OP8S

I would imagine that's because of the Gov. Recovery strategy ( which includes alcohol mis-use ). Since privately run "charitable " organisations have been introduced rather than just seeing your GP. Dependants are reffered to these organisations who now get their " payments by result ". It's been coming to a head down in England recentley. There is a Gov. strategy available on the net if anybody cares to look for themselves. As usual the bottom line is the DSPs employees wages & the highest payout to the DSP is if the person who enters the service , leaves it substance free as soon as possible. If they don't return in a year then that's the big cash pay-out to the DSP. The problem is addictions of all sorts & the issues that surround them do tend to take longer than a year for any real benefit to be made. Just yesterday I acted as an advocate for somebody who had entered the service & by no fault of their own was told that their treatment was finishing in 5 weeks. Anybody with any knowledge of substitute medication knows that 5 weeks is hardly enough time to achieve the right dose, let alone stabilise & bring some normality back to the users life. It was all down to bully-boy tactics by their key-worker ( who don't have any medical experience, sometimes I wonder what qualifications some have ? ). It's sad that this type of treatment has reached shetland if the previous posts are right. The people at CADDS deserve a wage surely, but not if this is the only method they can achieve it then they shouldn't be there, if they're ambitious enough to be bullying other medically trained staff then they will stop at nothing pestering the user into thinking that they should start reducing if the user doesn't want to, simply to get their hands on the cash being paid out by the Gov. Everyday now on differents sites another member joins because they are being treated unfairly, if you happen to be with CRI then should you miss an appointment through no fault of your own then treatment is stopped immeadiately, meaning a return to the black market. Every user in treatment saves the country £3 each, the UK needs to look at the systems used in other countries that have a far better success rate in treatment. At the moment there's money to be made out of those junkies, by shoddily run DSPs who care more about their wages than they do about the servive user.

A lot of the answers are already out there. Countries like Germany, Switzerland, The Netherlands all prescribe substitute medication for those that need it. There is loads of evidence based material available over the net which shows as our treatment system is failing theirs' is having far better results. With less intake & more people leaving the system. There's a lot of differences between drug treatment in these countries, we're so obviously getting it wrong in the UK. Prohabition just causes an unstable market controlled by criminals. Regulation & distribution by medically trained professionals stabalizes people.

Sorry if you read the post you'll see that I don't recieve my medication from the NHS. I attend a private clinic, I thought I'd made that clear. Obviously my " drug-addled " brain got that wrong. I don't drink so the fee's I might pay amount to no more than somebody who has a couple of pints after work, or smoke 20 ciggies a day. I work full time in a good job, pay my taxes like a good boy, the kids do without nothing that kids should have. I'm the first one to admit there are hundreds of thousands of problematic drug users out there, all I'm saying is that treatment is what they need & if they're not working then they should still recieve it. This can only happen if the Government take control of substances rather than let the criminal underground " run the show ". @Dratsy sarcasm is far from wasted from me , try looking up the pharmacology of methadone & see how it generally effects users. It's been proved to have no negative effect on cognitive abilities. The reason I don't pull my socks up & be a man is because I like far prefer to stimulate the opioid receptors rather than any other, I believe in a Panorama programme not so long ago scientists proved that a night on the booze stimulated every receptor from valium, cocaine & finally barbituates if I remember correctly. Personally I don't fancy that much....call me fussy, call me what you want, but check out your facts first.

Terribly sorry if I've killed what should be a very important thread by not being the stereo-type drug user. There are thousands of people , possibly working alongside you who may be taking opiates legal, or illicit. We only hear the negative stories though, because of the stigma attached. I'm the first to critisize anybody who finances their habits using illeagal methods, but then they wouldn't have to if their substance of choice was legally available to them. With strict regulation & distribution of course, possibly even higher prescription charges which could be removed from benefits if they were not in employment. My employers know that I am prescribed methadone, but none of my colleagues do & none obviously notice as I often listen to hysterical stories of " druggies ". I often feel like telling them, but due to stigma that surrounds drug use & the rubbish that you read in the media I refrain. We as a country need to revise the 1971 Act, prohabition has increased about 1000 approx registered addicts ( mostly middle class, a lot of health workers, GPs etc ) to at least 100,000 people in treatment now & about 350,000 users who may or may not be in treatment. Check the figures out, it's true. That's a huge increase in 40years. The Gov. need to address the situation a.s.a.p ! If substances were available in a controlled form by the Gov. we would see a collapse in the illicit market due to people getting their substance of choice in a controlled way & the police could start investigating the real criminals that are now in control. Selling contaminated substances, which people still use, from cannabis to heroin & everything else in between. The benefit to the country would be noticeable I'm sure.

Tories, lib/dem's , SNP, Labour. There's not much choice when it comes down to it. Not IMO anyway, they're all just a bunch of puppets controlled by the hands that feed them. The difference between left wing & right wing is barely distinguishable nowadays. It's either right wing or slightly less right wing. It's big business who pull their strings hoping to increase their profits. Some might say this country's going to the dogs!

" jesus h " to coin a phrase So you aspire to alcoholism do you ? Very unhealthy for you & very costly not just to you but to society also. Quite an assumption you're making about me. I certainly don't have the time to sit around drinking tea let alone booze all day, I'm far to busy working only to see the taxman run off with a large portion of my earnings. Also I wasn't pleepsing about anything that effects me, I don't recieve my medication from the NHS. I do believe that those that do have to rely on the NHS for any addiction from cigarettes to crack should be given the same treatment nationwide. SP is correct opiates are legal, but controlled & quite rightly so. This Government is going backwards in it's policies ignoring the successful research based evidence that is now being used by our European cousins. Why ? Because of mass-hysteria produced by the media & the divisions they cause in society, not to mention the greed of the new "charitable " DSPs. Keep up the opinions , unresearched as they may be.

^^ Precisely Dratsy, such ridiculous & uneducated comments made by Nadine Dorries should never see the light of day. Unless to show how ignorant an MP can be. These people know nothing of the world that we live in. If the comments weren't so dangerous they would be hilarious.

Indeed. Any extra money charged for alcohol should be invested into our already cash-strapped NHS & not the pockets of the alcohol industry, who have quite enough profits already.

I'm sure that it's a grand display that CADDS have put on & very probably well worth a look for anybody with no real experience of problematic drink / drug use. I wonder if CADDS will be relying on the coalitions new " payment by results " policy, which has already started to be implemented by several privately run " charitable " organisations on the mainland. Payment by results, is exactly what it means. The DSP gets paid by the Gov. for every person that is " recovered " & off their books. This has already started a worrying scenario where people who have been prescribed substitute medications are currently being put under pressure to reduce & give up their medication. The complaint's about these charitable organisations grow in number everyday & folk who once led prosperous lifes find that without their substitute medication they soon re-lapse. Some anyway. I know of one person in Shetland who gave in to such pressure & now says he stops short of the pharmacy that used to dispense his medication ( which provided him with stability ) only to enter the liquid pharmacy known as the off-license daily, where he now collects his alternative substance. Maybe " payment by results " is not how CADDS is funded. I certainly hope not for any of their clients. As far as I can see by reading the coalitions new policies are very open to abuse by some of these privately run charitable organisations. The United Nations advises it's member countries that " encouraged reductions " are rarely successful & that the user should feel in control of their own treatment. Should they wish to reduce themselves & live a life of abstinence all well & good. But with the creation of these charitable DSPs & payment by results then the bottom line comes down to how many people can be encouraged to give up their treatment due to pressure from drugs-workers, whether they feel ready for it themselves or not. As usual it becomes a financial matter rather than what may be best for the client. Why should I stop taking a medication that I have lived a prosperous life while on it ? I have a full-time job, a mortgage , 3 kids & a wife to think about. All thanks to being prescribed a legal medication for my addiction. Should I relapse then I have everything to lose & nothing to gain. You can say that I'm a tad cynical maybe, but is this the tip of the ice-berg as far as NHS re-structuring Cameron style ? Which area of healthcare will be next I wonder.

Yes Malcom, appeal against the desicion a.s.a.p. , my 70+ year old mother didn't get her blue badge renewed this year, no explanations to it. She can only walk very short distances due to a number of medical complaints. It seems like all benefits applied for nowadays are often refused first time around but when the person appeals against the decision " hey, presto ! " they get whatever benefit or concession that was applied for. Seems to be happening a lot with disablity benefits nowadays but what other can you expect when the DWP puts matters such as that out to private tender ( they have in England anyway ) & to a French company at that ! Honestly you couldn't make it up. I certainly don't agree with people claiming benefits that they may not be entitled to, but ultimately the people that are in need of these benefits & are entitled to them are placed under undue stress, worrying whether the benefits that they may of been on quite legitametly for a number of years are often refused on their first " re-assesment ", meaning that they have to do without until they appeal & get it all sorted out. Which as you may know can take some time. So yes appeal against the desicion & I would hope that justice prevails.

No doubt copying programmes that they have seen on the TV such as Jackass & similar such rubbish. Impressionable young minds copying what was deemed to be entertainment by some adults, not exactly suitable role models. Not in my opinion anyway. Kids will be kids though & whatever their parents say or do will want to show the world that they are not the same as the generation that are their parents, proving that they are individuals in their own rights. I'm pretty sure that a lot of us did the same at their age ( not stunts or filming ) but chose to wear flared tousers, have mohicans, listened to music that our parents hated & found offensive. Even made a prank phone call or two!! " Is Mr.Wall there ? , no , Mrs. Wall ?, no , any of the walls there?, no...well you better get out of there before the roof falls down ! " . Not even funny but to a teenager was a quite amusing use of 10p. These kids who are on youtube whether you like it or not are going to grow up enevitably, put their past life of teenage pranks behind them become parents themselves & in 15-20 years time probably be on shetlink complaining about the "youth of today ". Just as is being done now. As long as their actions aren't carried out with any repetative malice to anybody in society, the only harm that they are doing is to themselves when one of their stunts goes wrong. Lets not go down the road of denying them the freedom of the street at lunchtime. As somebody said a couple of plods taking a stroll along commercial street over the dinner hour would stop any trouble that may arise. Surely 1 hour out of their day is within their budget.

