Vocal Voices

.... to be provided by the NHS.

Why?

The users of these facilities make a deliberate decision to go out and get blitzed. If 'drunk tanks' are needed let the users fund them 100%. It is not the responsibility of the public, via taxes, or the police and NHS to fork out for these things.

Being drunk and disorderly in a public place is a criminal offence punishable by fines or, in extreme circumstances, a prison sentence. It is time for those in authority, and especially the media, to stop softening the description of these degenerates by referring to them as 'revellers' or 'party goers' and to call a spade a spade.

It only takes a few of these morons to ruin an occasion for hundreds of others, often violently, and it is long past the time for them to be brought to book. Arrest them, charge them, take them to a drunk tank they pay for to sober up, then take them to court and fine them.

Stop pandering to them. They are not victims, those of us on the receiving end of their stupidity, are, and that goes for NHS and police staff as well as the public.

I don't disagree with the concept of drunk tanks but the responsibility should not be placed on the NHS, for sure.
Because straight away you are into a "duty of care" scenario and "I know our Darren wasn't an angel but they owed him a duty of care"; no actually, not in my mind. If you drink yourself into a stupor or give yourself alcoholic poisoning that's on you, not on the nurse.
Years ago I went to a Christmas do at the Cedar Court, Wakefield. As we were going in a young woman was being carried out on a stretcher to an ambulance, too drunk to walk. That ambulance could have been needed for a real emergency, not holding the hand of a drunken idiot.

cromwell wrote:That ambulance could have been needed for a real emergency, not holding the hand of a drunken idiot.

Nail on head, same for the police who might also be needed elsewhere, and good reasons why those who get themselves in such a state should pay in full.

I've just finished working with a guy who is having drink control issues. When the lunches, evenings and parties were going last week he was hammering double vodka's neat. Thursday, last week, he had to be put in a taxi, at around 8pm, after he emerged from a Christmas lunch. Unable to even make it to the tube to make it home.

At the company Christmas party he was completely plastered and "pawing" any women he came in touch with.

This is a choice thing. This week was the last week for a few of us who finish at the end of the month, last night he came out with me for my drinks and we had to be early because he had to be at home to baby sit as his wife was going out. I had a beer, he had a double vodka, neat.

There are people who are actual alcoholics, I've worked with a few who have had to be institutionalised, but the vast majority of the rest choose to get into this state.

Time was that the drunks were thrown in the cells and then had to face the magistrate first thing the next morning. Perhaps it is time we started doing that again.

Suff wrote:This is a choice thing.

And that is the bottom line.

Nobody 'accidentally' gets so drunk that they cannot function. It is wholly down to them, and it is wholly down to them to sort themselves out. It is not for the NHS, the police and us, through our taxes, to hold their hands and sort them out.

Suff and WM, I was looking for the uptick box for your posts!

I suppose that in a stressful job there is always temptation to self medicate with alcohol, and I did know a couple of proper alcoholics when I was working.
But to get totally incapacitated is just idiocy. You can relax with a couple without becoming so drunk that you can't walk.

Suff wrote: When the lunches, evenings and parties were going last week he was hammering double vodka's neat.

If he's drinking neat double vodkas he has a big problem.

cromwell wrote:If he's drinking neat double vodkas he has a big problem.

More than he thinks. One of the women he was "pawing" considered reporting him for inappropriate behaviour. Sadly I didn't really get a chance to talk to her before we both left for Christmas as I would have encouraged her to do so.

Here is the downside of contracting. She is a contractor and her continued work, in 2019, is contingent on someone who has known the drinker most of his life. Horrible situation but, sadly, such is life in contracting. Had she been permanent I'm sure she would have reported him in a second. She's a strong, independent, person who is well adjusted and fun to work with. I shudder to think of how a more vulnerable contractor would have felt.

I love a drink, I even love several, but alcohol, for some, is a drug and, for them, it should be treated that way. For others it is a way of doing outrageous things without feeling the consequences.

I know I sound like I'm preaching, most of us have been way over the top at least once. The problem is that it is becoming a way of life and that needs to be stopped.