Saturday, 19 August 2017

HOW THEY DESTROYED




THE U.K’s MOST WORKABLE SYSTEM

FOR THE COMMISSIONING OF
 
RECOVERY FROM DRUG ADDICTION.


(SOLELY TO MAINTAIN DRUG PROFITS.)



The Government’s Payment by Results (PBR) schemes are now estimated by the National Audit Office to account for over £15 BILLION of public spending.

These are outcome based payment schemes where payment of all or part of the agreed charges DEPENDS ON THE PROVIDER ACTUALLY ACHIEVING RESULTS specified by the national or local government Department contracting for the Provider’s services.

When, in the last quarter of 2010, the then Government recognised that since 1948 the National Health Service had for more than 60 years been paying for rehabilitation of addicted drug addicts - whilst receiving an actual delivery by a majority of Providers of only 3% of cured (i.e. long term abstinent) users, the Rt Hon Oliver Letwin and his team introduced probably the world’s most viable and promising addiction handling policy ever.

At that time, provision of rehabilitation was based overwhelmingly on Opioid Substitution Therapy (methadone and Subutex prescribing) and 12 Steps Mutual Therapy Groups (both residential and in-the-community), plus, in over 45 countries including the U.K., some Self-Help Residential Addiction Recovery Training Centres.

And the first revelation of the new policy was that whilst

(a) 12 Steps had – over periods of years – an apparent 20 to 30% chance of producing lasting abstinence - often with continued weekly application,

(b) N.H.S. O.S.T. prescribing was delivering only 3% of late-life abstinence, whilst,

(c) in three months across at least 45 nations, Self-Help Residential Addiction Recovery Training was delivering 55 to 69+% of former addicts comfortably abstinent for 9 months or more, and that they had been doing so since 1966.

In other words, with CONTINUING ABSTINENCE for its goal, the 2010 introduction of Payment by Results quickly revealed that there were actually little or NO RESULTS from the “flagship” psycho-pharm O.S.T. prescribing at an annual cost of over £47,000 per addict, a BETTER RESULT from much less costly 12 Steps, and a comfortably RELAXED LASTING ABSTINENCE RESULT from Self-Help Residential Addiction Recovery Training - at a ONCE ONLY cost of just over half the ANNUAL O.S.T. cost.

Rationally, what these revelations should of course have achieved, was a massive move away from O.S.T. prescribing and an equally large move towards 12 Steps and the world’s main Providers of Self-Help Residential Addiction Recovery Training – known as NARCONON® - which was established in the Arizona State Prison System in 1966 and which has been expanding across the world ever since.

BUT IT DIDN’T.

Solely because the psycho-pharmaceutical fraternity didn’t want to lose its highly lucrative O.S.T. methadone and buprenorphine prescribing business which it had built up over the previous 62 years, and which was costing the Government between £8.46 and £10.8 BILLIONS per year across all government Departments, for the 40 year life of the average prescribed methadone addict. 
(Figures obtained from the National Audit Bureau & Glasgow University)

Unfortunately the Government were persuaded by psychiatric Professor Sir John Strang’s psycho-pharm supporters that, because Payment by Results was “a relatively new idea”, it ought to be tried out in practice before being widely introduced.

Whilst PbR is of course merely a “payment system”, in the addiction recovery field it absolutely depends on first being able to deliver the LONG TERM ABSTINENCE RESULT required by the Government.   So for his four year “pilot” of Payment by Results, Strang quietly selected rehabilitation centres for his “pilots” which he full well knew could seldom if ever actually deliver a lasting abstinence RESULT.

Which absence of results, after completion of his “pilots”, he pronounced as an abject failure of the Payment by Results system, rather than as a failure of the O.S.T. prescription “management” system he had exclusively favoured and piloted.

It should be noted that he carefully excluded from his “pilots“ the one then 44 year established addiction recovery programme capable of delivering enough addicts to relaxed abstinent results to make a Payment by Results system actually WORK for the nation’s benefit.

Of all the commentators observing and measuring the U.K. addiction scene, the National Audit Bureau’s estimate of the cost of O.S.T. prescribing is the lowest per annum, at over £47,000 per addict per annum – likely for the next 40 years.

But a competent Self-Help three months long Residential Addiction Recovery Training Programme, when delivered on a Payment by Results basis, is priced at a once only fee of £29,000, of which £20,000 remains UNPAID until, as and if, the various desired degrees of relaxed lasting abstinence are achieved and medically approved by physician examination at three, six and nine months from the start of the Programme.

51 years of history across charitably run addiction recovery centres in 45 countries adequately demonstrates that a trained addict who has comfortably abstained for six or nine month is seldom – IF EVER – going to again become an addict.

Obviously, because an addiction recovery training centre is a drug-free environment, any addict in study is going to gain three months of drug free living, or is going to fail, and in either event thus pay for no more than his or her accommodation, bed, board, laundry and toiletry costs, which have to be covered wherever they reside.

But the following three months as well as the next three months prove their relaxed abstinent condition and prove to the Commissioner that the Provider merits staged payments of fees based solely on the abstinence RESULTS achieved at each stage.

To offset the biased result created by Sir John Strang’s previous four year Payment by Results “pilots”, what is now required is a new set of “pilots” over a similar period based on a three months, 51 year tried and tested, Self-Help Residential Addiction Recovery Training Programme.

Insofar as the psycho-pharm fraternity have already spent the last half century trying to get rid of Self-Help Residential Addiction Recovery Training in every possible unfair and underhand way, it is clear that such a new set of pilots will be violently, overtly and covertly resisted in every manner, because the psycho-pharms just do not want our politicians to know the truth.

For turnover and profit reasons, the psycho-pharms do not wish to deliver cures for ILLEGAL addiction – mainly because they also CAN’T !

However, they CAN cure INVOLUNTARY addiction to prescribed medical drugs – but they seldom if ever do so, and they resist having anyone else do it, by neglecting to manufacture and provide the essential small-size drop-down dosages which comfortable withdrawal from medical drugs absolutely necessitates.

As a result, any government moves or proposals to avoid and / or cure either illegal or prescribed addiction will fail if psychiatric or pharmaceutical advice is sought on these subjects, because addiction in any of its forms is their favourite way of capturing and retaining new consumers of drugs and psychiatric services.


________________________________________

This Report Prepared by S.A.F.E., the

Society for an Addiction Free Existence
__________________________________

No comments:

Post a Comment