Drug Use, Public Debate and Increasing Pressures for a Drug Policy Reform in Finland

The situation in Finland is marked by a redistribution of labour between social and health care and criminal control policy. Attitudes are changing especially among the young, authorities are speaking out against the zero-tolerance policy, but there is also resistance to change. The situation is open.

The misuse of drugs act – a user perspective

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.

“It’s a Bit of a Double-Edged Sword”: Motivation and Personal Impact of Bereaved Mothers’ Advocacy for Drug Policy Reform

North America’s overdose crisis is an urgent public health issue that has resulted in thousands of deaths. As the crisis began to take hold across Canada in 2016, bereaved parents, mainly mothers, emerged as vocal advocates for drug policy reform and harm reduction, using their stories to challenge the stigma of drug-related death. In 2017, we launched a qualitative research partnership with leading family organizations in Canada, conducting interviews with 43 mothers whose children had died from substance use, to understand their experiences of drug policy advocacy. Our findings showed that participants’ motivations for engaging in advocacy were rooted in their experiences of grief, and that advocacy led to feelings of empowerment and connection to others. Our research suggests that advocacy can be cathartic and associated with healing from grief, but that “going public” in sharing a family story of substance use death can also have a considerable personal cost.

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

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.

On the biopolitics of humane drug policies: What can we learn from 19th century sobriety boards?

Background: In accordance with recommendations from The United Nations’ Chief Executives Board of Coordination, several countries are in the process of reforming their punitive drug policies towards health-based approaches – from punishment to help. The Portuguese model of decriminalisation is generally seen as a good model for other countries and has been scientifically described in favourable terms, and not much scrutinised. Method: This article draws on foucauldian archaeological and genealogical approaches in order to understand and compare governance logics of the 19th century Norwegian sobriety boards and 21st century Portuguese commissions. In doing this, we problematize contemporary drug policy reform discussions that point to the “Portuguese model”, which aims to stop punishing and start helping drug-dependent people, are problematised. Findings: The Portuguese commissions investigate whether drug-using people are dependent or not. Dependency, circumstances of consumption and their economy are considered when the commission decides on penalising, assisting, or treating the person, or a combination of all this. This model was studied alongside the Norwegian sobriety boards mandated by the Sobriety Act that was implemented in 1932. Sobriety boards governed poor alcoholics. Authorities from the sobriety movement were central in creating sobriety policies that culminated in sobriety boards. The Portuguese commissions have similarities to Norwegian sobriety boards. They make use of sanctions and treatment to govern people who use illicit substances to make them abstain, with the view that this is emancipatory for these people. The different apparatuses have distinct and different ways of making up, and governing their subjects. Conclusion: This article contributes to debates on drug policy reforms and aims to investigate whether they might produce biopower effects of governance masked by an emancipatory language. There is a need for critical studies on drug policy reforms to avoid policies that maintain divisions and control marginalised populations.

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

“Someone has to be the First”: Tracing Uruguay’s Marijuana Legalisation Through Counterfactuals

Why did Uruguay become the first country in the world to legalise marijuana in 2013? Based on extensive original research and unprecedented review of secondary sources, the article assesses alternative explanatory accounts through a unique combination of process tracing and counterfactual analysis. By tracing cannabis reform in Uruguay both as it was and was not but could have been in the absence of hypothesised explanatory factors, the article assesses the role of these factors in the causal story. Specifically, the article shows how and why political will and social mobilisation influenced both the reform process and outcome. In doing so, the article cuts through the haze of rival explanations to present the clearest picture of drug policy reform in Uruguay to date.