May 25th, 2024

Film on addictions a must-see here

By Letter to the Editor on November 19, 2021.

A must see for all southern Albertans is the film, “Kimmapiiyipitssini: The Meaning of Empathy,” directed by Elle-Maia Tailfeathers and filmed on Kaianai First Nations. The stories, narration and filming presents the realities of substance-use and the effects on individuals, families, communities and those providing frontline support. Maia Is a shining star in the film world. The filming shows the beauty of the foothills and the beauty and best of people struggling with addictions and those compassionate and caring individuals who provide relationship and support. Our world needs a lot more Empathy.
Patti Nicol-Pharo

Share this story:

Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Fedup Conservative

My late half breed Cherokee Indian grandfather used to say “The Indians need to stop sitting around drinking themselves to death while blaming it on the White-man. They need to go out and show the world that they are as good as them, or better. People who can survive our winters in a teepee, living off the land, aren’t stupid.
Every Indian I have told that to has agreed. “Your grandfather was a wise man” is what they usually say.
Nothing has changed instead of booze it’s drugs.


I almost never hear people talk about how by every measurement, white men make up the majority of pedophiles, serial killers, and rapists. That’s according to the FBI’s data.

It was us colonizers who forced a way of life upon the Indigenous Peoples here, while also robbing them of their own way of being, to this day.

So of course, white settlers ARE to blame for a significant amount of the socio economic problems faced by Indigenous people because this isn’t even their system. This system is designed to disenfranchise and oppress them while us white settlers benefit off of that oppression. Do you pay rent to live in their home and off of their resources? Of course not.

Meanwhile, white settlers who are institutionally racist, child rapist, serial killers get to do and be the worst that humanity has to offer while scapegoating onto brown people all over the world.

Just sayin.

Last edited 2 years ago by UncleBuck
Seth Anthony

UB said: I almost never hear people talk about how by every measurement, white men make up the majority of pedophiles, serial killers, and rapists. That’s according to the FBI’s data.

If a country has 100 million of one race, and 1 million of another race, then of course the former will have a much higher percentage of just about anything. What are the numbers Per Capita? Where is your source for your assertion? What does your statement have to do with what is occurring in Canada, or better yet, the Blood Tribe?

UB said: It was us colonizers who forced a way of life upon the Indigenous Peoples here, while also robbing them of their own way of being, to this day.

There was a war. The Indigenous people lost. Just like how tribes conquered, murdered, and plundered other tribes and their territory.

Conquering has taken place throughout history. White people have been taken over and conquered countless times. The North American empire will fall just like all empires eventually fall at the hands of another race.

UB Said: So of course, white settlers ARE to blame for a significant amount of the socio economic problems faced by Indigenous people because this isn’t even their system. This system is designed to disenfranchise and oppress them while us white settlers benefit off of that oppression. Do you pay rent to live in their home and off of their resources? Of course not.

So when are you moving off of the “stolen land”? Correction- This is not their land. It WAS their land, but they lost it in a war.

The indigenous people were living in the stone age. Hunting and slaughtering for food, with a lot of freezing / starving to death in the winter. They now have homes, infrastructure, our technology, our education, our health care, our inventions, etc. Ask any indigenous person if they would want to go back to living in the stone age. The answer would be a resounding, “Hell no”.

Furthermore, your assertion that the indigenous people are oppressed is asinine. They have far more rights, privileges, and opportunities than any other race in Canada.

Regarding their extremely high rate of addiction: Have you ever been to the blood reserve? On that reserve, the racism, hatred, and anger, is profound. Those negative emotions are being taught to the kids on the reserve. Those emotions are the main catalysts for addiction. Their attitude needs to change. If not, they’ll continuously produce addicts and criminals, which is exactly what we are seeing in Lethbridge.

BTW- You speak of the dangers of scapegoating, yet that’s almost exclusively what your post consists of.

EDIT: I just had a brief look at the following Statistics Canada report. It shows that violent crime is 9x higher in Indigenous communities compared to non-indigenous communities. Other crimes average 6x higher. In Alberta, Sask, and Manitoba, Indigenous people commit murder at approximately 15x the rate of non-indigenous.

Last edited 2 years ago by Seth Anthony

when noting majority, are you referring to sheer numbers, or are you meaning proportional? moreover, are you saying pedophilia and rape crimes are almost never committed by natives? murder?
moreover, i am grossed out by your racist, ignorant, hate crime of statement that, erroneously, states that white people are “…are institutionally racist, child rapist, serial killers….”

