Publisher's notebook
Personal responsibility is needed
There is a growing divide in this country between how much the government should provide for its citizens versus how much they should provide for themselves. That is the basic question in the whole liberal - conservative divide.
Europe is way more advanced down the liberal way of thinking than America but we are heading in their direction. Being a white, suburban living businessman from the Boomer generation definitely increases your chances of being on the conservative side. Guilty as charged. But every issue has its own unique set of angles to consider and hopefully most of us are open-minded enough to consider each on it's own merits.
One such issue is the opioid crisis. The Post has published many different articles in most of our towns on the subject. In particular, the use of Narcan (naloxone) by both emergency services and law enforcement.
Naloxone is a drug that interferes with the attachment of opioid drugs to the receptors in the brain. It is administered nasally and has been called “the Lazarus drug” by some responders for its near-miraculous ability to seemingly bring overdose victims “back from the dead.” It was first introduced in 1971 for use in hospitals to prevent patients from overdosing on pain medication during and after surgery. By 2010, almost all ambulance crews in the U.S. carried Narcan.
Many of the various hometowns that The Post covers are using it both by police and EMS. The problem is that many now feel that Narcan is being overused and encouraging even more reckless behavior. There is a growing cost as a single dose runs about $75 and victims today often need several to be revived. Not to mention the labor cost.
We are asking this question in our weekly online poll this week: How should first responders utilize Narcan on overdose victims? The possible answers are: victims should always be provided Narcan for free; victims should have to pay for Narcan doses used on them, but it shouldn't bankrupt them; victims should have to pay for Narcan doses used on them, and it should be very expensive; and responders should limit how many times they are allowed to use Narcan on the same victim.
Personally, I feel the same way about Narcan and the whole opioid epidemic as I do about medical insurance coverage. A government is formed for the protection of its citizens and certainly saving their lives should be a top priority. I have said many times that I am okay with the government providing universal Medicaid, but it should be a no-frills service that does not encourage wasteful and unaffordable overuse like "Obamacare" does. That is why it is collapsing.
Using the same reasoning, I feel the same way about opioid addiction and overdose treatment. We must be a compassionate people and I think Americans always have been. We absolutely should save any citizen's life that we can and the use of Narcan is a small price to pay. That being said, I believe that the user should be billed for it. I would even consider ideas like criminal penalties for repeat users to make sure that we are not just making the problem bigger.
The old axiom still works for this old Boomer ... let's offer a hand up, not a handout. But our hands should always be out when needed to save somebody's life. I think that is something that young and old, blacks and whites, liberals and conservatives can all agree on.
Europe is way more advanced down the liberal way of thinking than America but we are heading in their direction. Being a white, suburban living businessman from the Boomer generation definitely increases your chances of being on the conservative side. Guilty as charged. But every issue has its own unique set of angles to consider and hopefully most of us are open-minded enough to consider each on it's own merits.
One such issue is the opioid crisis. The Post has published many different articles in most of our towns on the subject. In particular, the use of Narcan (naloxone) by both emergency services and law enforcement.
Naloxone is a drug that interferes with the attachment of opioid drugs to the receptors in the brain. It is administered nasally and has been called “the Lazarus drug” by some responders for its near-miraculous ability to seemingly bring overdose victims “back from the dead.” It was first introduced in 1971 for use in hospitals to prevent patients from overdosing on pain medication during and after surgery. By 2010, almost all ambulance crews in the U.S. carried Narcan.
Many of the various hometowns that The Post covers are using it both by police and EMS. The problem is that many now feel that Narcan is being overused and encouraging even more reckless behavior. There is a growing cost as a single dose runs about $75 and victims today often need several to be revived. Not to mention the labor cost.
We are asking this question in our weekly online poll this week: How should first responders utilize Narcan on overdose victims? The possible answers are: victims should always be provided Narcan for free; victims should have to pay for Narcan doses used on them, but it shouldn't bankrupt them; victims should have to pay for Narcan doses used on them, and it should be very expensive; and responders should limit how many times they are allowed to use Narcan on the same victim.
Personally, I feel the same way about Narcan and the whole opioid epidemic as I do about medical insurance coverage. A government is formed for the protection of its citizens and certainly saving their lives should be a top priority. I have said many times that I am okay with the government providing universal Medicaid, but it should be a no-frills service that does not encourage wasteful and unaffordable overuse like "Obamacare" does. That is why it is collapsing.
Using the same reasoning, I feel the same way about opioid addiction and overdose treatment. We must be a compassionate people and I think Americans always have been. We absolutely should save any citizen's life that we can and the use of Narcan is a small price to pay. That being said, I believe that the user should be billed for it. I would even consider ideas like criminal penalties for repeat users to make sure that we are not just making the problem bigger.
The old axiom still works for this old Boomer ... let's offer a hand up, not a handout. But our hands should always be out when needed to save somebody's life. I think that is something that young and old, blacks and whites, liberals and conservatives can all agree on.