Just how prevalent is this oxy addiction thing among our young adults in top privates?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Meanwhile the drug makers from China and Mexico are making a killing pushing this stuff all over the country. They know it is deadly, will get you hooked, and they make a ton of money. If someone makes a choice to get high from pot or alcohol heroin is no longer a big step and the drug makers are profiting while they are killing Americans.

I though heroin mostly came from Afghanistan? It's what funds terrorism.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Teach your child that getting high on anything is a bad choice and a slippery slope. Parents put down your booze and joints - you are part of the problem.

I drink half a beer, a few nights a week, when the weather is warm. Every once in a while, I go all out and have a whole beer. I don't think that I'm part of the problem.

A lot of Americans have a preoccupation with boozing and getting high. Having a beer once in a while is not the same thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am friends with parents whose children attend Burke, Field, GDS, Georgetown Prep, Gonzaga, Holton, Lab, Landon, Madeira, Maret, NCS, Potomac, Sidwell, St. John's, SS&SA, STA, Visitation, and WIS.. I have had discussions about the presence and extent of hard drug use among students in these school communities. Not one single parent I have asked about this issue believes that hard drugs like opiods, heroin, or meth are being used by the student's in these schools.

We absolutely do need to starting publicly outing these schools, thoigh not the individuals, so that the parents become aware of the issue and bring pressure upon the schools to do something about it. Please if you know something, say something, fresh air is a great sanitizer.

+1000

Thank you. It is also time we started to privately out the student dealers to school faculty and administrators.

As a parent with kids at one of these schools (Sidwell), but in the lower grades, I'm surprised and saddened to hear that this doesn't already happen. What are parents so afraid of? If I was absolutely certain - with proof - that a kid in my DC's school was dealing drugs, I would not think twice about alerting school officials.

That Sidwell isn't the be all end all that is always portrayed. When you are spending $41,000 a year for school no parent wants to feel that the place is perfect.

Me again. Yes I have kids at Sidwell and yes we are spending that much for their education. But I am under no illusions that the place is anywhere near perfect. I realize that I still have some years to go and may not fully know what I'm talking about when it comes to dealing with high schoolers and the US there, but I like to think that if I knew without a doubt that a kid at the school was a dealer, I would be informing school officials pronto. If my little Larla suffers socially from that, do be it. She'll live. Another kid may not.

you are correct - you have no clue.

[Anonymous]

Some line for heroin got crossed around 2010. Maybe there was complacency and school programs focused on stuff like marijuana, coke, and meth because the people teaching it also thought no one would go over the line to heroin. Maybe it was the financial crisis, maybe it was renewed interest in 90's bands and Kurt Cobain whose death became romanticized, but somehow, heroin had become thinkable. Stats show a significant spike in heroin overdose deaths between end 2010 and end 2011.

This was when a nice young man I know from a rigorous private school (no point naming, too far in the past) started on opiates and ended up in Baltimore calling escort services and offering them their fee plus a hundred bucks if they scored him some heroin. That he injected in a shooting gallery in an abandoned row house where sometimes he stumbled over someone who had taken his last trip. That he still maintained a very high GPA and got a 2300 on his SAT normalized it for others and somehow made it an option not an unthinkable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Meanwhile the drug makers from China and Mexico are making a killing pushing this stuff all over the country. They know it is deadly, will get you hooked, and they make a ton of money. If someone makes a choice to get high from pot or alcohol heroin is no longer a big step and the drug makers are profiting while they are killing Americans.

I though heroin mostly came from Afghanistan? It's what funds terrorism.

Most comes from Mexico. The fentynal that is now being used to cut it mostly comes from China.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

People on methadone aren't recovered. They are just addicted to another opiate.

I am pretty sure that the PP wanted to know your opinion about methadone treatment. Unless that's your opinion -- that methadone treatment is bad, because addiction to methadone is still addiction?

Don't know whether PP shares my view but methadone should be viewed as a last resort for hardened addicts. Totally unsuitable for newer addicts. Suboxone is a let's throw some medication at this approach. Many people are now addicted to suboxone, and I've heard in parts of Europe there are people they are addicted to suboxone as their starter opiate. No oxy, no heroin, just suboxone.

Both methadone and suboxone are addictive. They have a much longer half life than oxy or heroin so withdrawal can be much harder and longer. In addition, there are many out there taking it just to make sure if they can't score their pills or heroin at least they have a fix to get them through.

By the way, most addicts who have taken oxy or heroin for some time are no longer taking it to get high. They are taking it to stave off withdrawal symptoms.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Meanwhile the drug makers from China and Mexico are making a killing pushing this stuff all over the country. They know it is deadly, will get you hooked, and they make a ton of money. If someone makes a choice to get high from pot or alcohol heroin is no longer a big step and the drug makers are profiting while they are killing Americans.

