Virginiá]

Completely agree with him. If these folks keep using drugs time and time again, it should not be on society and taxpayers to keep them alive. This is not like having cops or EMTs carrying epipens or portable defribilators on clean folks having a reaction or heart troubles. These are people that made the choice to get hooked and stay hooked knowing the potential deadly consequences.

That is not how addiction works. People know the consequences but their head is so screwed up that they don't even factor it into their decisions. Perhaps you would like to go on a tour of America and tell the families - the mothers and the fathers that their children died because "they should have known better" and that the officer didn't want to do a thing as simple as inject the person with a reversal agent because they wanted to make a point.

Guess how many addicts that kind of 'statement' is going to influence? Zero. All you're doing is letting people die - people who might have found their way later in life, all for nothing.

[publicunofficial]

Completely agree with him. If these folks keep using drugs time and time again, it should not be on society and taxpayers to keep them alive. This is not like having cops or EMTs carrying epipens or portable defribilators on clean folks having a reaction or heart troubles. These are people that made the choice to get hooked and stay hooked knowing the potential deadly consequences.

Hey, I'm a privileged white kid from the NoVA suburbs who has never known anyone going through opioid addiction! Allow me to make blanket statements about the pros and cons of spending $35 to save's someone's life.

[SoLongAtlas]

Public, not originally from nova, not rich, and don't really prefer it here just up here for work.

Corbyn, when do you draw the line for repeat drug users? Should the police become habitual rescuers of people that don't want help after they push their lives to the limit again and again? The sheriff said that was the case and they become violent after being saved. Where should that cycle end?

[Badger]

$37.50 per shot vs. the cost of an autopsy and even the most DIRECTLY related costs, and further even ignoring it costs VASTLY more if even one person goes into a drug-induced coma for god-knows how long.

Even counting this policy at its most heartless dollars and cents standard, the guy's math is vastly off.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

$37.50 per shot vs. the cost of an autopsy and even the most DIRECTLY related costs, and further even ignoring it costs VASTLY more if even one person goes into a drug-induced coma for god-knows how long.

Even counting this policy at its most heartless dollars and cents standard, the guy's math is vastly off.

The cost is really beside the point; they're human beings, not road kill.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

Public, not originally from nova, not rich, and don't really prefer it here just up here for work.

Corbyn, when do you draw the line for repeat drug users? Should the police become habitual rescuers of people that don't want help after they push their lives to the limit again and again? The sheriff said that was the case and they become violent after being saved. Where should that cycle end?

Have you thought about not advocating murder?

[JA]

Public, not originally from nova, not rich, and don't really prefer it here just up here for work.

Corbyn, when do you draw the line for repeat drug users? Should the police become habitual rescuers of people that don't want help after they push their lives to the limit again and again? The sheriff said that was the case and they become violent after being saved. Where should that cycle end?

I believe Corbyn and I have the same answer to the question in bold: never. You don't draw a line when it comes to a human life. Instead of being habitual rescuers, why doesn't the state of Ohio enable them to take these people into custody afterwards and mandate they attend rehabilitation and counseling? What, do they think someone with an addiction problem is just going to go "woah, I just overdosed and nearly died. I now have total control over the insatiable cravings due to the chemicals in my brain and will never touch drugs again"? That's not how addiction works. These people need serious help and intensive care.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Public, not originally from nova, not rich, and don't really prefer it here just up here for work.

Corbyn, when do you draw the line for repeat drug users? Should the police become habitual rescuers of people that don't want help after they push their lives to the limit again and again? The sheriff said that was the case and they become violent after being saved. Where should that cycle end?

So you're saying they shouldn't even call an ambulance if they find a person like that ODing? Because that would be the standard policy if they don't have a treatment on hand...and that would cost a lot more than a Narcan dose.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

The sheriff's main point was that he believes it's not safe for his officers to administer it and should be left up to the paramedics.   He should have left the "taxpayer" stuff out of it.

[Bojack Horseman]

VM sounds exactly like the Jerry Falwell types who said in the 1980s that we should ignore AIDS because it's God's punishment and divine way of exterminating the homosexuals. Thankfully both back in the 80's and now, the Hippocratic Oath prevents medical professionals from taking that advice.

[Cactus Jack]

Apparently someone had to take up Arpaio's banner.

[Averroës Nix]

The sheriff's skepticism isn't as off-base as you might think. People treated with naloxone frequently revive and walk away, seeking no further treatment, and in most cases there is nothing that law enforcement or emergency services can do to stop them.

Instead, they are relegated to waiting for the next overdose, when again they will be expected to step in and save a life or at least prevent a trip to an emergency room in the back of an ambulance. It requires minimal imagination to realize the effect that this has on their morale, particularly in those counties where naloxone injections are now administered by the hundreds or thousands annually.

Moreover, there is a sense that anyone who is outfitted with naloxone will tend to overuse it. Even trained clinicians can misjudge whether someone has overdosed, let alone a police officer with minimal background on human physiology.

(Incidentally, for both of these reasons it is not true that each injection amounts to a life saved, or even an emergency department visit prevented, although some certainly are.)

Incidentally, the sheriff is correct about the dangers involved in reviving a person who has overdosed. Even when naloxone is used to revive someone who took opioids under medical supervision and in a clinical setting, those people frequently wake up agitated and confused. It isn't unusual for them to flail and strike out at people. Nor is it surprising when you consider what is happening to the receptors on which opioids act.

As of 2015, Butler County had a drug overdose mortality rate several times the national average. They are losing more people to drug overdoses than most other places in the United States lose to car crashes, gun violence, and all suicides combined. 2016 was probably even worse.

This far from a matter of "one asshole standing in the way." This is a county that has moved beyond its breaking point. Neither medical professionals nor policy experts nor community leaders have any good answers, and even the best suggestions that they have are palliative. Narcan can prevent an overdose from becoming a fatality, but it does nothing to break addiction. If you want to understand how someone in a position of responsibility can be so callous, consider that.

[SoLongAtlas]

VM sounds exactly like the Jerry Falwell types who said in the 1980s that we should ignore AIDS because it's God's punishment and divine way of exterminating the homosexuals. Thankfully both back in the 80's and now, the Hippocratic Oath prevents medical professionals from taking that advice.

Hate Falwell and his types so thanks but I wouldn't fit in well with that crowd.

The police should deal with issues of law and the EMTs should admin the narcan. Essentially what I am getting at is that these folks know they are getting dependent on drugs and it is unsustainable for the community to continue supporting them if they don't want the help, either via narcan, rehab, etc. Sometimes and as the sheriff pointed out, they don't want the help and sometimes put up a fight when being treated. You cannot help someone that doesn't want help, you can only force them to go to rehab/jail and the rate of recidivism after that in habitual drug abusers' cases is extremely high.

[Santander]

I think Butler County is often lauded for being quite progressive in its handling of non-violent drug offenders compared to neighboring Franklin County in Indiana, which also struggles with drug abuse. This is not a matter of "taxpayer dollars" or "heartlessness". Basically this:

The sheriff's main point was that he believes it's not safe for his officers to administer it and should be left up to the paramedics.   He should have left the "taxpayer" stuff out of it.