Seth Anthony

Not even 1 brown person in the city of Maple Ridge has ever committed a murder! But 36 white people, and 33 black people have! So you see, white and black people kill way more people than brown people.

–Maple Ridge has no brown people–

See my edit in my previous post.

Last edited 2 years ago by Seth Anthony

haha! nice 🙂


i further find it exceptional how racist and hateful statements can be uttered by “minorities” about whites, especially white males, without the repercussions that would be applied were such remarks uttered by whites and directed at “minorities.”

Seth Anthony

It gets even worse than that. I’m talking about people being accused of racism, when they didn’t say anything even remotely racist. That kind of thing happens all too often on Lethbridge’s social media sites.

For example, what I wrote in this thread about the blood reserve is nothing but the objective (non emotional) truth. Even Dr. Tailfeathers has spoken about the parenting issues, and how an astonishing and heartbreaking, 39% of babies born on the blood reserve, are addicted to narcotics. That number doesn’t even include babies born with FAS. This should be considered a national health emergency. But anyway, it identifies why their addiction rate is so high, and suggests ways to help the problem. Yet, if I or someone else were to post that information on one of Lethbridge’s Facebook pages, then I would receive a lot of “Likes” for the information, but many Indigenous people (and some non-indigenous) would accuse me of being racist. Well, I know because I tried doing it one time.

In other words, it’s now common to be accused of racism, even if the information is helpful and truthful, but the recipient doesn’t like what was said. So many others know what’s happening on the reserve, but they’re afraid to talk about it lest they be accused of racism.

There are just as many people, council members, etc, who claim, “We need to do this and that for the indigenous people”. Yet, they have never even been to the blood reserve, and have no clue as to what’s occurring there. At best, they might have driven through the reserve, or even talked to some administrators in the nice administrator buildings. Doing that will give them a false impression. They need to spend a lot of time, like I and others have, talking to the people in the heart of the reserve (townsite).

Last edited 2 years ago by Seth Anthony

racism does indeed get tossed around as though it can used as hand grenade these days. it is a word that often is used to stifle honest discussion.
it must be very difficult to be native and “successful.” if a native has a profession, be it with regard to a trade or academia, one is often shunned by natives that are struggling, and the term “apple” is used derisively – red outside, but white inside – because they chose to find a meaningful way to contribute to the whole of society. talk about the cost of “success.”
somehow, some way, the cycle of trauma and fasd needs to get cut (being born with addictions is not good, but that is relatively easy to overcome). i am not sure what is the answer for this. we have been a long time with no answers coming from fed’l and prov’l govts. as for very many band councils, they also seem to have no answers, and are roughly as self serving and corrupt as their fed’l and prov’l scoundrels.


If you think FASD is a ‘relatively easy to overcome’ please think again for it is not. Even if an FASD does not do drugs/alcohol they have a Huge road ahead of them physically, mentally and socially. Not good stories. They also need 24/7 care some forever through their lives. Is FASD even taught in our schools??? You don’t have to be an addict to have a child born FASD… one night partying can and does the trick unfortunately.

Les Elford

I had the pleasure of seeing this excellent, professional, film last week and agree. Kudos, to Dr. Esther Tailfeathers and her medical team, Ella- Maia Tailfeathers, all the individuals who worked on this project; the band police, EMS, fire department the band council, the volunteers patrolling the streets of Lethbridge and the reserve.

Thank you for your; initiative, your drive, your motivation, your selfless acts, your empathy, and determination and persistence to make life better for those in the most need.

I wish you all the best and success in your endeavors. I hope more people learn of the important and valuable work you are doing and ideally try to help in their own way.

Kudo’s as well to the UCP for their recent recognition and influx of additional funding for the homeless shelters throughout the province. 

Tragedy occurs in many ways; and numerous reasons homelessness which could impact any of us, at any given time. Many individuals in BC are now homeless due to an environmental disaster. Some may recover fully; some may not… all due to no fault of their own.

Regardless; ours is not to judge; but to exhibit love, compassion, and empathy to those who need it.  Hopefully, if the worst case scenario happens to you or I someday;…… maybe  someone will be kind enough to exhibit the same to us.

