Are recovering drug addicts reliable?
The opioid epidemic in the US is a lot less "sexy" to talk about than identity politics, for sure, but its impact on the US is going to be obvious if left unchecked. Some employers need workers and are beginning to take in recovering addicts. I for one think drug addicts should be given a second chance to find stability and normality in their lives after recovering. Americans generally feel the opposite and there's a significant stigma placed against drug addicts. The article describes how I feel about it best,
"I don't necessarily care about these guys' past. I'm looking at what they're doing today. What they're going for in their future,"... "A guy that is willing to invest any kind of time in their future and their lifestyle and their healthy living is a guy worth bringing on."
At the same time it's also understandable why a business would consider recovering addicts as way too much of a risk to hire. I know that many of you believe that taking responsibility for your lives is one of the best preventative measures for leading a stable, successful life. So I'd like to know from our many professionals here,
- Should recovering drug addicts be given a second chance at employment or continue to endure their past?
- Exactly how risky is it to bring into a firm a recovering drug addict?
- Is the American stigma against recovering drug addicts totally out of place? Is drug addiction something that needs to be discussed more openly about?
- How will the opioid epidemic affect us economically in terms of unemployment and wages?
Feel free to share any other thoughts.
Strongly disagree on your response to 4. Those who recover and take part in rehabilitation services are capable of adding economic value, and do so on a daily basis. However, they are not typically the ones who are revolutionizing modern nations, more servicing supplementary needs that are far less glamorous.
Agreed. I worked with an analyst who was a recovering heroin/cocaine addict. Dropped out of college bc of drug use, returned and landed an IB summer analyst position. Individual in question worked harder than a lot of the target guys I met who felt the position was beneath them. If someone is qualified, honest, and hardworking, who gives a shit about their past?
Lol, americans the most tolerable to drug use? Ever tried to go to Europe or Australia by any chance?
i agree. amsterdam, portugal, etc. there are many places that get the drug war is a scam. unless they are only referring to alcohol.
Yeah this came to mind after I posted. Western Europe and South America are more liberal in this regard. I'm biased by my Eastern European background and the fact that I associate mostly with Asians. Compared to Eastern Europe and Asia, the U.S. is very lenient on drug usage.
It's less sexy to talk about because it obliterates the left's narrative about "white privilege."
In any event, I actually talked to a friend about this last night who is a child social worker (so she's a de facto expert in drug addiction)--she basically said that it's a huge epidemic and it partially stems from over-subscribing pain killers. For example, someone might be subscribed 2 weeks of heavy narcotics for managing post surgery pain when, in reality, they really only need 2 days' worth. I've personally dealt out to friends the excess drugs I've been subscribed post knee surgery, so I can imagine this being an attractive source of income in low-income/working-class communities.
As for giving drug addicts a second chance, yeah, I'd have no problem hiring a recovering/former drug addict. It just depends on context--the type of job and their level of recovery.
Lol since you (completely unnecessarily) brought white privilege into this let me respond. The opiod epidemic might actually be a sign of white privilege. Studies show doctors are more reluctant to give black people pain killers because of a.) an insane perception that they are more capable of dealing with pain and b.) they are more likely to abuse or defraud the system (ie. sell pain killers illegally). So essentially, the minority avoidance of the opiod epidemic could be a signal of white privilege rather than some refutation of it. Also, the opiod epidemic has been discussed ad nauseam by the left and they push for public funding for rehabilitation....
Are you serious? Your post just wreaks of the literal insanity of the Obama-era Democratic left. Somehow extreme poverty and drug addiction in the white community can be spun as "white privilege." Just insane.
As far as the topic at hand, when has the left brought up impoverished white rural Americans in any serious policy discussion? The left is far too busy focused on anti-white identity politics.
Goddamn it, WSO does not allow editing comments anymore. iPhone autocorrect turned reeks into wreaks.
I deal in facts while you deal in whatever the fuck fits your preconceived notions: https://www.theguardian.com/science/2016/aug/10/black-patients-bias-pre…
excerpt: “A black patient with the same level of pain and everything else being accounted for was much less likely to receive an opioid prescription than a white patient with the same characteristics,” said study co-author Astha Singhal, an assistant professor at Boston University’s dental medicine school.
To determine whether there was a racial bias in pain medication prescriptions, the researchers looked at more than 60m records of pain-related emergency department visits from 2007 to 2011 for people aged 18 to 65.
Lies, damn lies, and statistics. Correlation does not equal causation. You know what the study doesn't cover? Geographical differences. Racial groups congregate in certain locations and predominantly go to different hospitals as a result, especially in emergency room situations (what the study covered). There is a huge difference between a hospital in Anacostia in SE DC and a hospital in Arlington, Virginia. What is more likely is that hospitals in black-dominated areas are less likely to prescribe opiods for reasons that the study doesn't even consider, reasons that have nothing to do with race. The social sciences are amazing at bastardizing statistics to manufacture a narrative.
Dude, I don't really give a fuck either way, you brought it up (entirely unnecessarily) and I gave you facts. It's fine if you reject them because they don't fit your narrative. I didn't spin shit. Whites get pain killers easier for the reasons cited and that has to do with privilege. Plain and simple. As for policy points, the left has been pushing for public rehab related to the opiod epidemic for a while now, you can look up the details.
dude why are you always trying to polarize political parties on every single issue?
I think what he is trying to say is that the opioid epidemic is greeted with calls for compassion and treatment; while the crack epidemic was greeted with scorn, mandatory minimums, and overzealous prosecutors.
I think that this isn't about race but how we have seen 30 years of mass incarceration do nothing but cause misery for millions and cost the government billions of dollars it could have spent on more effective solutions like rehab/diversion programs/etc.
