Is It Really Treatment?
The city of Vancouver is a beautiful city, but it is also a port for drugs. The main drug being sold is heroin. For years now, Vancouver has been trying to treat and fix the heroin problem. They’ve set up a project called Insite, where addicts can go and shoot up heroin with clean syringes and medical supervision. While at the clinic police aren’t allowed to arrest the addicts while using. The city has since added to the project. Addicts are not only given medical supervision and clean instruments, but are also being given free heroin. The city claims that if the addicts are given a clean/safe environment and free heroin, then they won’t have to go out and commit crimes to obtain the drug in the streets.
The National Insitiute on Drug Abuse states that drug addiction treatment is the intent to help addicted individuals stop compulsive drug seeking and use. Vancouver claims that Insite is a treatment program, but the definition of drug addiction treatment clearly states that in order to be treatment it has to help addicts stop using. If you go by definition then the program isn’t drug treatment. The addicts that partake in this program can’t get over their addiction if they are being given heroin to shoot up. Instead Insite is sustaining their addiction.
“Merriam-Webster defines sustain as to provide what is needed for (something or someone) to exist, continue, etc” (Webster). Insite is sustaining their addiction with free/clean instruments, medical supervision/care, no legal punishment and actual drugs. There was a patient that is apart of the program that was asked on video if she would ever stop using. She answered saying that she will continue to use for the rest of her life. She says that the drug has become apart of her every day life. Insite just now makes it easier for her and other patients to continue using.
Also in the video is a man who is also apart of the program. It is stated that he and all the other patients now need heroin to function normally in society. After interviewing the man, the reporter goes on to say that even though he seems to function normally it is still obvious that the man is high on drugs. A definition of a drug is a medicine or other substance that has a physiological effect when ingested or introduced to the body. Someone couldn’t possibly act normal and be a regular contributor to society if they are physiologically impaired.
Vancouver isn’t treating the users addiction. They are just sustaining there addiction. In order to truly be treated the users would have to stop using and seeking heroin. The program is just sustaining the addiction.
Work Cited
“Vancouver Combats Heroin by Giving Its Addicts the Best Smack in the World.” Public Radio International. N.p., n.d. Web. 01 Mar. 2015. <http://www.pri.org/stories/2015-02-04/vancouver-combats-heroin-giving-its-addicts-best-smack-world>.
“Principles of Drug Addiction Treatment: A Research-Based Guide (Third Edition).” What Is Drug Addiction Treatment? N.p., n.d. Web. 27 Feb. 2015. <http://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/principles-drug-addiction-treatment-research-based-guide-third-edition/frequently-asked-questions/what-drug-addiction-treatment>.
Merriam-Webster. Merriam-Webster, n.d. Web. 01 Mar. 2015. <http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sustain>.
The Gamer 2.0
SleepyCat
Coffee Lover 03
doglover7025
Snowman10
excellentstudent27
Gymrat
hockeyfan
holistic25
ilovebeesss
ilovemydog
The Gamer
Naturechild101
BreakingBad45
ravensfan8
temporal111
thatpersonoverthere
toetio
username1132005
Calm&Patient
webbwrestler135
Counterintuitive Spring 2024 
A method that may be more practical to set a definition to ‘Sustain’ might be to introduce the word with an anecdote or situation. “Sustainability is when…” or “When someone does this they are showing characteristics of sustain”. As reviewed with the ‘What is PTSD’ assignment a while back, there are many ways to define something without the implicit use of a dictionary. Anyone could quote a dictionary, but it wouldn’t mean as much to the reader as something with as much backing as an anecdote or “real” proof.
LikeLike
Using a dictionary definition, while informative, does not truly constitute as a proper argument. It just gives the definition of the word you want and you simply build off of that word. Anybody can look up a word when they are researching a topic, or reading an essay, but when that it is done it is only used to discover a new word and find out the context in which it is being used. Yes, I see that by Vancouver providing a police free environment and free heroin is not truly helping addicts beat their addiction. But giving me the definition of the word sustain isn’t really doing much for the argument. “Sustain” is just an effective word to use in regards to the topic, the definition however, is not. It seems like by quoting the definition you were just looking for an easy cop out to extend your essay.
LikeLike
I wouldn’t use any definitions from the dictionary because it removes the words from their context. Saying that the Insite Program isn’t treatment just because it doesn’t meet the literal definition of a treatment seems unfair to the topic. The Insite program is helping the addicts safely abuse the drugs just like a treatment would help alleviate the situation. The insite program is a treatment for the other problems that the drugs would have caused such as the criminal activity and the spreading of diseases involved with using Heroin. Be careful with using the dictionary for the definitions because they don’t themselves provide enough context for the topic.