I have often thought the development of a community of tiny houses would be great for the homeless. Ideally in an empty ware house which could also be retrofitted into a rehabilitation facility for those do willing. 
Construction of tiny homes would be costly. I now am beginning to feel with winter coming, even just having Costco tents for shelter ($300.00) or old army surplus tents would be better for many currently.

Obviously the status quo is not really the answer.  Yes; having a home or safe shelter is only one piece of the pie. But imagine what could happen; if a group of likeminded, creative individuals could put away their differences and work  in Lethbridge on a proactive basis for improvement to the social issues homelessness involves.

Kind of like what Dr. Esther Tailfeathers and her team have taken the initiative to do on the reserve.        

Please consider reading the following excellent article from the Edmonton Journal; “Homelessness is not a crime. It is the result of a socioeconomic system that allows people to be excluded from owning or renting a home.”
Les Elford

Seth Anthony

Homelessness is the result of a socioeconomic system that allows people to be excluded from owning or renting a home.”

This is false. Let’s take Lethbridge for example. The large majority of “Homeless”, are young indigenous people that already had a home. They left their home willingly, or were kicked out because of their drug and/or alcohol abuse. In other words, it had nothing to do with economics. Addiction is the main cause of homelessness, and the main cause of that addiction is what I addressed in my post to UncleBuck.

Also, a quote from the lady in the link you posted:

“As a homeless 16-year-old, the options social services gave me were to go to a group home, return to an abusive family or go it alone”.

Note two things: 1) The poor parenting (abusive family) that she spoke of, and what I spoke of in my post to UB. 2) She could have gone to a group home where she would have had food and other sorts of assistance, but instead, she chose to be homeless. She then blames her homelessness and other things on “the system”. Most of the other stuff she said is BS as well, but I won’t get into that right now.

The author (and so many others), thinks poverty is a main cause of addiction, but trauma is the main cause. The irony is, the lady he wrote about to try and prove his point, actually proves him wrong. lol

