Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

https://www.wusa9.com/amp/article/news/local/virginia/narcan-arlington-public-libraries-how-to-find-drug-reversal-medication/65-d7b63b14-9311-410c-ac2f-69b5116d9685
 

ARLINGTON, Va. — The overdose reversal medication Narcan will be available at all seven Arlington Public Library locations starting in June. 

Narcan is a nasal spray that can reverse the effects of an overdose from opioids, including prescription painkillers, heroin, and/or fentanyl.

As part of the Arlington Addiction Recovery Initiative, the nasal spray will be placed in overdose emergency boxes, which can be found at most branches' public access points. The emergency boxes at the Aurora Hills and Glencarlyn locations will be available so employees can easily access them. 
 

Why are librarians tasked with this shit? Why?

Posted
4 minutes ago, Nicole44 said:

Why are librarians tasked with this shit? Why?

Why are we expecting elementary teachers to be armed bodyguards?

Because our society has no more safety nets.

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
18 minutes ago, Nicole44 said:

Why are librarians tasked with this shit? Why?

Because it's a city facility that is open to the public, and they don't want to tie up police, fire stations, or city hall with it.

And like Kyrie said, plenty of homeless around.

Edited by atomheartbevo
Posted
2 minutes ago, Kyrie Eleison said:

because street and homeless addicts frequent libraries, especially in the summer...it's climate controlled, quiet and free.   

this is smart policy.

So librarians like my friend are tasked with that bullshit? They are understaffed and now are supposed to take care of addicts

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, Foosters said:

Do you have a different proposal to stop addicts from OD'ing in libraries?

I felt like this was a Good Samaritan type deal. Why narcan someone that’s already on their way out?

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, Nicole44 said:

So librarians like my friend are tasked with that bullshit? They are understaffed and now are supposed to take care of addicts

There's no duty to assist, so if your librarian friends are as uncomfortable with the prospect as you are, they can let them die. 

I'm really not seeing the issue. AEDs are installed all over the place, with the expectation that if someone collapses with a potentially fatal heart issue, someone nearby can assist. Does that upset you?

Edit: DG beat me to it

Edited by Foosters
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
Just now, Degenerate Gardner said:

I know what you mean. AEDs always piss me off in public places too. Am I supposed to be a cardiologist? Just let ‘em die.

Let’s just let the librarians save them! 

Posted
2 minutes ago, Nicole44 said:

So librarians like my friend are tasked with that bullshit? They are understaffed and now are supposed to take care of addicts

Bullshit? All they do is puff a spray in a nostril then call 911. How is this any different than a defibrillator? Heck this is easier than a defibrillator.

  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted
1 minute ago, Foosters said:

There's no duty to assist, so if your librarian friends are as uncomfortable with the prospect as you are, they can let them die. 

I'm really not seeing the issue. AEDs are installed all over the place, with the expectation that if someone collapses with a potentially fatal heart issue, someone nearby can assist. Does that upset you?

Edit: DG beat me to it

It’s about drug overdose. 

 

2 minutes ago, VirginiaLonghorn said:

Must have something to do with the Dewey Decimal System.

UHF!!!

Posted
Just now, Zepol87 said:

I don't really see a problem with this. 

Perplexing, isnt it? 

I think Nicole honestly thinks the addicts deserve their fate. That's really the only explanation.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Foosters said:

Perplexing, isnt it? 

I think Nicole honestly thinks the addicts deserve their fate. That's really the only explanation.

I'll be honest. Addicts deserving their fate is a more defensible position to me than "But Librarians!"

I mean, Libraries are going to be required to have fire extinguishers all over their building per the code. But I doubt there's anything in their job requirement that says if they see an inferno they're required to grab it and go fight the fucking fire. Same fucking thing here. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
2 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

I'll be honest. Addicts deserving their fate is a more defensible position to me than "But Librarians!"

I mean, Libraries are going to be required to have fire extinguishers all over their building per the code. But I doubt there's anything in their job requirement that says if they see an inferno they're required to grab it and go fight the fucking fire. Same fucking thing here. 

6jwzfn.jpg

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 2
  • Drool 1
Posted
18 minutes ago, Nicole44 said:

I felt like this was a Good Samaritan type deal. Why narcan someone that’s already on their way out?

This is disgusting.  You've gone off the deep end. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

I fail to see how "It's about drug overdose" is a germane response to what Foosters posted.

It’s not. My point is grown adults take substances and that is their right. Why should librarians be caught in some legal quagmire? So if an heroin addict OD’s in front of a library and they have narcan they are always supposed to save them?

5 minutes ago, Foosters said:

Perplexing, isnt it? 

I think Nicole honestly thinks the addicts deserve their fate. That's really the only explanation.

No.

Posted

"Yeah I was thinking about becoming a librarian but then I saw that the city had an expectation that I might attempt to spend 30 seconds to save another human being's life one in a blue moon and I was like fuck that"

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 2
Posted
2 minutes ago, Js1 said:

This is disgusting.  You've gone off the deep end. 

I’m not an asshole and you know this. Just got off a call from a friend of mine (saving the same person over and over) and now there is some legal liability? 

