Vancouver Safe Injection Site

[Moderate Centrist]

This story was on the CBC Website today:

Vancouver's safe-injection site a concern: UN

Source: http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2004/03/02/world...injection040302

I think the whole concept is misguided and offensive. The government should tackle this problem by focusing resources on prevention first.

Does anyone have any information on the success rates of these injection sites? By this I mean how many people (Numbers or %) do they break the habit?

It looks like a situation that will breed long term dependency and divert resources from where they could be better spent.

[Black Dog]

Your link's dead. Here's the GAM's article.

BC safe injection site worries UN

A UN organization has expressed concerns to Canada over Vancouver's safe injection site for addicts, saying the approach violates international agreements on ways to control drug abuse.

In a report released Wednesday, the International Narcotics Control Board says the establishment of the drug-injection site in Vancouver last year — the first in North America — “is not in line with the international drug-control treaties to which Canada is a party.”

I think the whole concept is misguided and offensive. The government should tackle this problem by focusing resources on prevention first.

Heroin abuse is a huge problem in Vancouver and across North America. A drug strategy focussed on prevention would do little to help those people already hooked.

Does anyone have any information on the success rates of these injection sites? By this I mean how many people (Numbers or %) do they break the habit?

Check this out.

Keep in mind, SIR's are a relatively new concept, so we've yet to see what kind of effect they'll have. But its pretty clear that the existing strategy, which treats drug use a sa criminal, rather than a medical matter is an abject failure.

It looks like a situation that will breed long term dependency and divert resources from where they could be better spent.

Safe injection sites typically provide sterile injection equipment, information about drugs and health care, treatment referrals, and access to medical staff. The idea is to keep people safe and hopefully get them on the road to recovery. people who use these types of sights already have "long-term dependency" issues. That's the nature of heroin.

Regarding the UN report, it seems to me to be just another example of the misguided, outdated thinking that has driven western drug policies for the past hundred years or so. Those policies have totally, utterly failed. The system needs to be overhauled and to do that, we need new ideas, including SIRs.

[Galahad]

This story was on the CBC Website today:

Vancouver's safe-injection site a concern: UN

Source: http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2004/03/02/world...injection040302

I think the whole concept is misguided and offensive. The government should tackle this problem by focusing resources on prevention first.

Does anyone have any information on the success rates of these injection sites? By this I mean how many people (Numbers or %) do they break the habit?

It looks like a situation that will breed long term dependency and divert resources from where they could be better spent.

Of couse it's a foolish idea.

And no they don't have any actual stats on whether or not it is successful, this is the type of answer we always get:

From the Vancouver Sun today:

Larry Campbell (our Mayor whose only platform WAS this drug injection site) says " There is certainly value in harm reduction. We know anecdotally from the people who work down there and live down there that they have seen a difference and it's positive".

But my FAVORITE quote in this article by Campbell is his answer to the UN criticism:

"I don't think they have credibility. From my point of view, they're simply an arm of the US drug policy, which I don't agree with. It's almost impossible to take them seriously".

Oh lord... I laughed until I cried. From his stunning left wing stance on every issue, I'm POSITIVE he took the UN VERY seriously when they were against the war in Iraq & saying there were no WMD.

I guess that as long as you throw barbs at the US at every opportunity, on every issue, on every side...you gain points with the left wing.

PS - Whenever Larry Campbell rants about how "the reality is that people out there have drugs and they do inject" and that his objective is for them to shoot up in a safe manner, I can't help thinking of other realities, like for instance ..... the reality that people out there have illegal guns and they do use them, and I wonder when he'll open up shooting ranges for this gun toting group so they don't kill innocent bystanders when attempting to hit their target individual.

Soon I hope.

[Black Dog]

Of couse it's a foolish idea.

Why? Can you articulate a reason or is this just a typical knee-jerk "drus are bad and bad people do drugs" reaction.

And no they don't have any actual stats on whether or not it is successful, this is the type of answer we always get:

From the Vancouver Sun today:

Larry Campbell (our Mayor whose only platform WAS this drug injection site) says " There is certainly value in harm reduction. We know anecdotally from the people who work down there and live down there that they have seen a difference and it's positive".

What's your point? That, simply because we're not certain of a new project's success, we shouldn't give it a try? As I said, it's pretty obvious to anyone with two eyes and a brain behind them that the status quo isn't working. What would you propose?

