BC Political Discussion: Election 2026 & 44th Parliament

[Northern Light]

On the above discussion re: drug use.

The appropriate standard, I will argue, is that drug use that does not endanger others, and does not impair you're ability to lead something resembling a 'normal' life is none of the state's business.

Drug use that causes you to be disassociated from the real world, unemployable, unable to be good neighbour, a real or perceived threat to others does demand intervention.

I'm not, by the way in favour of 'jail' as such, punishing people for self-harm seems a bit redundant at best, and more than needlessly mean.
However, I do think compulsory care. (addiction treatment, including enforced de-tox) is fair game.

Its not a choice I think should be made frivolously, civil rights do matter, bodily integrity does matter.

But if you're sending yourself into a downward spiral or already there, to the point where you're clearly incapable of self-care, responsible judgement and where you are causing harm to yourself or others, there is no kindness in respecting boundaries. Watching someone commit suicide in slow motion and shrugging your shoulders with 'its their right' is not an ethical, responsible or reasonable answer.

Yes, there should be guardrails. People who can 'hide' their problems get some latitude to indulge their impulses. People who have never previously encountered the law, who are still able to hold a legit job etc, deserve some space to make decisions of their own accord.

But ultimately, if the downward spiral is out of control, the responsible choice is to stop it. We need as society to acknowledge that our responsibility is to respect autonomy up to near-crisis points; but once someone is across that line, the reasonable choice is intervention and the cruel choice is the abdication of responsibility to intervene.

Lets acknowledge that its challenging to draw that line; but that can't be an excuse for indifference to suffering.