I would suggest we defer what the middle ground or success factors look like to the people running and studying programs like this
Nah I think i’ll keep having my own opinions instead of blindly trusting “experts”. There is a lot of money in the addiction biz, and you don’t make money off of a recovered addict. I am unwilling to fund someones addiction for their entire life. It’s easy to be a functional addict when everyone else is footing the bill. I don’t think temporary improvement of conditions is indicative of much.
What you call punishment I call boundaries. I know a lot of addicts and I’ve seen what worked for those who were able to break the cycle. Knowing that your family will kick you out of the house for instance, is a pretty big deterrent to using drugs. There needs to be some limits somewhere so we aren’t subsidizing life long addiction on tax payer dime.
What do you mean when you say “full restriction”? Initially quitting is definitely the hardest part. The temptation to make all your pain go away with a quick trip is too much to bear for many. There’s a reason most detox facilities restrict you from having phones, cash, and don’t let you leave. I think its good for addicts to have temporary restrictions on their freedoms to initially get clean.
I’m totally fine funding good rehab care. but i’m not willing to continue to fund an addicts addiction with my tax dollars. perhaps make this program require a voluntary admission into a program with reduced freedoms (i.e. can’t leave the campus) until the drug addiction is kicked.
Can we find a middle ground where perhaps you have up to 3 months to be off drugs or else you lose your benefits? Of course with proper care supplied. People need to know they are putting their immediate comfort at risk if they continue to use drugs
Not really. There is a big difference when the free money is guaranteed over a long period of time. I don’t think it takes any extraordinary leaps in logic that people would stop working if they were given a bunch of money every month.
There’s a big difference when its guaranteed over a period of time. Then you can actually feel justified in quitting whatever job you have since you know the money will keep coming in.
The study does not go over it’s selection criteria so it’s impossible to tell how the participants skew. For example, if they selected for those without drug addictions, this data is no surprising. As a relatively right leaning person who isn’t against some social welfare programs, I believe having no drug addiction should be a prerequisite to any of these types of programs. Else you are just feeding their addiction further. There would be literally 0 incentive to quit if you have all your basic needs taken care off while you waste my tax money on drugs
can attest to this. used to being banned on reddit for some very mainstream (yet controversial in terminally online spheres) opinions. i hope lemmy moderators never become what reddit moderators have become
Would prefer to keep porn entirely separate from casual discussions. there really is not a big overlap between people looking to discuss current events and coomers looking for jerk off material. The one thing I always hated about reddit is how the porn was mixed in with casual discussion posts. You don’t need porn.
remember when two highschool students solved a 4000 year old unsolved mathematical proof https://www.wfla.com/news/education/teens-prove-2000-year-old-pythagorean-theorem-school-officials-say/#:~:text=School officials say 17-year,and without using circular logic.