Last edited 2 years ago by Seth Anthony
Dennis Bremner

Vancouver’s experiment with safe-injection sites is a dead end for addicts—and a public-health risk.
Christopher F. Rufo
The Social Order
Public safety
Every major city in the United States seems to have its designated opioid district, a tucked-away part of town where normal rules are suspended and the drug trade shapes the social order: Kensington in Philadelphia, the Tenderloin in San Francisco, Pioneer Square in Seattle. The scenes are sadly familiar: disheveled men and women living under blue tarpaulins, dealers doing hand-to-hand transactions between large trash receptacles, and dope fiends searching with their fingertips for the last good vein. Methadone clinics and rescue missions operate amid a steady rumble of ambulances and police cruisers, vehicles sent not to enforce public order but to manage the status quo.
Political leaders have long sought to transform these places. Among progressive policymakers, the prevailing trend is “harm reduction,” a public-health approach that accepts widespread drug use and directs resources toward mitigating its negative consequences. Harm reduction began with needle exchange and methadone clinics, which helped, respectively, to reduce the transmission of blood-borne diseases and to stabilize addicts with opioid replacements. Now, as Western nations confront the opioid crisis, cities in Canada, Australia, and Europe have adopted a new harm-reduction strategy: so-called safe-injection sites, where addicts can take drugs—predominantly heroin and methamphetamine—under the supervision of medical professionals, who intervene in case of emergency.
Public-health officials and progressive leaders often cite Vancouver, Canada, as the gold standard of harm reduction. Over the past 30 years, Vancouver has implemented the full range of harm-reduction strategies. The centerpiece of the city’s current efforts is the Insite safe-injection facility on East Hastings Street, which has drawn the attention of academics and media from around the world. Advocates argue that such facilities can prevent fatal overdoses, reduce rates of infection, connect addicts to social services, and mitigate street disorder, with few negative consequences.
What’s happening in Vancouver can hardly be categorized as a success, however. Though harm reduction has brought some benefits, such as reducing the transmission of HIV, it has also compounded the problems of addiction, homelessness, and public disorder. Vancouver’s concentration of services in its own opioid district, the Downtown Eastside, has created a veritable death trap for addicts around British Columbia, who travel there to obtain drugs, overdose, and then perish in the streets.
As cities in the United States, including San Francisco, Denver, Philadelphia, and Seattle, consider opening their own safe-injection sites, they should understand the full consequences of these practices. Beneath the narrow certainties of the academic literature runs a deeper story that reveals the hidden costs of harm reduction. As the coronavirus begins to spread in opioid districts throughout North America, policymakers must reconsider the wisdom of concentrating vulnerable, immunocompromised populations in tight quarters, where they can become vectors for a catastrophic outbreak.
On the surface, Vancouver is an unlikely location for an opioid epidemic. In popular imagination, the crisis is taking place in impoverished inner-city slums or forgotten rural communities. According to the influential “deaths of despair” hypothesis, the opioid crisis is most pronounced in communities exposed to “prolonged economic distress,” leading to a decline in life expectancy for middle-aged men. But Vancouver is neither West Baltimore nor West Virginia—it’s one of the world’s most prosperous and progressive cities, with a booming economy, liberal leadership, and universal health care. And yet, despite this affluence, the city faces one of the worst drug problems on record. Since 2008, overdose deaths in British Columbia are up 151 percent, with Vancouver’s numbers driving much of the increase. According to CTV News, Vancouver’s “paramedics and dispatchers are feeling fatigued and burnt out” by the pace of opioid overdoses, “and some are experiencing occupational stress injuries such as post-traumatic stress disorder.”
The Downtown Eastside neighborhood is ground zero for the troubles. For the past century, the area has been Vancouver’s Skid Row, home to a dense network of cheap hotels, bars, brothels, and, increasingly, homeless encampments and social-services offices. It’s here, across ten city blocks, that Vancouver has launched its experiment in harm reduction, opening Canada’s first needle exchange in 1988 and North America’s first safe-injection facility in 2003. Rather than try to disperse the Downtown Eastside’s social pathologies throughout the region, policymakers have decided to concentrate new subsidized housing construction, welfare services, and drug programs in the neighborhood. Total social spending in the Downtown Eastside now amounts to more than $1 million per day.
Despite these intensive efforts, the city has failed meaningfully to reduce rates of addiction, homelessness, and criminality in the neighborhood, which remains the epicenter for all overdose deaths in the region. In 2017, the City of Vancouver logged 8,000 overdose calls, with the Downtown Eastside responsible for 5,000 of the total, even with a population of only a few thousand residents. The situation has become ever more chaotic, as Covid-19 threatens to spread among many homeless men and women who have nowhere else to go.
For the addicts caught up in the Downtown Eastside’s web of social programs, the results are not encouraging. According to a ten-year longitudinal study by Simon Fraser University professor Julian Somers, even the most service-intensive interventions failed to produce better outcomes. In his study of 433 addicts enrolled in Vancouver at Home, a program offering free housing and comprehensive services, Somers concluded that “despite the high concentration of services and supports in the [Downtown Eastside], members of the current sample experienced significant personal decline rather than recovery, as evidenced by their involvements with criminal justice, large increases in acute care and prolonged homelessness.” Over ten years, Somers writes, “participants’ use of community medical services and hospital services each tripled, while criminal convictions and welfare receipt doubled.”
“According to the latest numbers, more than 1,500 overdoses a year have taken place within a block of the Insite facility.”
Even the key claim of harm-reduction advocates—that safe-injection sites reduce overdose deaths—loses much of its rhetorical power when viewed in context. While it’s true that Insite recorded 189,837 visits last year without any fatalities on the premises, the Downtown Eastside streets saw more overdose deaths than ever. It’s not that addicts who use the safe-injection site are achieving sobriety; they’re just not dying on the floor of the Insite injection room. According to the latest numbers, more than 1,500 overdoses a year have taken place within a block of the Insite facility in the Downtown Eastside. And even the “no deaths on the premises” statistic might be misleading. As a secret recording from the Powell Street Getaway facility reveals, it’s possible for addicts to overdose at safe-injection sites, and then die en route to the hospital or after they have returned to the streets.
More broadly, if the objective is to maximize overdose reversals, safe-injection sites may not be the most efficient method of achieving this goal. According to the BC Centre for Disease Control, British Columbia currently sees between 1,000 and 2,000 overdose reversals per month. These are primarily administered in the field by paramedics, law enforcement, community members, and other drug users. The government’s decentralized Take Home Naloxone and Facility Overdose Response programs, which distribute overdose-reversal kits into the community, cover a much broader territory and deliver much greater results than brick-and-mortar safe-injection sites, with less potential for negative spillover effects.
Finally, even if one accepts the purported benefits of safe-injection sites, the solution cannot scale to serve the addict population in the Downtown Eastside. The Insite facility has a $3 million annual budget, 12-seat injection room, and averages 700 to 800 visits per day—but according to the latest data, these figures represent only 4 percent of the total number of daily injections in the Downtown Eastside. In other words, if policymakers were to scale safe-injection sites to meet the overall rate of neighborhood drug consumption, they would need to build 25 more facilities in the Downtown Eastside alone—a political, financial, and spatial impossibility.
The Downtown Eastside is one of the world’s most heavily studied neighborhoods. A cursory glance through the academic literature reveals at least 6,500 peer-reviewed papers, journal articles, and scientific reports that focus on life there. According to the National Post, the neighborhood is home to “more than 170 nonprofits clustered in an area of only a few blocks, all devoted towards supporting an increasingly dense community of addicts.” An entire social-scientific sector is devoted to solving the problems of the Downtown Eastside, to little avail.
Indeed, these efforts have contributed to a “magnet effect” that encourages opioid addicts from around British Columbia to move into the neighborhood in search of social programs, a permissive social environment, and easy access to drugs. According to the Simon Fraser University study, from 2005 to 2015, the number of homeless addicts who had migrated to the Downtown Eastside from outside the neighborhood increased from 17 percent to 52 percent of the overall population. In the name of compassion, public officials have created perverse incentives that are worsening homelessness, overdoses, and crime.
As it turns out, much of the academic literature in support of the current harm-reduction policy is more about activism than hard science. According to a recent survey by the RAND Corporation, nearly 80 percent of the literature on safe-injection sites is made up of studies from just two facilities: Insite in Vancouver and the Medically Supervised Injection Centre, in Sydney, Australia. As the RAND scholars conclude, these studies are neither rigorous nor definitive, and they often ignore the potential for community-level harm and second-order effects. “We conducted our own assessment of the individual studies,” the report argues, “and found that the evidence base concerning the overall effects of SCSs [supervised consumption sites] is limited in quality and location.”
Even worse, as a recent investigation by the Huffington Post revealed, one activist-researcher who had lobbied for the original funding for Insite coauthored all 33 studies of the facility from 2003 to 2009. Unsurprisingly, they showed unanimously positive results. Some of these studies were even produced in collaboration with the Vancouver Area Network of Drug Users, an activist group that requires researchers to agree to their rules, including: “if researchers want to work with us they should really become allies of our movement,” “we want to see the research—in progress—to give feedback,” and “[researchers must] present us with an explanation and action plan on how the research will contribute to the empowerment and liberation of people who use drugs.” This is the language of radicalism, not science, and any study conducted under such auspices should be treated with skepticism.