"I don't think they have credibility. From my point of view, they're simply an arm of the US drug policy, which I don't agree with. It's almost impossible to take them seriously".

Oh lord... I laughed until I cried. From his stunning left wing stance on every issue, I'm POSITIVE he took the UN VERY seriously when they were against the war in Iraq & saying there were no WMD.

I guess that as long as you throw barbs at the US at every opportunity, on every issue, on every side...you gain points with the left wing.

Apples and oranges issues. The Iraq war was a matter for the UNSC. As for the International Narcotics Control Board, which is complaining about the Vancouver SIR, here's a bit of info from their web site:

The International Narcotics Control Board (INCB or Board) is the independent and quasi-judicial control organ for the implementation of the United Nations drug conventions, established in 1968 by the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs of 1961. It had predecessors under the former drug conventions since the time of the League of Nations.

The Board is independent of Governments as well as of the United Nations; its 13 members serve in their personal capacity. They are elected by the United Nations Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) and their work is financed by the United Nations. Three members are elected from a list of candidates nominated by WHO and 10 from a list nominated by Governments.

And who are the members of this group?

Edouard Armenakovich BABAYAN Russian Federation

Madan Mohan BHATNAGAR India

Elisaldo Luiz de ARAÚJO CARLINI Brazil

Philip O. EMAFO Nigeria

Hamid GHODSE Iran (Islamic Republic of)

Nüzhet KANDEMIR Turkey

Melvyn LEVITSKY  USA

Robert LOUSBERG Netherlands

Maria Elena MEDINA-MORA Mexico

Alfredo PEMJEAN Chile

Rainer Wolfgang SCHMID Austria

Jiwang ZHENG China (People's Republic of)

I guess we can expect members from the US, Iran, Russia, China, Turkey, Nigeria, India and Mexico to be oh-so-open minded on drug issues, hmm.

PS - Whenever Larry Campbell rants about how "the reality is that people out there have drugs and they do inject" and that his objective is for them to shoot up in a safe manner, I can't help thinking of other realities, like for instance ..... the reality that people out there have illegal guns and they do use them, and I wonder when he'll open up shooting ranges for this gun toting group so they don't kill innocent bystanders when attempting to hit their target individual.

Soon I hope.

Again, apples and oranges. One can be considered a medical problem, the other criminal.

Finally, about harm reduction.

[NDP Newbie]

I wish the UN would stop cheering on the Drug War, tacitly endorsing homophobia, and marching to the drumbeat of the "Rah! Rah! Go China!" cult.

[Alliance Fanatic]

I wish the NDP would stop supporting a culture of death,

The NDP is probably by far one of the worst parties out their, the reason why is they are so far left, and that their radical views affect the decision making process. So that means that they will continue to fight for the rights of the pedophiles at NAMBLA, force communities to have gay pride parades, and show pride in Sado-masichist sexual practices. Not to mention the rights of terrorists and criminals, drug dealers, and pimps.

[bobocop]

I wish the NDP would stop supporting a culture of death,

The NDP is probably by far one of the worst parties out their, the reason why is they are so far left, and that their radical views affect the decision making process. So that means that they will continue to fight for the rights of the pedophiles at NAMBLA, force communities to have gay pride parades, and show pride in Sado-masichist sexual practices. Not to mention the rights of terrorists and criminals, drug dealers, and pimps.

Oh wait: you're serious. Wow.

NDP's issues.

Let's see...nope, no NAMBLA....no foced pride parades....don't see anything on S&M...and the terrorists criminals, drug dealers, and pimps don't even get a mention.

So, A.F.: do you have anything at all to contribute or are you just going to keep talking out of your ass? Troll.

I don't see

- sinking our credit rating

- adding mountains of debt

but I guarentee these issues under a Jack Layton government

[Black Dog]

I don't see

- sinking our credit rating

- adding mountains of debt

but I guarentee these issues under a Jack Layton government

You guarantee, hey? Well, I'm glad we have your "expert" opinion on the matter....

But this isn't a discussion on NDP policy, it's about Vancouver's SIR and the drug war in general. Lay off the trolling.

[BigGunner]

Safe injection sites are not a new idea. They are being used elsewhere in the world and are quite successful.