Posted
6 minutes ago, Nicole44 said:

Why should librarians be caught in some legal quagmire? So if an heroin addict OD’s in front of a library and they have narcan they are always supposed to save them?

What the fuck are you talking about? If you saw a toddler drowning in a pool would you think "ah you know, I could save them but it isn't my kid. Don't want to get caught up in some sort of legal situation here."

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
8 minutes ago, Nicole44 said:

It’s not. My point is grown adults take substances and that is their right. Why should librarians be caught in some legal quagmire? So if an heroin addict OD’s in front of a library and they have narcan they are always supposed to save them?

No.

I think it's been established that the librarian doesn't have to do shit if they don't want to do shit. 

  • Like 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, Nicole44 said:

I’m not an asshole and you know this. Just got off a call from a friend of mine (saving the same person over and over) and now there is some legal liability? 

Again, as multiple people have pointed out, this does not create a legal duty for your librarian friends who live in Arlington, VA, anymore than the installation of a fire extinguisher or an AED does.

And to clarify, your librarian friend has saved the same addict multiple times from death, but is concerned now that there may be a requirement that she do so?

Edited by Foosters
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

Well, let me give you a hint, junior. Maybe we can live without

libraries, people like you and me. Maybe. Sure, we're too old to change

the world, but what about that kid, sitting down, opening a book, right

now, in a branch at the local library and finding drawings of pee-pees

and wee-wees on the Cat in the Hat and the Five Chinese Brothers the librarian spraying narcan up some bum's nose?

Doesn't HE deserve better? Look. If you think this is about overdue

fines and missing books, you'd better think again. This is about that

kid's right to read a book without getting his mind warped! Or: maybe

that turns you on, Seinfeld; maybe that's how y'get your kicks. You and

your good-time buddies. Well I got a flash for ya, joy-boy: Party time

is over. 

  • Hook 'Em 6
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, Foosters said:

Again, as multiple people have pointed out, this does not create a legal duty for your librarian friends who live in Alexandria, VA, anymore than the installation of a fire extinguisher or an AED does.

And to clarify, your librarian friend has saved the same addict multiple times from death, but is concerned now that there may be a requirement that she do so?

My friend gave narcan to someone he has given it multiple times before. At least four times. What is the point? 
 

@Js1 please don’t hate on me. 
 

 

Edited by Nicole44
Posted

There is so much wrong with this. 

The very idea that a public library is a great place for homeless junkies to hang out, for starts.

Then the idea that a librarian should be tasked with saving the homeless junkies from the consequences of their own actions.

Hopefully, the librarians are indemnified for any adverse outcomes with respect to said homeless junkies.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, Nicole44 said:

My friend gave narcan to someone he has given it multiple times before. At least four times. What is the point? 

I agree that's a different scenario. That person is 99% going to OD and die at some point. 

My suggestion might be - I don't know - quit letting them in the fucking library?

Edited by ztejas
Posted
1 minute ago, Nicole44 said:

Repeatedly? 

Uh.  Yes?  Do you think they should have a three strikes and you're out policy?  Give em a punchcard.  "Janice, get the Narcan, this guy is dying.  No, hold up, his OD punchcard says he has already been Narcan'd 3 times, better let him die"

 

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Posted
1 minute ago, ztejas said:

I agree that's a different scenario. That person is 99% going to OD and die at some point. 

My suggestion might be - I don know - quit letting them in the fucking library?

You will see this case be in the news. I can’t feel bad for posting this. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, DalTxHornFan said:

There is so much wrong with this. 

The very idea that a public library is a great place for homeless junkies to hang out, for starts.

Then the idea that a librarian should be tasked with saving the homeless junkies from the consequences of their own actions.

Hopefully, the librarians are indemnified for any adverse outcomes with respect to said homeless junkies.

I mean, it's true that homeless shouldn't be encouraged to hang out in libraries.  But they have forever and the presence of narcan rather pales in comparison to the other attractions.

I don't think most addicts intend to OD and those that do probably don't want narcan, so really, it's not an "attraction."  It's just another public place to put the stuff.  And one that already happens to attract addicts.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Mantis Toboggan, MD said:

Uh.  Yes?  Do you think they should have a three strikes and you're out policy?  Give em a punchcard.  "Janice, get the Narcan, this guy is dying.  No, hold up, his OD punchcard says he has already been Narcan'd 3 times, better let him die"

 

So that person can do it again and again? Known addicts are known addicts around my friend’s world. He has saved many of them. One died. Now there seems to be a legal issue.

Posted
1 minute ago, Nicole44 said:

Now there seems to be a legal issue.

What makes you think this?  

Anytime someone attempts to save a life and fails, or does it too slowly, there's a potential, probably shitty, lawsuit.  Many times, good samaritan laws will protect them.

There's nothing in this that changes that status quo.

Posted
30 minutes ago, Nicole44 said:

I’m not an asshole and you know this. Just got off a call from a friend of mine (saving the same person over and over) and now there is some legal liability? 

There is no legal liability for your idiot friend you twatapotamus.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 3
  • Haha 5
  • Fuck You 1
Posted
5 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

I don't think most addicts intend to OD and those that do probably don't want narcan

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. These ideas seem at odds with each other. 

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...