Just another day in Rural Western Washington (Seattle, Redmond: rental, homes)

[Transmition]

If someone is committed enough to rehabilitation that they would move from a large city to Sequim, seems like they are on the right path.

It's more likely that the one in Sequim serves the existing addicts in the area. Now you are just seeing them during the day, when they used to only come out at night to get the real stuff.

[rya700]

Not the expert but pretty much the legal standard is an addict has to be an imminent danger to self or others before they can be contained and/or placed against their will and even then there aren't enough placements or funding. Although it sounds like these laws are starting to change.

[Diana Holbrook]

Originally Posted by jabogitlu

I'm not trying to be argumentative necessarily, but I think there is probably need for this kind of service in a place like Sequim. I grew up in a small town in the opioid belt (Southern Appalachia) and relative to the overall population, a huge percentage of people were/are addicted and need major intervention to even have a slim chance at a normal life in the future. Those folks (in my hometown) didn't come from somewhere else - their lives fell apart due to a combination of no jobs, pressure to conform to crazy and antiquated religious norms, and cheap and easy access to opioids. That sounds like a generally similar combination to PA/Sequim. In short, most of the folks using these services are probably homegrown.

Fair enough! I was trying to figure that out because it seems like the treatment center is always mentioned like it is a magnet for problems instead of a solution to the problem.

[CalWorth]

Originally Posted by Diana Holbrook

Explain how this works, because my instinct is to want MORE drug treatment centers. We have to. The homeless problems we're having (nationwide, I might add, this is not just a rural WA problem!) are so inextricably linked to the prevalence of powerful addictive drugs, more treatment centers are desperately needed. What planning is necessary to make them a net positive, rather than a negative?

I would have thought drug treatment would be inpatient, not outpatient, and therefore I'm not sure what would draw addicted homeless to places around the centers. Are they waiting to get IN? Is that it? What is it?

"Patients" have been brought in from other areas. When they complete the program (this doesn't mean they stay sober) or get kicked out, they don't leave the area, they stay, and so do their partners, family, friends, children, drug dealers, pit bulls. The clinic, who sneakily slid into the area, said there would be "wraparound services" for their clients. What is that? Do they mean shelter, medical care, jobs, counseling? There is not enough of that for the general populace. This clinic was a huge money-grab for the tribe, lots of federal funding. Drug clinics attract actively using drug addicts & their hangers-on. My friend in San Diego had the great misfortune of having a "sober living" half-way house move in behind her. Sober living? That place was a trap house. I know that you live rural. Maybe advocate for a drug clinic in your area & see how it impacts your community.

And of course now Port Angeles & vicinity is air bnb haven, reference the NY Times article I cited. The disparity in this beautiful little community is stunning.

[Diana Holbrook]

Originally Posted by CalWorth

"Patients" have been brought in from other areas. When they complete the program (this doesn't mean they stay sober) or get kicked out, they don't leave the area, they stay, and so do their partners, family, friends, children, drug dealers, pit bulls. The clinic, who sneakily slid into the area, said there would be "wraparound services" for their clients. What is that? Do they mean shelter, medical care, jobs, counseling? There is not enough of that for the general populace. This clinic was a huge money-grab for the tribe, lots of federal funding. Drug clinics attract actively using drug addicts & their hangers-on. My friend in San Diego had the great misfortune of having a "sober living" half-way house move in behind her. Sober living? That place was a trap house. I know that you live rural. Maybe advocate for a drug clinic in your area & see how it impacts your community.

No, I don't think they necessarily belong in rural areas, where there is not the services or jobs the people need. I think they need the help and treatment somewhere, because it's not something they can likely get out of without help. But where and what kind of help will work. We need to figure that out. Not just welfare and free stuff... protection of communities from the blight of addicted squatters and the eyesore and crime they bring with them.

And of course now Port Angeles & vicinity is air bnb haven, reference the NY Times article I cited. The disparity in this beautiful little community is stunning.