LikeLike
While the dictionary definitions do help with your argument try a different approach to get the readers more enticed, and to give your essay more adversity. For example, maybe try to define the word “danger”. Yes, the program does reduce the danger of the crimes the addict may commit to get the drugs, but what about the danger that the drug has on the addicts actual body. Include the impact the drug has on the organs and heart. You can also include in that the danger of the addiction, you mention the addict stating they will use the rest of their life because of this program, how dangerous is that to the user? Your writing is strong, try adding different and creative definitions to make your essay great.
LikeLike
The dictionary definition does nothing to persuade anyone, because it’s factual. The best way to define something is to outline it in your head ask questions like what is addiction to me, what do I think causes it, what kind of people do I think are most susceptible to addiction, do I think addiction can really be cured? Gather your thoughts, find some sort of evidence that conforms with your opinion, and connect them to your topic and that should give you a much stronger result.
LikeLike
I like the method of using definitions to refute the claim that Insite is a treatment for drug addiction. It shows that what they are doing truly isn’t a cure for drug addiction. It gives a direct comparison to what Insite says they’re doing to what they really are doing.
LikeLike
It would do Hashmeesh good to incorporate his own ideas into the argument. It would make it stronger if he used the dictionary definitions to strengthen his own idea and theories.
LikeLike
Define the psycological state of a heroin addict. Your definitions are clear however the essay is missing some emotion.
LikeLike
Using the definitions straight from the dictionary makes the argument seem dry and dull. It doesn’t really make the situation feel the way it should. To make it better try instead of using the actual definition come up with the definition by how it is used in the situation. Use the scenario to create the definition instead of just looking it up. It’ll make it feel more real and persuasive.
LikeLike
Although quoting an actual dictionary definition does get the point cross it may not get your point across. Yes we understand what the dictionary thinks but what do you think? How can you relate/use this in your argument, where is the feeling behind it. Maybe instead of using a dictionary definition and building off that you can use a different approach, still giving a strong definition with support but not the same argument or definition that many others give, it does not give the argument any depth or purpose.
LikeLike
The author did a great job on using dictionary definition to react to the issue, but their are other efficient methods to make this argument. Since “numbers don’t lie”, the author could’ve find data on the people that were cured, the success vs failure percentage, the cost of treating them vs cost of letting them in the streets. Those datas could reveil wether the SUSTAIN is for the addicts or the community.
LikeLike
The way hashmeesh interpreted the definition was not clear. She misinterprets the definition causing confusion for the reader. It is a very effective way to argue using the dictionary definition because that defines how the word is suppose to be used.
LikeLike
I think for this argument should be focused on the word “sustained” rather than the different ways of treating addiction and the definition of “drug addiction treatment.” Having definitions can be helpful in a definition argument, however it is the the entirety of the piece. I think a little more research should be incorporated for this and finding out every detail, and all the little quirks to help others what this “treatment” is really about; if it’s just having people shoot up and get high but in a healthier way and to reduce crime, or if it can actually help addicts in the future. I remember when I watched the video that the woman did indeed say she will always and continue to shoot up for the rest of her life, but I also remember in the video is a man saying he had been addicted free for x amount of years and he said the treatment did help in. This can also be a neurological argument, where this type of treatment is only effective for some but not all addicts. Having a little more evidence and research can really make this a great argument.
LikeLike
While the use of definitions can sometimes helps readers to understand piece, the added self-interpretations are kind of wasted because readers will have already interpreted it for themselves. Maybe instead, try a more personal approach to draw readers in and keep them interested.
LikeLike
You should explain the definition in your own words with the help of an outside source. This will help put more emotion in your work, keep the audience’s attention, and help make this essay become better in general. I do believe in your conclusion that they shouldn’t be providing a clean and safe environment for addicts to shoot up herion but should actually help these addicts cope with the herion addiction with means of rehab or counseling.
LikeLike
Using the dictionary definition may make a reader no longer interested in the argument or topic. Instead of offering a definition to a reader for them to maybe get a better understanding of the argument, offer up some addiction information or facts supporting your argument. This will make your argument stronger.
LikeLike
After reading this, I was left feeling very confused. Until the end of your paper, I wasn’t sure if you supported Vancouver supplying heroin addicts or against the idea. Don’t be afraid to flat-out express whether you’re for or against the topic. I concluded that you were against Vancouver’s free heroin clinics…
I agree with your point of view. It’s beneficial to mention the opposite point of view such as clean needles, less violence, etc. Although, you failed to mention the real reasons why giving free heroin to people is actually harmful. Yes, maybe it keeps violence down in the neighboorhood but Vancouver is creating walking, useless zombies. A thought I had on this topic, was what about the family members of the heroin-addicted individual? Witnessing a loved one suffer with addiction is absolutely heartbreaking. Therefore, how would a family member feel knowing their loved one isn’t getting the treatment he/she needs, and instead he or she is legally being given a substance that could kill him/her at anytime.
LikeLike