....to think the term 'junkie' is hugely offensive and ignorant....

[InFlames]

...following on from the Amy Winehouse thread...this will either take off or I'll be slammed for bad nettiquette won't I?


I think the term 'junkies' is really offensive. Would you refer to people experiencing psychosis or schizophrenia as 'psychos'?

AIBU?

[InFlames]

I agree it is a nightmare - very sad, very scary. And no you're right I can't and don't expect everyone to agree with me or not use it. I see it the same as words use to describe learning difficulties and ethnicity - it's definitely used more commonly than those terms - but I think the same misunderstanding and judgement and dismissal is behind it's use.

[hairfullofsnakes]

But flames just because you find it ignorant it doesn't mean that others have to agree with you or that you are right...

I don't think I would use the term junkie but I dont really find it offensive - to me drug addiction is very sad, very scary and a horrible nightmare. Some addicts deserve sympathy, some don't.

[InFlames]

I personally find it ignorant because it has the potential to minimise and dismiss, and to be used in a derogatory manner.

[maighdlin]

see this thread has expanded slightly but of course "junkie" is an offensive word its supposed to be!!!!! its supposed to be a derogatory word as it is generally used in a derogatory way. there are thousands of words like that. plus maybe im being thick but why is it ignorant? if you called koreans "dog eaters" then that would be ignorant as you would be assuming all koreans eat dogs. "junkie" is a slang word for drug addicts, the common ground is that they are addicted to drugs. calling all drug addicts thieves would be wrong as they are not all thieves, but they are all "junkies" for the meaning of the word "junkies", IYSWIM.

[InFlames]

Starting from the bottom up, one less person addicted to drugs is one less sale for a dealer, and - eventually - one less child being used as a mule.

Seem like common ground to me? Hey ho.

[LadyOfTheManor]

Because rather than pat the poor junkies on the head, I have to see the 5 year olds being forced to carry drugs around, so the people you feel massive amounts of sympathy for, get their hit.

[InFlames]

Which is fantastic and must be very rewarding - my point was that you don't work with people with addictions - you are working with the consequences of powerful drug dealers, so am I.

Common ground if not common opinions?

[LadyOfTheManor]

No I don't, but back home I help out with the children that are forced to act as mules crossing the water to bring the stuff into Spain.

[InFlames]

Do you? If so I apologise for any assumption.

[LadyOfTheManor]

So because I don't sit down and sympathise with addicts it means I don't do anything to help the drug situation in society?

How do you know I don't work in customs, preventing the bastard stuff coming in?

[InFlames]

Though as I've said, I think we're not going to shift each other's views on this, at all, so best to stop now.

[InFlames]

I think, with your attitude, you cannot possibly work with people with addictions.

[LadyOfTheManor]

How do you know what I do? How do you know what I do to change things?

[hairfullofsnakes]

I have sympathy for those who deal with the fall-out from addiction - the parents, the spouses, the children...

I say this as someone who was an addict (not to drugs, something else) and I never had much sympathy for myself either!

[InFlames]

Yep not something I could do :-) Far too opinionated for one thing !! And very passionate about this issue - most MH issues will get me riled and soapbox standing - I'm fortunate to have a career where I can legitimately do this in many ways!

There have been a lot of Amy inspired posts - hopefully some are helpful tho especially the ones with very personal experiences.

[LyingWitchInTheWardrobe2726]

No of course no, InFlames, I'm guessing we're just both very opinionated about things... I can live with that.

It's just all become a little 'Winehouse-bandwagon-jumping' here today. Inevitable I suppose.

I was nodding at your post saying that you couldn't work with perpetrators. I did a three-month stint in Social Services taking minutes and couldn't stop glaring at them during case conferences. Everything seemed to be focused on the perpetrator, what he needed.... nothing for the victim. I've never wanted a pair of blunt rusty shears so badly in my life before...

[InFlames]

right and who ... I miss buttons, stupid iPhone.

[InFlames]

No you're ight lying but I do know no one go worked with addictions would hold those views, so it was a semi reasonable assumption.

I started the thread after it became a diversion from the other thread - much as I am not arbiter of discussion topics, I'm guessing you're not either?

[LyingWitchInTheWardrobe2726]

How do you know who anybody is or what they do, InFlames? You're not the arbiter of discussion topics and whether you agree with somebody's perspective or not there's no need to belittle their viewpoint.

Agree with hairfulofsnakes about starting this thread. Bad form.

[InFlames]

Difference between us LOTM is that I am working to try and change things - you are not.

[michglas]

Someone with a drug addiction chose to take those drugs in the first place (apart from extreme circumstances where someone is forced), and so I would term them as a 'junkie' or 'druggie'. It is of their own doing and I have no sympathy in the majority of cases.

[InFlames]

hair I moved - well tried to! - the discussion that I was told represented a diversion from the thread it was on.

[hairfullofsnakes]

Yabu to start this thread because of another thread - and petty and childish!

[InFlames]

I think there is no shifting some people's black and White, holier-than-thou-ness. Am done trying here with you LOTM.

[InFlames]

Yes - I think the long term cost of addiction- to health, society and family- far outweighs the short term cost of intensive and timely treatment.