Editor:
Re: ‘My son would’ve been better off homeless,’ May 31.
My deepest condolences to Maggi Plett on the loss of her son Zach. I applaud her decision to publicly expose the outrageous conditions that exist in many so-called recovery houses. I too, have seen them, and I believe that if most people had an opportunity to see what we, the public, offer sick and vulnerable people on the long road to addiction recovery, we would be disgusted.
Caring for the sick and vulnerable should not be a profit-making opportunity and, indeed, a profit is what many recovery-house owners make.
Homes are bought and paid for by the residents for the benefit of the owners as costs are minimized. The residents eat sub-standard meals, the supply of food is limited and the general living conditions are appalling. In the recovery home I visited, blankets were shared, the washer and dryer were broken and pasta was the dinner served every night.
Recovery houses are an integral part of the recovery process after detoxification and intense residential treatment. For addicts, the purpose of living in a recovery house is to regain physical and mental health, integrate into the community, and foster life-long connections with NA and AA.
This can’t be done on $30.90 per day, a profit-making economic model and lax accountability.
Sad but true – it costs more per day for my cat to stay at a kennel.
Lynne Spence, Surrey