The city does not control the flow of illegal drugs into the country, that is the obvious jurisdiction of the federal government. But since the fed's are more concerned with lining the pockets of friends and insiders of the Liberal party with millions of dollars of taxpayers money, border security and enforcement of the current drug laws take a back seat.

The city is forced to react to a bad situation with a unique solution.

[Alliance Fanatic]

Well Svend Robinson is the one who pushes for kids at the age of 14 to be rammed by 40 year old predators so, oh yeah, and was'nt he the one that helped kill a woman, and did'nt he support all of those students at Concordia University that spit on jews, and want jews dead. He is by far the worst of the worst, a person who has morals that are in the sewer. This is the difference between the NDP, and the Conservative Party,

The conservative party values children, and wants them to be safe from a world of drugs, prostitution, and violence, while the NDP is the one fighting for the guy in the van, trying to seduce children in a playground.

Here is another left of center initiative by your socialist wacko's

http://start.shaw.ca/start/enca/news/NewsS...rc=n030185A.xml

Here's another socialist, left wing, enlightenment for us all.

http://www.indybay.org/news/2002/06/133077.php

I maybe a troll, but at least I want to make this country a place, where children are not afraid to get molested by a creep.

[BigGunner]

Well Svend Robinson is the one who pushes for kids at the age of 14 to be rammed by 40 year old predators so, oh yeah, and was'nt he the one that helped kill a woman, and did'nt he support all of those students at Concordia University that spit on jews, and want jews dead. He is by far the worst of the worst, a person who has morals that are in the sewer. This is the difference between the NDP, and the Conservative Party,

The conservative party values children, and wants them to be safe from a world of drugs, prostitution, and violence, while the NDP is the one fighting for the guy in the van, trying to seduce children in a playground.

Here is another left of center initiative by your socialist wacko's

http://start.shaw.ca/start/enca/news/NewsS...rc=n030185A.xml

Here's another socialist, left wing, enlightenment for us all.

http://www.indybay.org/news/2002/06/133077.php

I maybe a troll, but at least I want to make this country a place, where children are not afraid to get molested by a creep.

Yes, I have reported your comments to the webmaster as defamitory...

You certainly are a troll, and you do nothing to enhance debate on here into something intellectually stimulating.

[NDP Newbie]

I think I should register with a new account.

[Pellaken]

LEGALIZE ALL DRUGS

solve your problem

[SirRiff]

i dont know why some people would be opposed to mitagating a problem when no complete solution will ever exist.

the reality of the world is that some people will do hard core drugs. we can ignore them and let them die on the streets and keep stealing to support thier habit. we can put them all in jail, which will necessitate shorter terms and lighter sentances for violent crimes, while just addiing a meaningless criminal record for a drug addict. or we can accept the problem is permanent, and try to strike a balance between punishment where effective, acceptance where needed, and tolerating where forced.

doesnt that sound like the most reasonable course of action?

[Alliance Fanatic]

Well your friend Svend did want to lower the age of consent for boys to 14, which would give members of NAMBLA, and other predators, a legal right to have sexual intercourse with 14 year olds. Which I find completely disgusting, as for the comment of me being a troll, well I want to protect children from predators which is very extremist of me. I also find it sick that people think that pedophilia is alright, so I'm sure that you find pedophilia alright from your comments.

Oh by the way thank Svend Robinson for pushing through bill C-250, now NAMBLA is protected under law, and it because of people like him that children get abused, and I'm sure that you dont know anybody who has been sexually abuse, I see alot of people who have been victims, and its because of that left wing nut, that the criminals, and scumbags are protected.

[Greg]

Wasn't this thread started to discuss, Vancouver Safe Injection Site? Let's make sure we keep the threads on topic. From the rule book,

It is important that you stay on topic and keep the discussion focused. If the thread begins to wonder off into a new topic area, start a new thread and continue the discussion under the new thread. If you feel a thread is being watered down with too many different topic areas and you do not want to start the new thread yourself, feel free to contact the Admin and request a new thread.

If someone posts an off-topic post in a thread, please contact me and continue with the original discussion. Do NOT respond to or engage that particular post as I will likely delete it.

Thanks

Greg

Admin

[BigGunner]

Well your friend Svend did want to lower the age of consent for boys to 14, which would give members of NAMBLA, and other predators, a legal right to have sexual intercourse with 14 year olds. Which I find completely disgusting, as for the comment of me being a troll, well I want to protect children from predators which is very extremist of me. I also find it sick that people think that pedophilia is alright, so I'm sure that you find pedophilia alright from your comments.

