Page 2773 - Week 11 - Tuesday, 20 October 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
The Woden Valley Hospital guidelines state what will happen if a person misses a methadone dose, and none of the outcomes expressed involves ringing to see whether he or she is all right, or physically checking on that person's whereabouts.
The third option is to enable pharmacies to offer methadone treatment and not expand the public health sector's involvement. This option would, in effect, privatise some aspects of the methadone treatment program, which would not satisfy the needs of some clients. Under the guidelines already set out for dealing with schedule 8 drugs, and after being accredited, pharmacies could expand the program if they were interested in becoming involved. But there is the danger that some areas of Canberra would not be well served, as participation depends on pharmacies volunteering to be part of the program.
That brings me finally to consideration of the fourth and recommended option. I consider it to be in the best interests of all methadone users if there is available a range of service providers who can meet the varying needs of people with methadone dependency. The committee's majority report had recommended further amendments to the two amendment Bills before the Assembly which, I feel, enhance the chances that they will fulfil the aim of maximising the availability of the program. Just as there is a wide range of users, there needs to be the widest range of options for the delivery of methadone treatment.
Some people will still be sentenced by the ACT's court system to undergo methadone treatment, but the vast majority of people who use the program in the future will do so because they realise that they have a problem with illicit drug use. Methadone can be a way of bringing that dependency under control, and they can do so and still stay in the community, contributing to the economic and social life of the ACT. It seems to me that the ultimate aim of this debate today is to reach the greatest number of people and to help them maintain their place in our society. Of what use is a methadone treatment program that makes unfair demands on individuals and prevents them, by the sheer logistics of how they get their daily methadone dose, from participating in community life?
By adopting the recommendations of the committee's majority report, we as an Assembly achieve several things. We make methadone available to people in their local areas at a wide range of times. This maximises the lifestyle options for people who are dependent on methadone and lets them and their families take part in community life, just as we do. By making methadone more readily available, we also improve the viability of the families involved, reducing the stresses placed on all those living with drug dependency.
Another important issue, which is dependent on my last point, is that of giving people who need methadone treatment the dignity that goes along with managing their own medical condition. As the Drugs Committee report states, methadone treatment is a medical treatment program, and it is less than satisfactory to provide services to patients in a manner that makes them feel punished for their medical condition. We as an Assembly need to appreciate that the best way to manage participation in a methadone treatment program is to allow people to feel empowered by the process, not to feel deprived of dignity. Madam Speaker, I urge all members to support both Drugs of Dependence (Amendment) Bills before us today, and the further amendments proposed by Mr Moore which will follow.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .