Please watch this video and pass it along. After watching this for the first time, I felt nauseous - so many lives have been destroyed by impaired driving. STAY SAFE.
WARNING: Graphic Images, Drug and Alcohol Use.
Archive for the ‘Alcohol Testing’ Category
The Consequences of Drinking and Driving
Monday, May 10th, 2010Is Addiction a Recurring Choice?
Thursday, May 6th, 2010Please read the following article in Macleans magazine before reading the content of this blog:
http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/05/26/addiction-new-research-suggests-its-a-choice/
When I first read the title of the Macleans article, “Addiction: New research suggests it’s a choice”, I had made up my mind that this article would either be biased, or at the very least on the fringe of modern psychology. However, after reading the theory of Gene Heyman my thoughts may have shifted.
The premise of this article is that fully functioning individuals who make the choice to engage in drug use and then continue to use the drug are doing so in a completely voluntary manner. Mr. Heyman suggests that the majority of drug users who exhibit addict like behaviour in their teens and twenties, are clean and sober by the time that they reach 30.
I am leery to completely acknowledge Mr. Heyman’s hypothesis as valid, but as with most theories, there does appear to be a grain of truth. Drug use does have the tendency to have people acting in a “victim like matter”. If society has the perception that those who use drugs cannot control their actions, it makes it easy for someone who is caught in the cycle of drug or alcohol abuse to state that they have a physical disease and therefore need not take personal action or have personal accountability. When you think you’re beyond help, you probably won’t try or if you attempt to receive help with the underlying belief that it will not be effective, it probably won’t be.
I am a firm believer that everyone makes choices in life by free will – at least initially. I am also a believer in the fact that certain people are more susceptible to certain ways of life, whether it be through genetics or the way in which they were raised. There are many people who have used cocaine one time, and only one time without developing an “addiction”. There are also many people who’s addiction began by using cocaine just the one time and it turned into a downhill spiral. A conscious choice to use cocaine was made the first time, but I tend to think that every time thereafter becomes less and less conscious and more of a reflex.
Whether addiction is a choice or not, it is still a real problem. Perhaps understanding how addiction works will provide more effective treatment options for those who struggle with substance abuse. A personal choice to be self-destructive can and should be treated entirely differently than a physical disease. I would like to see independent research done into Mr. Heyman’s theories. If additional doctors find the same conclusion, it is time to re-evaluate current rehabilitation methods. If more specific rehab can be offered, recurring patients may be helped much sooner into the process.
Only time will tell.
Random drug testing proposal for health services
Friday, February 19th, 2010
An Ohio politician recently introduced a bill that would require random drug testing of Ohio Medicaid recipients. House Bill 440 proposes that an adult Medicaid recipient would have their Medicaid services terminated for six months each time;
1) The recipient fails to comply with random drug and alcohol testing;
2) The recipient fails to complete a treatment program following a determination of a drug and/or alcohol problem or;
3) The recipient had a second positive drug and or alcohol test.
Medicaid is a state and federally funded health program providing benefits to “low income” and “medically vulnerable” people.
This got me thinking about what would happen if such a bill was proposed in Alberta; every adult Albertan receiving Alberta Health Care would be subject to a random drug and alcohol test.
We could randomly drug test all adult Albertans; “weed out” those people who are taxing the health care system, punish them by taking away their and encourage them to go to rehab. As a tax paying Albertan, why wouldn’t I be in favour of this? Reward those who are drug free, lighten the load on the already burdened health care system and feel good about offering rehab services to addicts.
Given this line of thinking, should we not then consider taking health care away from cigarette smokers, obese adults…heck… even adults who don’t exercise according to the Canadian Physical Activity guidelines?
While I believe it makes sense to provide rehabilitation services to those people who may have a substance abuse problem, it doesn’t make sense to take away basic health care services. In essence, this would probably lead to further health problems for these individuals. Desperate times call for desperate measures; these individuals may resort to stealing in order to have money to care for themselves.
Clearly this bill would not pass in Canada. I’d like to think that Albertans are a little more liberal than that, or at least are educated enough to realize this isn’t the answer to the problem. Then again, I wouldn’t put it past a number of people who would probably support the idea in the ever increasingly “me first” climate we live in today.
Merry Christmas from SureHire
Friday, December 18th, 2009I wanted to wish everyone a Merry Christmas this holiday season.
Party season is in full swing and I know that everyone has been told before, but drinking and driving do not mix. There is always an alternative. As an employer, if you have alcohol at work related functions, be sure you practise due diligence. Employers can potentially face civil liability when hosting, organizing or sponsoring events that involve alcohol.
I have mentioned this topic earlier in a newsletter, but with the information as important as it is, I want to re-iterate it here.
Provider Liability
Provider liability occurs when those who provide, serve or make alcohol available to a person who they know or should know is already intoxicated. Provider liability does not prevent individuals from being hosts and serving alcohol. The case of Jacobsen vs. Nike Canada Ltd. is one example of legal precedent that has been established in court.
Supervisors purchased and consumed dinner, soft drinks and 36 beers with Nike employees towards the end of a 16 hour workday. The plaintiff, a 19 year old, consumed at least eight beers during this time in which he would have been displaying obvious signs of intoxication.
After leaving work, he went to a bar where he consumed at least three more drinks before falling asleep while driving home. His accident left him a quadriplegic. While the plaintiff acknowledged his own negligence, the court found Nike Canada liable for 75% of damages for two reasons:
1. Nike, as an alcohol provider, had a duty to monitor its employees’ consumption and take steps to prevent them from driving when they knew, or should have known that their employees were likely impaired. This is the same standard applied to a licensed commercial establishment.
2. Nike had a duty to maintain a safe workplace. Nike required workers to bring their cars to work and knew they would be driving home. In effect, drinking and driving was made part of the working conditions that day.
Be safe and enjoy this holiday season. If you would like more information about employer liability feel free to call SureHire at 1-866-944-HIRE (4473). If you would like to read the entire Christmas newsletter for SureHire, that discusses employer liability: SureNews: Alcohol Liability Issue
If I don’t get another blog out before January, Happy New Years and all the best in 2010 to all the readers!