38
"Billy Weselowski has seen it all, and he hates what he sees on Vancouver's Downtown Eastside," Margaret Wente wrote Saturday in her column Legalization in disguise which wrapped up a four-column series on drug addiction, treatment, toleration and Canada's laws.
To view this video you need to upgrade your Flash Player
Download Flash Player from the Adobe website.
"Mr. Weselowski knows this world all too well. He grew up here. His childhood was a nightmare of violence and abuse.
"At 13, he blacked out from booze for the first time, and quickly wound up on the streets. He injected, snorted, stole, pimped women, stabbed men and became an accomplished felon. He was the hardest of the hard core.
Bethany Jeal a nurse with the Downtown East Side Clinical Housing Team, holds a typical tray with an injection kit that will be handed out to drug users at Insite. (John Lehmann/The Globe and Mail)
Four-part series
Saturday Three million needles a year
Tuesday Insite: What the science really says
Thursday Sweden and Scotland’s U-turn on drugs
Saturday Next stop: Legalize drugs?
"Today, he runs rehab programs for drug addicts that borrow from the tough-love model of AA.
"He has successfully treated thousands of people, using an approach that emphasizes structure, personal responsibility and abstinence.
"But this approach to addiction is deeply out of fashion. The experts who make drug policy, allocate public money, dispense research funds, advise politicians and push for reform aren't interested in hearing from people like him.
"Instead, they're interested in 'harm reduction.' In Mr. Weselowski's view, harm reduction is a farce . . .
:Canada's official drug policy is known as the Four Pillars approach: prevention, treatment, harm reduction and enforcement.
"In practice, prevention and treatment have been neglected, while harm-reduction measures have steadily gained ground."
Ms. Wente concludes by arguing that maybe Canada needs to take the tough-love approach of Mr. Weselowski, rather than toleration and "harm-reduction."
Whether you agree or not, it's a provocative argument, so we're pleased that Ms. Wente was online earlier today to take your questions on her argument and her four-column series.
Your questions and Ms. Wente's answers appear at the bottom of this page.
Ms. Wente is a past winner of the National Newspaper Award for column-writing who has had a diverse career in Canadian journalism as both a writer and an editor.
She has edited two leading business magazines, Canadian Business and ROB Magazine. She has also been editor of The Globe's business section, the Report on Business, and managing editor of the paper. Her columns have appeared in the Globe since 1992.
Ms. Wente was born in Chicago and moved to Toronto with her family when she was in her teens. She has won numerous journalism awards. She holds a BA from the University of Michigan, and an MA in English from the University of Toronto.
Editor's Note: globeandmail.com editors will read and allow or reject each question/comment. Comments/questions may be edited for length or clarity. HTML is not allowed. We will not publish questions/comments that include personal attacks on participants in these discussions, that make false or unsubstantiated allegations, that purport to quote people or reports where the purported quote or fact cannot be easily verified, or questions/comments that include vulgar language or libellous statements. Preference will be given to readers who submit questions/comments using their full name and home town, rather than a pseudonym.
Jim Sheppard, Executive Editor, globeandmail.com: Thanks for joining us today. Your four columns on drug use, harm-reduction and a possible tougher approach in Canada certainly generated a lot of comment and controversy.
Many of our online readers have asked why you decided to tackle this subject and how you researched it. Can you elaborate?
Margaret Wente: I have to say that this is one of the most volatile issues I've ever investigated. It's very polarizing, to the extent that people on opposite sides tend to disagree on the most basic facts.
I got interested in the subject because I wondered why Vancouver's supervised-injection site — a tiny operation in the big scheme of things — was generating such heat.
I also wondered (like everybody else) why, after at least 20 years of intensive intervention and attention, Vancouver's drug scene is worse than ever. It is really a national disgrace, a place full of wrecked lives and terrible tragedy.
So I decided to poke around.
It's important to say that I didn't begin with any fixed opinion on drug policy issues.
