Andy Clark / Reuters
California Gov. Jerry Brown vetoed legislation Sunday that would have authorized a pilot program for the nation’s first safe injection site in San Francisco.
“Fundamentally I do not believe that enabling illegal drug use in government-sponsored injection centers — with no corresponding requirement that the user undergo treatment ― will reduce drug addiction,” Brown said when announcing the veto.
But reducing drug addiction isn’t the primary function of safe injection sites ― the supervised spaces where people can inject drugs under medical supervision in hygienic facilities ― according to harm reduction experts.
“He’s definitely missing the point in the sense that safer consumption spaces are specifically for people who are unable or unwilling to stop using,” said Jon Zibbell, a senior public health analyst at the nonprofit research group RTI International. “They are not designed to cure addiction.”
While getting people to stop using illegal drugs is a good general goal to have, the primary goal is to keep those people safe and alive.
Indeed, harm reduction advocates have long stressed that safe injection sites reduce needle sharing and infectious disease transmission, as well as save lives by reducing the risk of fatal overdoses[1], since medical professionals and the overdose-reversal drug naloxone are on the premises.
Safe injection sites also create an entry point into the health care system[2] for people who inject drugs, including the possibility of addiction treatment.
Brown’s rejection echoes the criticisms Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein lodged against safe injection sites in a New York Times op-ed in August[3], in which he suggested that safe injection sites normalize drug use and