I though heroin mostly came from Afghanistan? It's what funds terrorism.

Afghan heroin is sold in Asia and Europe. Ours comes from Mexico. The addiction surge seems to have peaked because of the FDA crackdown on Oxy 3-5 years ago but the collateral damage will go on for decades.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I am a different PP, but one of the ones you questioned earlier. I think methadone / suboxone can be beneficial if used properly - it seems again like it comes down to whether the person WANTS to get better. I am wondering why you feel that that point isn't valid. I have a unique POV in that I know several former addicts - trust me, if they don't want to get and stay clean, they won't. Why do you think kids get shipped out to intensive rehabs and are cured of all physical dependence, then come back nd replaces 6 months later? Rinse and repeat. If the internal motivation and sense of personal responsibility isn't there, they will turn to it again, absolutely. My brother, who has been clean for 8 years, told me when he hears someone talking about it now he still feels a momentary internal urge to use...the high is just THAT good. When it came to finally getting clean, he had to make that conscious choice himself...and then he had to commit himself to the hard work of staying there. And he actually did use suboxone - he started under the care of a doctor. He said weed helped him get through the toughest initial days. But underlying everything was that he finally decided he wanted to do it

Argh. Once again, I never said there's no role for motivation and self-control. Obviously, there is. It's just not as simplistic as "the addict has to WANT to change." It's much more complicated than that. You also have to have the resources to change (medical support, social support, a place to live, maybe a job to look forward to). And sometimes the addict needs support even to be motivated to change in the first place. And the self-control needed to resist urges needs to be learned; it's not necessarily an intrinsic trait. Also, the whole point of methadone and suboxone is that they REDUCE the urge to use. Hence, these medications actually reduce the need for willpower and personal responsibility to recover. Which is a good thing, because drug addiction undermines the ability to use willpower.

PP insisting on "personal responsibility" is really just making an argument that there should be no taxpayer funded addiction treatment.

I'm one of those PP and that's not what I'm arguing. I repeat over and over that just because addicts bear personal responsibility doesn't mean they don't deserve help or that you shouldn't help them. Once again, it's just unbelievable that something as simple as "personal responsibility" for taking recreational drugs is as controversial as it is to people like you.

so what's your point? do you disagree that other extrinsic factors also contribute to addiction?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I am a different PP, but one of the ones you questioned earlier. I think methadone / suboxone can be beneficial if used properly - it seems again like it comes down to whether the person WANTS to get better. I am wondering why you feel that that point isn't valid. I have a unique POV in that I know several former addicts - trust me, if they don't want to get and stay clean, they won't. Why do you think kids get shipped out to intensive rehabs and are cured of all physical dependence, then come back nd replaces 6 months later? Rinse and repeat. If the internal motivation and sense of personal responsibility isn't there, they will turn to it again, absolutely. My brother, who has been clean for 8 years, told me when he hears someone talking about it now he still feels a momentary internal urge to use...the high is just THAT good. When it came to finally getting clean, he had to make that conscious choice himself...and then he had to commit himself to the hard work of staying there. And he actually did use suboxone - he started under the care of a doctor. He said weed helped him get through the toughest initial days. But underlying everything was that he finally decided he wanted to do it

Argh. Once again, I never said there's no role for motivation and self-control. Obviously, there is. It's just not as simplistic as "the addict has to WANT to change." It's much more complicated than that. You also have to have the resources to change (medical support, social support, a place to live, maybe a job to look forward to). And sometimes the addict needs support even to be motivated to change in the first place. And the self-control needed to resist urges needs to be learned; it's not necessarily an intrinsic trait. Also, the whole point of methadone and suboxone is that they REDUCE the urge to use. Hence, these medications actually reduce the need for willpower and personal responsibility to recover. Which is a good thing, because drug addiction undermines the ability to use willpower.

PP insisting on "personal responsibility" is really just making an argument that there should be no taxpayer funded addiction treatment.

I'm one of those PP and that's not what I'm arguing. I repeat over and over that just because addicts bear personal responsibility doesn't mean they don't deserve help or that you shouldn't help them. Once again, it's just unbelievable that something as simple as "personal responsibility" for taking recreational drugs is as controversial as it is to people like you.

so what's your point? do you disagree that other extrinsic factors also contribute to addiction?

Go back and reread the thread. Your question is asinine as you have repeatedly purposefully missed my point in your pursuit to remove choice, responsibility from and to infantilize addicts. To what purpose, I don't know. I suspect it's something personal.