Oh by the way thank Svend Robinson for pushing through bill C-250, now NAMBLA is protected under law, and it because of people like him that children get abused, and I'm sure that you dont know anybody who has been sexually abuse, I see alot of people who have been victims, and its because of that left wing nut, that the criminals, and scumbags are protected.

You don't get it!

NO one suports paedophelia!

NO one supports the sexual assault of anyone, no matter what their age. It doesn't matter if the victim is 12, 14, 23, or 57 - rape is and always will be against the law.

If you were so concerned about the welfare of children, then perhaps you can explain the sense in conservative Premier Campbell's policy that will shut all the battered women's shelters and the one youth shelter for sexually exploited youth that is set up to help young people escape from *bad* situations in Vancouver.

Your allegation that somehow Svend is under the sway of some kind of paedophile lobby runs opposite to the facts...Svend has been with his adult partner for decades, which is an accomplishment that many heterosexual couples cannot claim anymore.

You might be a gay-hater....you are certainly entitled to your opinions...but attepting to tie them to being paedophiles is WRONG. Again, facts point out that the landslide majority of paedophiles are in fact straight.

And, yes.....your posting has again been reported as defamitory and factually incorrect.

Have a nice day

[Alliance Fanatic]

http://www.realwomenca.com/newsletter/1999.../article_1.html

Here u go, and by the way I'm not a gay hater, not all gays are pedophiles, I hate Pedophiles, I dont think thats a hate crime.

[BigGunner]

http://www.realwomenca.com/newsletter/1999.../article_1.html

Here u go, and by the way I'm not a gay hater, not all gays are pedophiles, I hate Pedophiles, I dont think thats a hate crime.

I think we can mostly agree that RealWomen is the Conservative Party's women's auxilliary. They are not exactly a bastion of proponents of womens rights. They are an anti-abortion conservative lobby group...as such, most of the 'official' views come from that hardline slant.

[JWayne625]

Safe injection sites are akin to condoning the use of drugs, and that is the last thing the authorities should be doing. If these addicts are stupid enough to use, and even more stupid to inject them to get high, then too bad for them. Why is that our responsibility to provide them with safe injection sites? Our government and other's say we should legalize pot because it is a harmless drug, but the reality is that it is not harmless, because it is a gateway drug to more addictive substances.

Most drug addicts, if they are honest will tell you that they started out by using pot and hash, and progressed from there. I facilitated a drug awareness program designed by councellors from Addictions Service for the Province of New Brunswick, and I worked for a number of years with youth and I can tell you that a good many youth feel that it is okay to smoke pot and hash. Many of these same youth I read about in the paper now that they are adults, where they have committed armed robbery, and worse, and the excuse is that they are crack or heroine addicts. They made a concious choice to develop a habit of getting high, and now they seems to want to ignore the fact that they made that choice. It is somehow not their fault that they have gone from Young Offender's to Adult Offender's, and are now in a loop that they find difficult to get out of. Many do not even want out, because it is much easier to get high, sell drugs, live the good life, than it is to get a job and a life. Why is that society's fault?

We had an instance here in the Regional Correctional Centre where an individual maimed himself by cutting off his toe because they withdrew him from a Methadone Program because upon testing they discovered that he was still using other drugs while on Methadone. The judge questioned his committment to wanting to get off drugs at all.

I agree with those who say that safe injection sites are a bad idea. It will only encourage those who want to get high, to contiue on that path. That makes about as much sense as passing a law that says; a person cannot purchase tobacco products until they are 19 years of age. Nobody is allowed to sell or purchase tobacco products for anyone under the age of 19 years of age, but once that 14 year old gains possession of those tobacco products the law does not forbid them from smoking them it public. Possession and usage of controlled substances is illegal, but the government will provide a safe injection site for people to inject those substances. Doesn't make much sense to me!

[Black Dog]

Safe injection sites are akin to condoning the use of drugs, and that is the last thing the authorities should be doing.

Yeah, much like granting liquor licences is akin to condoning alcoholism and allowing for the sale of cigarettes is akin to supporting cancer.

If these addicts are stupid enough to use, and even more stupid to inject them to get high, then too bad for them. Why is that our responsibility to provide them with safe injection sites?