It does seem to be a contradiction!

[HeartNox18]

Originally Posted by CalWorth

...

And of course now Port Angeles & vicinity is air bnb haven, reference the NY Times article I cited. The disparity in this beautiful little community is stunning.

similar in many PNW coastal towns (Port Orchard is another very similar in WA, as is Port T)

Worker dudes:
Logging (what's left after spotted owl)
Fisheries (What's left after new regs)
Labor (those who can afford to hang around HCOL areas)

vs,
Those there via other financial means (Trust fund babies, inheritance, WFH, ultra wealthy, (don't need to work)

vs.

Don't want to work (Plenty of those everywhere, except Russia and China (they have a job for you))

[rantiquity]

Originally Posted by Diana Holbrook

Explain how this works, because my instinct is to want MORE drug treatment centers. We have to. The homeless problems we're having (nationwide, I might add, this is not just a rural WA problem!) are so inextricably linked to the prevalence of powerful addictive drugs, more treatment centers are desperately needed. What planning is necessary to make them a net positive, rather than a negative?

I would have thought drug treatment would be inpatient, not outpatient, and therefore I'm not sure what would draw addicted homeless to places around the centers. Are they waiting to get IN? Is that it? What is it?

Actually I have no problem with a drug treatment center....I have a problem with where it was built. If Jamestown wanted a treatment center they should have built it on their Blyn property. Or is it that the Jamestown tribe didn't want any homeless hanging around their Casino? Hmmmm

What I do have a problem with is the growing number of homeless people who are camped in around Sequim and PA. It seems to me the Jamestown treatment center in Sequim is a magnet for those people to be in the area. Yes we have all seen a increase of the homeless.

Now you want a partial solution to America's drug problem...
One: close the southern border and stop the Mexican cartel from shipping those drugs into our country. Two: put sanction on China and force them to curtail sending drugs (fentanyl+) to Mexico.
Three: use the school system to do a better job of educating the young on the negative use of drugs. Four: enforce the federal drug laws.
Five: IMO legalization of Marijuana is wrong...it has only allowed people in the long run to think other drugs are okay to use.
Six: stop democratic programs that deal out drug paraphernalia that just encourages more drug use.
And lastly force drug addicts to enter drug treatment centers which I and you know are most likely to be the least effective.But its worth a try...

[mayfair]

A problem in rural towns is also other places bussing their homeless there. Smaller towns don't have the services or support (talking about places without drug treatment centers or even homeless shelters) to deal with the influx on top of their homegrown homeless.

[jabogitlu]

Who is bussing homeless people to Sequim or Port Angeles? Certainly not any city in King County - we are full up on homeless folks, bursting at the seams. Doesn't appear to be any city in Thurston County, either, based on what you can see in Olympia. Not sure about Pierce or Snohomish, but it's also doubtful.

[oregonwoodsmoke]

Originally Posted by Diana Holbrook

......... because my instinct is to want MORE drug treatment centers. We have to. The homeless problems we're having ......... are so inextricably linked to the prevalence of powerful addictive drugs, more treatment centers are desperately needed. .................

It's possible that more treatment centers might be needed for those who really want help, but more treatment centers are not going to solve any drug problems. Treatment barely and rarely succeeds and that is with persons who really want to quit and get their lives back. It is a huge waste of money to treat people who do not wish to be treated, and by far the majority of drug addicts do not wish to be treated. Their only wish is to have access to more drugs. They do not want to quit. If you force them into rehab, it won't stick because they don't want it to stick. Don't waste the taxpayer's money like that, basically throwing it into the incinerator for no return.

Sure, have treatment available for those who have hit rock bottom and sign in voluntarily because they really want to escape their addiction. But that is a very small percentage of the drug addicts. You accomplish nothing by involuntary enrollment except for wasting time and lots of money.

Success rate with meth users who actually want to quit is only 5%. There is absolutely no way that a user who doesn't want to quit will be "cured" by being forced into treatment,