Writing for RealClearInvestigations, Leighton Woodhouse details the sad story of a man whose young adult son was addicted to drugs and eventually died as various medical and rehab places didn't do everything possible to save him. Seen from the parents' perspective, it is hard not to sympathize.
So I ask myself, why did the various hospitals and clinics the lad came into contact with treat him perfunctorily? Obviously I don't know for sure but I suspect the answer is buried in some of the following suppositions.
Had the young man been the first drug addict they'd ever treated, they might have done more. Sad experience has shown many such places that most addicts cannot be turned around and detoxed more than briefly. After many failures the clinics end up going through the motions, convinced doing more is futile.
There is no place to send addicts unless they volunteer, and few do. Even then, there are probably too few beds and a waiting list for the few volunteers for rehab/detox. While waiting, they go back on drugs.
The young man was also described as psychotic in addition to his addiction, and the write-up tries to blame the psychosis on the drugs. Perhaps so, but I suspect it is equally likely that the drugs were his self-help attempt to medicate for the psychosis, to ease or suppress his mental pain and confusion.
I sometimes wonder if Washington's policy-making swamp-dwellers don't very privately view the fentanyl deaths as a kind of self-administered final solution for screwed up people. They would not admit holding such a view, but I infer its existence from their policy choices.
