
Children of the Opioid Epidemic - dsr12
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/09/magazine/children-of-the-opioid-epidemic.html
======
sharkjacobs
I feel a great deal of sadness and sympathy for drug addicts when I think
about them, and a great deal of resentment and anger at drug addicts when I
think about the other people in their lives.

~~~
leetcrew
i can understand this sentiment, but there are many mental illnesses that
bring pain to the people around the afflicted. why do we single drug addicts
out for judgement?

anecdotally, i have seen that the ones that recover do not succeed through
willpower or strength of character. the main factor is the strength of their
support network. it is not a moral deficiency.

~~~
cfadvan
_i can understand this sentiment, but there are many mental illnesses that
bring pain to the people around the afflicted. why do we single drug addicts
out for judgement?_

At some point a drug addict, predisposition and circumstances aside, had to
make a choice to start taking drugs. Someone with a mental illness never chose
to flirt with mental illness, they’re just mentally ill.

Now, I also have a lot of sympathy for drug addicts, because we can’t ignore
predisposition and environment, but it was still, somewhere in their past, a
matter of choice. I don’t think that means we should hang them out to dry, but
it’s not quite the same as someone who was just born sick. Of course that does
exclude the hefty portion of the drug addicted populace who found their way to
drugs as the result of a mental illness...

~~~
Chernobog
Talking about environment, I saw a very good quote by a woman named Tine
Brubak Jahren, that I have taken the liberty to translate to English:

 _" It's odd when it comes to sympathy for drug addicts: Everyone has much
sympathy for sexually abused children, children of drug addicts, victims of
violence and abuse, people with mental health issues that are not helped by
the system. BUT, when they grow up to become dysfunctional adults that use
drugs to take away the pain and their problems, then it is suddenly full stop
for the sympathy.

Suddenly, they are expected to take charge of their lives and behave like
everyone else, and if they can't do that, there is no lack of suggestions such
as sending them to desolate islands, forced sterilization or simply locking
them up for life."_

She makes a great point, that also highlights the absurdity of using fines and
prison for addicts. The system essentially punishes them for something the
system has predisposed them to.

~~~
cfadvan
I agree with the conclusion, but the problem with perception is that no
sexually abused child or child of an addictt _ever_ made a choice to be that
child. 100% of the time, they’re purely victims. A lot of drug addicts are the
same way, but quite a few are also people who enjoyed doing drugs until it got
the better of them. They’re not all abused children or mentally ill, some are
just drug addicts. The result is that you can be unreservedly sympathetic with
abused children, but need a bit of background to feel the same sympathy for an
addict.

Now, I’d argue that either way treatment and support is the answer, not jail.
I’d also argue that the addicts who were screwed over and over into addiction
are enough of a majority that we should give all addicts the benefit of the
doubt. _However_ I also understand the perspective of people who have been
urned by those addicts who are just selfish assholes, and can’t manage that.
They shouldn’t set policy, but they’d have a valid view too.

tl;dr All victims of child abuse are victims, _some_ drug addicts are only
victims of their own poor decisions.

~~~
cm2012
Except that twin research shows that drug use and progression from light drugs
to hard drugs to addiction is largely from genetics:
[https://archives.drugabuse.gov/news-events/nida-
notes/twin-s...](https://archives.drugabuse.gov/news-events/nida-notes/twin-
studies-help-define-role-genes-in-vulnerability-to-drug-abuse)

Some quotes:

> "The progression from the use of cocaine or marijuana to abuse or dependence
> was due largely to genetic factors."

> "The genetic influence for abuse was greater for heroin than for any other
> drug."

Different paper:
[https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/978047001590...](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/9780470015902.a0005230.pub2)

"For instance, it is estimated that 50–60% of the variation in risk for
alcoholism is accounted for by genetic factors."

Now add this on top of the stuff that affects you growing up you can't
control.

Saying, "enjoyed doing drugs until it got the better of them" ignores that
whether or not you're going to be driven towards drugs is largely determined
before you're even born.

------
Sohakes
This is one of the most beautiful and hopeful articles I've read in a long
time. I was expecting a depressing read but was delightfully surprised.

------
cylinder
To get an idea of how the New York Times depicted children of a drug addiction
epidemic when it was black children affected, see here:

CHILDREN OF CRACK: ARE THE SCHOOLS READY? - A SPECIAL REPORT: Crack Babies
Turn 5, and Schools Brace

[https://www.nytimes.com/1990/05/25/us/children-crack-are-
sch...](https://www.nytimes.com/1990/05/25/us/children-crack-are-schools-
ready-special-report-crack-babies-turn-5-schools.html)

~~~
drenvuk
It would be nice if an approach with such a humanitarian tact used in the OP's
article were used back then. Hopefully we continue to grow in such a way.

~~~
zenkat
The article points out that race has a lot to do with how these two epidemics
of addiction were portrayed.

------
lifeisstillgood
I find this hard reading, the seeds of tragedy sown early.

How many children are abandoned to poor parenting - and is there a fix?

I know this is somewhat SF utopian but I keep banging on about "MOOP" \-
massive open online psychology. the idea that we are monitored day in day out
by our phones, listening to us and our interactions, the actual useful data
that could be extracted about our psychology, our behaviour and how to improve
it is immense (yes the risks huge - but that's why it should be open)

anyway - imagine a fridge that says "don't eat the chocolate" or a phone
that's says "don't take the opioids"

Or a phone that's suggests new ways to talk with your children.

~~~
AnIdiotOnTheNet
When you're a technologist, all problems look like technology problems I
suppose.

My own solution to poor parenting isn't any more appealing, mind you. If
meritocracy is desirable in a society, and parents have such a huge effect on
the opportunities and potentials of their children, then the obvious solution
is to do away with parenting. All children would be raised by trained experts
and parents would, ideally, never know who their children are. They'd all have
medical care, food, shelter, schooling, and other things that many children
are currently deprived of because they simply fell out of the wrong womb. With
this approach, having children is no longer as life-altering an event as it is
currently, so abortion should be less frequent. Another advantage is that you
can move the children around frequently, exposing them to many different
regional cultures and other children from all over the country, broadening
their understanding of the nation and its people.

Obviously there are disadvantages, not the least of which is that human nature
makes the whole concept completely non-viable because very few people will
accept the idea of not raising their own children. Worse, the idea that the
state is solely in control of their education is downright horrific to some,
and the inevitable homogenization of national culture would be seen as a
threat by existing cultural enclaves. Not to mention that, deep down, people
really don't actually want meritocracy at all.

~~~
jschwartzi
It truly would be a brave new world at that point.

