LAST Friday the Argus published a shocking photo of heroin addict Rachel Whitear, who died after overdosing. Her parents wanted the Ledbury 21-year-old's death to be a warning to youngsters. And it prompted Caerleon reader MIKE SINGLETON (pictured) - a father of two - to write a response

LIKE you, and I imagine all readers, I experienced a profound shock at the picture you published of the tragic Rachel Whitear.

However, I wholly agree with the decisions made by her parents and by you to publish the picture.

Some commentators have remarked on her intelligence and beauty but that misses the point: It is the loss of life in such a disgusting manner at such an early age that matters. The picture emphasises the utter futility of drug-taking: the denial of life involved in drug-addiction.

I have two sons of a similar age. The one thing I said I would never understand would be drugs - and they have never taken any.

But I, like many parents, have been so lucky. They went to a good school, but every school has a drugs problem - they confirmed that drugs were available. They went to high-ranking universities and the availability was even gre ater there.

The death of Rachel shows the truth of your comment that we must end our stereotype of the drug user - the product of a broken home or the damaged community. Any family can experience the sorrow caused by drug misuse. But this last point is why I totally disagree with your conclusion that "the scourge of drugs must be driven from this country."

We must face the fact that Rachel and countless thousands of young people choose every week to take drugs - and they have seen similar pictures and they know as well as we do the devastation caused by drugs.

They do not recognise it as a scourge that can be driven out. An essential part of the reasons why they do this is the message that we - the parents and all the other caring, responsible adults - put out about drugs: They simply don't believe it.

They are driven by the idea that anything banned must be good, also they know what they are going to get from drugs (they think) and they don't care: it's the rest of us who are left to pick up the pieces of their error of judgement.

So what do we do? Do we just stand and wait for the casualties, hoping they stop short of killing themselves?

My controversial view is that we must address the reasons why young people take drugs and part of this is by providing those drugs in a licensed, controlled environment. For the so-called social drugs, like ecstasy, these can be guaranteed pure and at a price which makes criminal supply unprofitable; if you object to this - stop outside any shop selling tobacco or any pub or off-licence and think about the scale of death and illness resultant from their sales.

But think also of the pleasure produced by moderate usage of alcohol. There must also be education about the dangers of using such drugs and accessible medical support in an emergency.

It is my view that addiction to the other class A drugs is a symptom of deeper psychological problems and these need to be addressed sympathetically while providing the drug in a safe environment with the hope that in time the addiction can be reduced and even eliminated.

Rachel died in utterly squalid circumstances without any chance of life, partly because of the existing attitudes to drug-taking.

We should acknowledge that there is a desire for drugs within our young people. If we can do that and keep the Rachels before our eyes maybe fewer of them will die in the shadows.