[Anonymous]

Not that PP, but it seems like you (but there are many yous, so perhaps not you) wish to insist all addiction is solely about personal choice. It is way more subtle than that and you're seeing resistance because insistence on assigning blame on a personal choice, parents who raise kids who make bad choices etc does not advance solving the problem. Gets in the way actually.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You can forbid doctors from prescribing opiates to young patients, but the kids will simply do what my child did when the doctors brush off their pain--go straight to the street for heroin, which is way cheaper than street pills.

There was a time in the past when doctors actually took teen complaints of pain seriously. Now most of the doctors have become amateur psychiatrists and decide with little basis that the complaints are psychogenic and not worth exploring.

How old was your kid?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can forbid doctors from prescribing opiates to young patients, but the kids will simply do what my child did when the doctors brush off their pain--go straight to the street for heroin, which is way cheaper than street pills.

There was a time in the past when doctors actually took teen complaints of pain seriously. Now most of the doctors have become amateur psychiatrists and decide with little basis that the complaints are psychogenic and not worth exploring.

How old was your kid?

17 when the pain started and we first went to a doctor. 19 when finally gave up that doctors could or would ever do anything to help. First usage came a couple of weeks after orthopedist declared child didn't need TENS machine and he wouldn't write a prescription for one.

[Anonymous]

If it's coming from Mexico then maybe Trump was right about that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I am a different PP, but one of the ones you questioned earlier. I think methadone / suboxone can be beneficial if used properly - it seems again like it comes down to whether the person WANTS to get better. I am wondering why you feel that that point isn't valid. I have a unique POV in that I know several former addicts - trust me, if they don't want to get and stay clean, they won't. Why do you think kids get shipped out to intensive rehabs and are cured of all physical dependence, then come back nd replaces 6 months later? Rinse and repeat. If the internal motivation and sense of personal responsibility isn't there, they will turn to it again, absolutely. My brother, who has been clean for 8 years, told me when he hears someone talking about it now he still feels a momentary internal urge to use...the high is just THAT good. When it came to finally getting clean, he had to make that conscious choice himself...and then he had to commit himself to the hard work of staying there. And he actually did use suboxone - he started under the care of a doctor. He said weed helped him get through the toughest initial days. But underlying everything was that he finally decided he wanted to do it

Argh. Once again, I never said there's no role for motivation and self-control. Obviously, there is. It's just not as simplistic as "the addict has to WANT to change." It's much more complicated than that. You also have to have the resources to change (medical support, social support, a place to live, maybe a job to look forward to). And sometimes the addict needs support even to be motivated to change in the first place. And the self-control needed to resist urges needs to be learned; it's not necessarily an intrinsic trait. Also, the whole point of methadone and suboxone is that they REDUCE the urge to use. Hence, these medications actually reduce the need for willpower and personal responsibility to recover. Which is a good thing, because drug addiction undermines the ability to use willpower.

PP insisting on "personal responsibility" is really just making an argument that there should be no taxpayer funded addiction treatment.

I'm one of those PP and that's not what I'm arguing. I repeat over and over that just because addicts bear personal responsibility doesn't mean they don't deserve help or that you shouldn't help them. Once again, it's just unbelievable that something as simple as "personal responsibility" for taking recreational drugs is as controversial as it is to people like you.

so what's your point? do you disagree that other extrinsic factors also contribute to addiction?

Go back and reread the thread. Your question is asinine as you have repeatedly purposefully missed my point in your pursuit to remove choice, responsibility from and to infantilize addicts. To what purpose, I don't know. I suspect it's something personal.

Where have I said that? I agree and understand that motivation and developing self-control are important to overcoming addiction, but not the only factors in recovery or addiction. I don't understand what you think the exact role of "personal responsibility" is, on a clinical level.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Even 15 years ago when I was in high school everyone knew that heroine was something you DON't touch, not even once. Even the kids doing coke and E knew that

That was true when I was in high school also. These days, there is not that same fear. I have two extended family members, both teens, with heroin addiction. Both started using recreational drugs in middle school and moved in a circle of underachieving kids with too much time on their hands who were looking for a quick high. Started with pot, moved to synthetics like Spice, then to psychedelics, then lifting prescription drugs from the family, and finally to heroin. One cousin died at 19 last year from an OD, the other is still in comunity college and on a 4th round of rehab. It is frightening but in the cases above, this didn't come out of the blue. It started with signs of misbehavior and bad decision making that snowballed over several years. The signs are often there. I've seen kids making blatant posts regarding regular drug use on social media and yet the parents remain clueless.