Because of the tremendous social costs involved in allowing such ills to go unchecked?

Our government and other's say we should legalize pot because it is a harmless drug, but the reality is that it is not harmless, because it is a gateway drug to more addictive substances

A myth.

Most drug addicts, if they are honest will tell you that they started out by using pot and hash, and progressed from there.

As cannibis is the most common drug out there, it's no surprise many who do hard drugs have also tried pot. However, not everyone who tries pot goes on to harder drugs.

Many do not even want out, because it is much easier to get high, sell drugs, live the good life, than it is to get a job and a life. Why is that society's fault?

I very much doubt that ithe average heroin addict living on the streets of East Van would consider scrounging, begging and stealing to get their next fix to be anything like th e"good life".

We had an instance here in the Regional Correctional Centre where an individual maimed himself by cutting off his toe because they withdrew him from a Methadone Program because upon testing they discovered that he was still using other drugs while on Methadone. The judge questioned his committment to wanting to get off drugs at all.

And this individual represent all heroin addicts?

It will only encourage those who want to get high, to contiue on that path.

Not if the SIS is part of a broader harm reduction strategy aimed at reducing drug dependancy.

Nobody is allowed to sell or purchase tobacco products for anyone under the age of 19 years of age, but once that 14 year old gains possession of those tobacco products the law does not forbid them from smoking them it public.

To the best of my knowledge, there's no law forbidding anyone under 19 to smoke.

Possession and usage of controlled substances is illegal, but the government will provide a safe injection site for people to inject those substances.

That would be the sensible solution. Decades of criminalization and prohibition have done nothing to solve the drug problem: indeed, under these policies, the problem has gotten worse and exploded into an epidemic. The realities of today demand new solutions, not dogmatic devotion to the faile dpolicies of the past.

[JWayne625]

Decades of criminalization and prohibition have done nothing to solve the drug problem: indeed, under these policies, the problem has gotten worse and exploded into an epidemic.

So tell me again why that is society's problem, and why we should assist addict's in getting high by injecting an illegal substance into their veins. If we follow that same logic, ions of incarceration has done nothing stop people from committing crimes, should we maybe give them taxpayers money in the form of pensions per month so they won't be inclined to rob that corner store, to feed their habit?

It is time we revamped our justice system so that jail will be a place that nobody will want to go, instead of what we presently have where all of the luxuries of home are provided, and them some. As mentioned on this weekend's news about inmates receiving spa treatment demonstrations, or holding fashion shows which Karla was able to partake of. Our justice system has become a joke, and offers no deterant to being incarcerated thanks to organization's like John Howard, and Elizabeth Fry. I don't for a minute condone inhumane treatment of our prison population, but prison should not be a pleasant place to go. Prisoner's should be offered 3 squares, a roof over their head's, clothes on their backs, and most of all work, whether they want it or not. God forbid we make our prison population work, and make them help pay for their own incarceration. If they want recreation let them work in shops that produces something. Who knows they might even learn a useful skill that could be used to get a real job. Instead we molly-coddle them and blame society as they reason these poor unfortunate soul's wound up on the wrong side of the law.

I could care less about their self-esteem. These people have committed some terrible crimes against others and they are supposed to be incarcerated as part of their punishment, not treated to luxuries that the average person can only think about receiving. Drug addicts are no different since many of them are at this very minute are robbing the nearest corner store to pay for their next fix. How is that society's fault, and tell me again why society should pay to assist them in getting high.

Am I supposed to feel sorry for these addicted individuals? I don't think so, they made a concious choice to inject drugs into their vein's, and now you want me and other's to somehow take responsibility for that choice by providing them with a safe injection site, while healthcare is being cut back right across this country?Cry me a river! If they wind up with HIV/ AIDS or Hep. A,B or C, who is to blame? Certainly not me, I'm not the one who made the stupid choice, they are, and they alone should be responsible, not society.

[Slavik44]

So tell me again why that is society's problem, and why we should assist addict's in getting high by injecting an illegal substance into their veins. If we follow that same logic, ions of incarceration has done nothing stop people from committing crimes, should we maybe give them taxpayers money in the form of pensions per month so they won't be inclined to rob that corner store, to feed their habit?

Well society is inclined to fix that problem because even crack addicts belong to society.

