The only question that I have is this:  Our paramedics carry a range of lifesaving drugs on board to every assistance call, but the certainly don't carry all drugs - not even all potentially life-saving drugs.  Therefore - can the city simply choose not to stock narcan on its emergency vehicles?  Can a call to an overdose scene just be a simple transport to medical facilities?

Sure - I know - someone somewhere somehow - should get paid for the service, but isn't the hospital at least able to make some sort of medicaid claim or something in that case?  

Considering just how over budget we are on the supply of one particular drug - we should and frankly we must - find a way to either lower the cost of the drug, quit dispensing it or find a way to get these addicts to pay for their own self-created mess.  I know that sounds harsh - but I believe the minute that you decide to deliberately poison your own body in such a manner it is no longer the debt of society to ensure your health, well-being and certainly not to determine your life/death.  Personal responsibility is a dying trait in our world today.

Furthermore - I agree.  I kinda wish  Mr. Picard hadn't backed down - seems to me as though the city's legal team had enough of the questions and the controversy and said to back down....but I'm more on the Sheriff's side here.  He's pulling the 7up defense - and the sad truth is they can't raise more than a handful of people to picket him over the decision....

All things said, I'm glad Mr. Picard asked the question.  It got blown out of proportion by the media (fake news, yada, yada) and he got a two-week national media (actually worldwide) spotlight out of it.  Now - he just needs to make another suggestion to keep the ball rolling until we find a solution that takes the taxpayer off the hook (at least the local taxpayer) for good.

Bob

Here's a letter sent to the editor of the Journal-News regarding said story, dovetails with Mr. Picard's suggestion:

Dear Editor: 

While I sympathize with her feelings – I must point out that the facts of the story lead to a different conclusion.

Ms. Turco herself – at a point of desperation over his substance abuse – kicked her stepson out of the house.

Why?  I can only imagine that it was an act of love, tough love.  I regret that Ms. Turco doesn’t see Mr. Picard’s suggestion nor Sheriff Jones’ decision as the same.

It is never fair, never seems right, never should a parent have to do it – but Ms. Turco found herself at that point.  We as a society have reached that same point.  It isn’t fair, it isn’t right – and we shouldn’t have to do it – but now is the time.

Bob