Reasons for drug policy reform: people who use drugs are denied evidence based treatment

The misuse of drugs act – a user perspective

Drugs and Alcohol Today ◽

10.1108/dat-10-2021-0056 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽

Author(s):

Mat Southwell

Keyword(s):

Social Justice ◽

Social Control ◽

Racial Discrimination ◽

Drug User ◽

Drug Policy ◽

Policy Reform ◽

People Who Use Drugs ◽

Content Type ◽

The Impact ◽

Drug Policy Reform

Purpose This paper aims to demonstrate the ways in which the Misuse of Drugs Act (MDA) militates against the interests and situations of people who use drugs. The author reflects on the author’s journey as a drug user, drugs workers and drug user organiser to critique the MDA. The author describes the impact of the MDA on the author’s early experimentation with substances and highlights the limitations of simplistic drugs prevention. The author describes how the MDA maximises drug-related risks and undermines the creation of healthy cultural norms and community learning among people who use drugs. The author talks about the author’s work as a drugs practitioner and mourns the vandalism of the UK’s harm reduction and drug treatment system. This paper describes the opportunity to use drug policy reform as a progressive electoral agenda to begin the journey towards racial and social justice. This paper calls for the rejection of the Big Drugs Lie and the repeal of the failed MDA. Design/methodology/approach Personal reflection based on experience as drug user, drugs worker and drug user organiser. Findings Successive UK Governments have used the MDA as a tool of social control and racial discrimination. The Big Drugs Lie undermines science-based and rights-compliant drug policy and drug services and criminalises and puts young people at risk. There is the potential to build a progressive political alliance to remove the impediment of the MDA and use drug policy reform as tools for racial and social justice. Practical implications The MDA maximises the harms faced by people who use drugs, stokes stigma and discrimination and has undermined the quality of drug services. The MDA needs to be exposed and challenged as a tool for social control and racial discrimination. Delivering drug policy reform as a progressive electoral strategy could maximise its potential to improve social and racial justice. Originality/value This paper represents the view of people who use drugs by a drug user, a view which is seldom expressed in the length and level of argument shown here.

Download Full-text

Possessing Drugs, Possessing Rights: Harm Reduction and Drug Policy Reform in Argentina

Contemporary Drug Problems ◽

10.1177/00914509211034006 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 009145092110340

Author(s):

Shana Harris

Keyword(s):

Drug Use ◽

Social Services ◽

Drug Policy ◽

Policy Reform ◽

People Who Use Drugs ◽

Negative Effects ◽

Drug Law ◽

National Drug ◽

Drug Traffickers ◽

Drug Policy Reform

Argentina’s national drug law, Law 23.737, has been in effect since 1989. Based on prohibitionist drug policy, this law was intended to severely punish drug traffickers and protect the public from drug use-related health concerns. However, it has failed to achieve these goals, and instead targets people who use drugs (PWUD) and brands them “criminals.” In response, the Argentine government announced its intent to reform Law 23.737 in 2008, sparking widespread debate among health, legal, and social service professionals. This article discusses this debate from the perspective of harm reductionists, those who work to reduce the negative effects of drug use rather than eliminate drug use or ensure abstinence. Drawing on archival research and 16 months of ethnographic fieldwork in Argentina, this article examines the positionality of harm reductionists in this drug policy reform, particularly the controversial proposal to decriminalize drug possession for personal use. Demonstrating their contention that Argentina’s legal apparatus is a major contributor to PWUD’s discrimination, stigmatization, and isolation from health and social services, I argue that challenging these problems through policy engagement allows Argentine harm reductionists to draw attention to the broader question of PWUD’s rights and to ultimately recast PWUD as rights-bearing citizens.

Download Full-text

Shadow Committees: On “Drug User Voice,” Representation, and Mobilization in a Norwegian Drug Policy Reform

Contemporary Drug Problems ◽

10.1177/00914509211003731 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 009145092110037

Author(s):

Aleksandra Bartoszko

Keyword(s):

Drug User ◽

Drug Policy ◽

Drug Users ◽

Policy Reform ◽

Political Representation ◽

Illegal Drug Use ◽

Conservative Policy ◽

Political Landscapes ◽

Alternative Organization ◽

Drug Policy Reform

Until recently, Norway remained immovable on its conservative policy that illegal drug use is a crime. In 2018, the Health Minister appointed an inquiry commission to design a less restrictive drug policy, which included two “drug user representatives.” But the Minister’s choices for these posts met massive dissatisfaction from some drug users who contended that the representatives “are not real drug users” and do not “speak for” nor “act on the behalf” of their experiences and opinions. They mobilized to establish an alternative organization, the Shadow Committee, to propose a drug policy reform shaped by “the user voices” and “not polluted by political compromises.” Yet, while performing a labor of difference, this committee, too, became caught in conflicting landscapes of representation with some members contesting strategic solidarity. Based on this case, and an ethnographic fieldwork among the protesters, this article investigates the concept of representation as understood, contested and applied by “drug users.” Exploring how they relate to “user voices” and question the authenticity of some of “user representatives,” I highlight how changing political landscapes affect understandings of representation and shape political, individual and collective forms of involvement. I draw on Pitkin’s political philosophy and apply the classical categorization of political representation to suggest reconsidering the governing assumptions regarding “user representatives” that increasingly inform drug and treatment policies in Norway. I ask if the concept of representation itself may be a barrier to meaningful involvement.

Download Full-text