Safe-injection advocates have positioned themselves as the arbiters of a morally neutral, scientific objectivity, dismissing dissenters as “deniers.” But the advocates have constructed their argument on the moral foundation of “harm reduction,” which cannot be evaluated simply as a neutral science. Though it has proved a valuable tool in some cases—for example, preventing infections and reversing overdoses—harm reduction makes profound assumptions about human nature that must be subjected to a broader public debate.
The critical question facing neighborhoods like the Downtown Eastside is: What is the desired end? Mark Tyndall, a physician and leading harm-reduction advocate in Vancouver, believes that the goal of sobriety—the traditional telos of both medicine and public policy, when it comes to drug abuse—is outdated and should be abandoned. The real objective, he argues, should not be recovery from addiction but the maintenance of addiction, possibly in perpetuity. “People have these unrealistic expectations like . . . we need to get [safe-injection users] abstinent and recovered,” Tyndall explains. “That so rarely happens to people that I don’t have those expectations anymore. I want to keep people alive and relatively healthy and hope for the best.”
The flaw of harm-reduction theory is that it contains no natural limits. Convinced that safe-injection sites are insufficient, Tyndall and his colleagues at the BC Centre for Disease Control are launching a pilot program to provide addicts with a “clean supply” of opioids through “ATM-style machines—with biometric scanners, real-time monitoring and alarm systems—that would distribute the pills to patients.” The Vancouver Mayor’s Overdose Emergency Task Force has endorsed the plan, recommending that the city “prioritize and identify space for a suitable location for a storefront service space, either in or adjacent to the Downtown Eastside.”
The vision of ATM-style opioid dispensers evokes Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World, in which an opioid-style drug, soma, is given to the lower castes. This approach threatens to reduce man into a machine. It’s no giant leap from the state-sanctioned distribution of soma to the untouchables of the World State to the administration of “clean” hydromorphone to the desperate tent-dwellers of East Hastings Street.
Huxley’s novel illustrates how the science of addiction can’t be untangled from its moral, political, and philosophical dimensions. Huxley’s fear was that, without restraint, addiction could become the dominant refuge from the difficulties of existence. “There’s always soma to calm your anger, to reconcile you to your enemies, to make you patient and long-suffering,” he wrote. “In the past you could only accomplish these things by making a great effort and after years of hard moral training. Now, you swallow two or three half-gramme tablets, and there you are. Anybody can be virtuous now. You can carry at least half your morality about in a bottle. Christianity without tears—that’s what soma is.”
Harm reduction is ultimately a pessimistic philosophy. It rests on the premise that human beings are subordinated to biological determinism, with almost no room for agency, hope, or grace, and maintains that science can lead us out of the darkness of addiction and human despair. Yet despite harm reduction’s influence over social policy for decades now, there seems no end in sight for the disorder of neighborhoods like the Downtown Eastside. As tents continue to line the streets of major cities, the addiction crisis demands an answer. Harm reduction isn’t it.