I to worked in Papa a long,long time ago. It was a summer job I had with a local construction company. A very beautiful place...on a fine day, but then you can say that for all of Shetland I suppose. We were allowed to down tools & leave the island every second weekend. By god I certainly needed it as most of my workmates found little else to do after we finished working (around 8pm) but drink the vast quantities of Shetland's red rose of the liquid variety along with black rum. Being the youngest just working with them in my Uni. holidays, I bowed to peer pressure & joined in. My mother said when I returned home at the weekend I would usually spend the Friday & Saturday sleeping off the build up of booze from the previous 12 days. I don't think I could live there, not just now anyway. I enjoy the endless choices of ways in which I can spend my time off work now on the mainland. Some weekends we just pick an area & drive off to see what that part of the country is like, or sometimes we just stay at home go to the cinema, or the local bowling alley ( though the kids are getting a bit too good for my liking lately ! ), swimming pools, art galleries. After spending my youth in Shetland I still find it exciting the opportunities that myself & my family can go to or take part in. No doubt someday, perhaps when the kids have flown the nest I may feel the urge to return to the "boanny isle". Though I have no doubt that I will return to mainland Shetland, anywhere else as beautiful as it may be would I feel just be to remote. Especially as I will be considered to be elderly & will need my creature comforts that I have become so accustomed to.

Glad to hear that. Next time I'm visiting home I shall try & catch up with him. Sounds like the "old days" with the band playing in the back garden, I hope that he is not coming up against the problems with finding venues for the more alternative musicians as was the problem for a while before I re-located. As I said in my previous post, he should be supported by the Art's Trust in his endevaours at least, even if it is just to have the offer of a suitable venue. I don't think he ever made any large profits & usually seemed quite happy if he broke even, with a good night being had by all including himself. It's certainly one of the best things about living on the mainland, the chance to go & see bands that are well established as well as taking a chance on a night off to see a previously unheard of band. I have seen both in quite small venues, certainly smaller than the Clickimin. It's an amazing experience to see musicians play in a relatively small venue, especially if they are already quite famous. I'm sure that a lot of musicians would quite happily play in smaller venues if the cost of travel to the isles wasn't so expensive.

Yes always good to hear a positive story. I think the majority of folk are honest, even down on the mainland where I live. Once not too long ago a friend of mine who does bar work from time to time for extra money to go towards the mortgage dropped his wallet with his cash payment for the week while searching for his cigarettes. He was as always listening to his i-pod & unaware that he had done so. A couple of seconds later a young man tapped him on the shoulder, offering his wallet up to him. Once he'd switched off his i-pod the lad told him that he'd seen him drop it from across the street. My friend was so shocked by this simple act of honesty that he says that much to his regret he didn't thank the young lad enough & felt the least he should have done was to offer the lad a reward for his honesty & help, but the young man was gone before he had even time to check that his wallet still had all his cards & the £180 in cash. I'm sure similar such things happen on a daily basis all around us without the public being aware. Why ? Because it's not much of a news story for the daily rag in my locality or the Shetland Times I'm sure. I can understand why, it would soon get quite boring reading stories about woman, man, child having their lost i-phone, nintendo, wallet returned to them. I imagine such stories would outnumber the negative stories & this is why we do not get to read about them. Therefore the media focus on the negative aspects of society's problems as they provide them with much more interesting reading & sensationalist headlines. When reading about these negative problems reported in the media, sit back & think about all the good, kind gestures & things that most of us do on a daily basis without even thinking about it. Even if you've just let a little old lady take your seat on the train ( or bus in Shetland ), opened a door for someone. It's all too easy to go by what is reported in the media, leading you to think that you're taking your life in your hands by simply going to the newsagents. It's a big world out there & in my experience a mostly friendly one, especially when you explain to them where you are from.

I don't think Thatcher was evil, I don't think that there are many people in history that are evil. War is evil & so is hatered of others. Thatcher did give the go ahead to a war against Argentinia, over an island that is mostly populated by sheep & is about as far away from the UK as you can get. I'm sure that there could of been an alternative to the death & disabilities that were caused by the Falklands War. If we had come to an agreement which meant that over time the Falklands were given to Argentinia without any bloodshed would we be any worse off ? The families of the troops that lost their lives or limbs on both sides certainly wouldn't be any worse off. I would certainly have more respect for any politician that difused what ended up in bloodshed, wouldn't you ? All too often they re-play history over & over again with their wars, it suits them for us to live in fear of some unknown enemy. Used to be the cold war, now it's the war on terror. Divide & rule, works a treat. We need world leaders that can see the mistakes that have been made in the past & do a little more thinking " outside the box ".