Meth addiction is actually a sign of white privilege too. Meth is primarily prevalent in rural communities / suburbs, particularly in low income communities. Only white people can live in outside of the city because black people can't afford cars to drive to work.
btw i just made that up but doesn't it seems like the insane shit you see in the MSM where they are in open warefare with anyone that is light skinned?
I don't know why so much MS was thrown on a fairly accurate point, but then again, this is WSO.
From personal experience, after a very key surgery, I was put on pain relieving meds, including morphine. Even though I didn't live in the US, where these meds are often oversubscribed, I was forced to go into addiction therapy by the doctors themselves for the simple reason that these hard opioids are highly addictive. Although in my case, it was more preventative than curative.
But yes, these drugs are very tempting and very easy to get addicted to. Yet they are the only recourse for most treatments and surgeries, since they are the only potent enough drugs, which are relatively cheaper too.
"It's less sexy to talk about because it obliterates the left's narrative about "white privilege.""
The insinuation here, although not your main point, is just too glaringly wrong to ignore. The drug epidemic is not a politically divisive issue, and to promote it as such is just motivated reasoning. There is nothing politically inconvenient to the left about openly discussing and addressing the opiate addiction, to insinuate otherwise is extremely misguided. The only good thing to come out of the current epidemic is that it has highlighted the need to treat the problem as a healthcare issue and not solely a criminal justice issue that can be incarcerated away. I would hope both sides could agree on this.
Your mistake here is using big words and making actual points. A meme would probably get your point across better.
After a certain period of time, yes.
Very, also time dependent (as they're in recovery the rest of their lives)
Depends on the social circles, but some place it's pretty ok and other places it's absolutely unacceptable.
There will almost certainly be people excluded from the economy.
I do feel folks look more unfavorably on recovering drug addicts versus recovering alcoholics which is ridiculous because the root cause is still the same. The only difference is one you can buy legally versus the other.
Then at the same time you have a hiring employer pushing away an applicant due to them being a recovering addict but then will head out after work pounding drinks as they need to take an Uber home.
I looks down on people in AA. Weak willed bitches. I quit heroin like 6 years ago. And now I just don’t do it. Quit drinking a few months ago too. Rehab is gay as fuck.
Quitter.
I admit it, man. I can't figure out moderation. It's a strength and a weakness. I have a fucked up personality. I just smoke weed and eat mushrooms now.
1 - Yes, however, i wouldn't hand them the keys to the castle when they are first out of recovery. I think as they grow in sobriety they should definitely be able to take on more responsibility. This would be shown by the merit of their own actions, performance, experience and education.
2 - Depends on the individual case. I have met several long term addicts that got their shit together and do very well. Also, depends on level of responsibility and the field they are working in. Just because someone was an addict does not necessarily mean they were a thief/criminal in other areas. Obviously, those that were also criminals should be hired with a bit of caution.
3 - It should be talked about more openly and people should be more aware of the costs of addiction from a personal level as well as the impacts on society.
4 - hard to say I have known coke/heroin addicts that worked multiple jobs and are very high functioning. However, I have also known pot heads that can't hold a job and are constantly on unemployment (this is obviously the rarer case). Eventually, the H junkies either got clean or ended up going down pretty dark paths. The more people that end up using habitually are going to increase the need for rehab programs, room in prisons (personally against locking up users unless they commit another crime) and abandonment of children. All of these have economic and societal costs that increase burdens on productivity.
all lives matter
I think that the biggest question here is - What defines a drug addict?
DSM V
Criteria for Substance Use Disorders Substance use disorders span a wide variety of problems arising from substance use, and cover 11 different criteria:
Taking the substance in larger amounts or for longer than you're meant to
Wanting to cut down or stop using the substance but not managing to
Spending a lot of time getting, using, or recovering from use of the substance
Cravings and urges to use the substance
Not managing to do what you should at work, home, or school because of substance use
Continuing to use, even when it causes problems in relationships
Giving up important social, occupational, or recreational activities because of substance use
Using substances again and again, even when it puts you in danger
Continuing to use, even when you know you have a physical or psychological problem that could have been caused or made worse by the substance
Needing more of the substance to get the effect you want (tolerance)
Development of withdrawal symptoms, which can be relieved by taking more of the substance
Sure they are reliable. If they are lagging, just throw em a bone, aka more drugs.
Say a dude worked at a steel plant for 20 years, was laid off and turns to opioids. If the Trumpster brought the plant back to life, is it worth giving that guy his job back?
As a PE professional, one of my past portfolio companies was a substance abuse addiction treatment centers business. I was originally shocked to learn that nearly 50% of all our employees, including our CEO with a Harvard MBA were "in recovery". Now some we're 20 years sober, some were 2-4 years, but they all were "in recovery". We even had an outside sales rep who unfortunately relapsed and passed away once at the company due to an overdose.
The fact is many of these people are just as good as anyone else in a professional setting as long as they have their stuff together. When you think about it a lot of people are unstable - former drug addicts just have issues that are easy to identify and stand out.
Ea quo voluptate molestiae consequatur. Quidem nulla facilis consequatur qui. Dolorem impedit aperiam ut sequi. Aliquid dolores est vero voluptate labore iste. Cum voluptas aspernatur magni tenetur reprehenderit sunt minima perspiciatis. Asperiores quis ut quo quae.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Amet voluptate optio iure. Sequi at dolores facere est consequatur odio qui. Deleniti commodi et aut et esse debitis aut. Quia aut sed aut molestias dolore enim est. Optio laboriosam iusto et esse et voluptatum. Officia consequuntur sequi ut est aliquid porro animi. Iure ea quae eos maiores unde odit fugiat.