And you don’t need a secret recording to know that a SCS or an OPS(over dose prevention site) client who dies in the SCS, it’s parking lot , right across the street or in the ambulance is not declared technically dead until viewed by a doctor. So they are often declared officially dead at the hospital. Even though they actually died in say, the parking lot of the SCS. But the SCS doesn’t have to record it as such.
Also, Arches &or Alpha house staff can say they never receive any complaints about their clients. I have no doubt they don’t as people call the police or the city to complain. I suggest that people email for a paper trail,the city ,the police AND Alpha house. Also, people may not know that behaviors they are complaining about are on occasion , from Alpha house clients. If they did perhaps they would also report to Alpha house directly. Because they don’t Alpha house staff can say,”We have never received any complaints”.
All of this is important for accurate data collection. Data that is needed to make INFORMED decisions.
Also ,I believe that Christopher F. Rufo has produced a video(12 minutes). All city staff in affected departments and city Councilors as well as ALL affected party’s should goggle Christopher F. Rufo to see it. As he points out, “Compassion should not be measured by intentions but by outcomes”!
A person may also dare to ask ,where is the compassion of Tribe councils that board up the homes and kick out the drug addicts on the reserve?

Seth Anthony

I saw that video a few days ago. It’s exactly what I, and many others have been trying to point out all along. BUT, people don’t want to know the truth about homelessness, and the video explains why they don’t want to know it. Those people just outright ignore the fact that homelessness has very little to do with socio-economic issues, capitalism, racism, etc. Those things can be argued to be minor factors, but the main factor is childhood trauma which leads to destructive addiction.

To watch the short video, Google, “Christopher F. Rufo homelessness”

Last edited 2 years ago by Seth Anthony

Why did the Blood Reserve close their shelter for the summer? Is it even open again and how often? How is their detox run?

Seth Anthony

I doubt I’ll watch the film, because I’m certain it won’t tell the truth. More specifically, I fully suspect it will be all about blaming others, not taking responsibility for one’s actions, and won’t even mention the poor parenting that inflicts trauma and creates addicts.

For example, the film has been described as:

“Heart-breaking but should be mandatory viewing for policy-makers to understand what opioids are doing to families”.

Whoever wrote that, is either disingenuous, or clueless. It shouldn’t be, “what opioids are doing to their families”. It should be, “what those parents and other adults are often teaching their kids”. Which is, negative psychological attributes that leads to escapism (addiction).

Indigenous people claim that generational trauma is causing their astronomically high addiction rate (which is exactly what I’m talking about). The difference is, they mainly talk about it in a way that prohibits taking any sort of responsibility for their actions after said trauma. For example:

If an abused child becomes a parent, then psychologically abuses their children (deliberately or not), is it the fault of the person that abused the parent, or is the onus on the parent for passing on their trauma? I suggest it’s the latter. Suggesting the former would not only be illogical, but it’s inevitable outcome is a constant, and never ending production of young addicts. That’s exactly what we are seeing in the Lethbridge homeless, and that’s the cycle that must end.

Last edited 2 years ago by Seth Anthony