Book 1.indb


More than twelve cities across the United States are proposing safe injec-
tion sites, including Philadelphia. Safe injection sites have staff on hand in 
case of an accidental overdose, and also provide addicts with access to clean 
needles to prevent the spread of disease. Too many addicts drift from society 
by having to hide their addictions, making treatment, if they want it, even less 
of an option as they continue to fall away from any potential entry to therapy 
for their disease. Opponents claim safe injection sites bring crime and disor-
der to the communities in which they are located. But this is simply not true. 
A 2014 review of over seventy-five studies regarding these sites shows no in-
crease in crime. They also reduce deaths from overdoses and increase the 
availability of other health-care services, such as testing for sexually trans-
mitted diseases and mental health care. Not a single death has occurred at 
any safe injection site. Studies also show the sites do not increase drug use.

The availability of a safe place to use drugs removes this behavior from 
the streets and public view. It also clearly saves lives. Opponents fear it nor-
malizes a behavior that should be shameful, but drug use is as old as human 
nature itself. Instead of moralizing, those who oppose safe injection sites 
should exercise basic compassion and allow sites to be legally established in 
their cities and towns. Saving lives is worth it.

NO

The heroin epidemic in Pennsylvania and across the nation should be of 
concern to all policy makers. Addiction is widespread across geographic, 
racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic groups. It is a serious public health issue 
that urgently needs to be addressed. However, government-sanctioned safe 
injection sites are not the solution to the problem. Cities that are considering 
them, such as Philadelphia, will be in violation of federal law if they follow 

Addiction ruins individual lives and communities. Opioid addiction has un-
doubtedly reached epidemic status across the Commonwealth of Pennsylva-
nia and around the country. But instead of treating drug use as a scourge, 
one solution proposes bringing addiction out of the shadows under the su-
pervision of medical care professionals. That solution is the institution of 
safe injection sites.

YES

Commonwealth Forum: Should Pennsylvania Allow 
Safe Injection Sites?



Safe injection sites are well intentioned, but they are not the solution to 
the heroin crisis. Governments at all levels should be dedicating more money 
to making addiction treatment more easily accessible. Let’s use our scarce 
resources to make sure that everyone who wants to break free from the grip 
of heroin has a timely opportunity to do so.

For More Information
Commonwealth 20, no. 2–3 (2018), a special issue (https:// tupjournals 

.temple .edu/ index .php/ commonwealth/ index), was dedicated to the her-
oin and opioid crisis in Pennsylvania.

National Institutes of Health, National Institute on Drug Abuse (https:// 
www .drugabuse .gov/ drugs -abuse/ opioids) provides detailed analysis of 
drug use statistics across the United States, with specific information on 
Pennsylvania as well.

TheWolf administration developed a website and task force to fight the 
opioid crisis in Pennsylvania (https:// www .pa .gov/ guides/ opioid 
-epidemic). This site provides information on addiction, treatment, and
county resources.

through on their plans. Not only is it illegal to possess heroin, but it is also 
against the law to run a facility that allows the use of banned drugs. The 
U.S. Department of Justice has already warned that they will intervene to 
prevent the safe injection sites, and with legal justification. Additionally, 
city- sanctioned use of heroin, despite its good intentions, sends the wrong 
mes-sage that there is a safe way to use these devastating drugs.

Let’s also be realistic about the practicality and usefulness of setting up 
safe injection sites. What neighborhood is going to want one of these facili-
ties located in their community? Philadelphia has already broken up heroin 
camps in its Kensington neighborhood because of complaints by residents. 
Communities want to rid themselves of concentrations of addicts, not attract 
them. This Not in My Back Yard (NIMBY) syndrome means that if there are 
sites set up, they are most likely to be located in poorer, less educated neigh-
borhoods that have less political power. These areas already suffer from un-
derinvestment of resources—why should they bear this burden as well?

From Pennsylvania Politics and Policy: A Commonwealth Reader, Volume 2. Edited by
Michelle J. Atherton and J. Wesley Leckrone (Philadelphia, Temple University Press,
2019).