The thinking behind giving them their fix is that if a crack addict decides to steal a car to pay for his fix, society will pay for it through higher insurance rates and so on and so forth no matter what happens society will foot the bill for these crack addicts wether we throw them in prison or not. Perhpas we should stop tacking such hardline stances and start saying tratment is better then punishment or encouragement. In other words, perhpas mandatory treatment after a drug conviction. I would rather foot a higher bill for treatment knowing I am truly helping a person, but that is just me.

[Black Dog]

So tell me again why that is society's problem, and why we should assist addict's in getting high by injecting an illegal substance into their veins.

As I pointed out, there's tremendous social costs involved in drug abuse. Take a stroll dowen East Hastings if you don't know what I mean. Secondly, not all drug addicts are addicts becaus ethey made a rational choice. After all, no one wakes up and decides "Hey, being a AIDS-inflicted street junkie is pretty cool!". Countless numbers of homeless and drug addicts suffer from mental illnesses which can impair judgement.

More to the point, though, I will respond with the words of a great phiolosopher: "Whatsoever you do to the least of my brothers you do unto me." As a society, we have an obligation to give a helping hand to those in need. Yes, there will be those who reject it, but that's no reason to stop trying. Society shares the costs, but in the end, reaps the benefits.

If we follow that same logic, ions of incarceration has done nothing stop people from committing crimes, should we maybe give them taxpayers money in the form of pensions per month so they won't be inclined to rob that corner store, to feed their habit?

That's a pretty crap argument, given that the existenc eof safe injection sites means addicts won't have to commit crimes to score their next fix. That's all part of the strategy of harm reduction.

It is time we revamped our justice system so that jail will be a place that nobody will want to go, instead of what we presently have where all of the luxuries of home are provided, and them some.

Have you ever been to prison? I doubt it. If prison's are as cushy as you make them out to be, people would be beating down the doors to get in (after all, yopu make it sound like the best in government-subsidized housing). It's a myth.

As for your "get tough" crap, we've got a perfect example of why that doesn't work just south of the border. There's a reason they're starting to rethink their approach down there: in the end "hard time" creates more criminals and more social problems.

Good article here.

Like the drug war, we've done it your way and it doesn't work. It's time to just admit you're wrong.

[JWayne625]

Black Dog, & Slavik44; Maybe you two bleeding hearts should apply for work at one of these safe injection sites before you try to tell me how things should be. I worked with drug addicted people involved in the criminal justice system for a number of years. I can tell that it is my experience in most cases, all we managed to accomplish was to enable criminals to escape responsibility for their offences, and in a majority of cases they are still plying their chosen professions, and they are still high a good part of the time. How do I know that, since I don't work there anymore? I read their names in the paper and hear them on the news all the time.

I'm a firm believer in making people responsible for their own choices in life. To do otherwise is to enable them to continue in a lifestyle of drug abuse and crime. Do you really think for one minute that just because you provide a drug addict with a safe injection site, that they will magically stop doing crime. It is quite obvious to me that you have never worked with criminals, and if you have, you must have dealt with a different clientele than I did, because the one's I know are still doing both, even with Methadone clinics, and crime reduction strategies in place. What is the new buzz phrase in criminology now, Oh yeah, "Restorative Justice" which is all about getting the criminal and the victim together to work out their differences. What a load of Crap. This is simply a pie-in-the-sky ideal world program dreamed up by some academic from the criminology department that looks great on paper, just like safe injection sites.

I had a supervisor where I worked who asked me what I thought was a success case from the group home, and my reply was to say; "Someone who has made a mistake, was tried, sentenced to custody, learned his lesson, left custody, and was never involved with the criminal justice system again." She asked me about a particular youth, and why I didn't think of him as a success case, and my reply was to ask her where that youth was at that time? She wouldn't answer the question, so I told her where he was. He was back in custody only this time in a secure facility. Why? Because he committed the vary same crime he had committed when he wound up in custody with us. The difference was that this time it was multiple offences, and the judge was tired of looking at him. She was lobbying to have him transferred to open custody so that he could go home on weekends. Where he generally verbally abused his grandparent's. Why didn't he live with his parents? He didn't get along with them becuase his father demanded that he follow some rules, like attending school, no alcohol, no drugs, a curfew, and Gd forbid his father wanted to know who he was hanging around with. I think that's child abuse, isn't it?