12-08-2006

Debating the UK Drugs Strategy

feature1 image

A table looking at the ups and downs of the strategy, and an invitation to respond on the good and bad things the it has brought for individuals and communities thus far.

Russell Newcombe,
Lifeline, August 2006

Reply here to post a response

  See replies here

Good Things
Bad Things
International policy context
UN Conventions International framework Restricts national laws etc
EU policy Europe-wide framework Restricts national strategy
National Strategy
Resources Increased funding 1998-2007 Situation after 2008 unclear
Drug legislation Controls prescribing/dispensing Excludes alcohol & tobacco
Law Enforcement on Trafficking Resources focused on Class A drugs & drug traffickers Intent to supply offence discriminates against heavy users
Law Enforcement on Possession Possession penalised less severely than trafficking Most seizures/offences are possession & involve cannabis
Treatment & Rehabilitation Maintenance as well as detox Small doses, limited options
Prevention & Education Drug education in most schools Primary prevention has failed
Abstinence Unprecedented anti-drug efforts Prevalence still rising or level
Harm Reduction HR is major aim/target of DS HR approach is in infancy
Local strategies/services
Drug Action Teams Tailor national DS to local needs Lack user representation
Prescribing Methadone for heroin addicts Few other drugs prescribed
Needle exchange Widespread and developed ‘Clean plate to eat dirty food’
Advice/information Fear-arousal rarely utilised now Safer use info is limited
Counselling & Support Key workers for each client Anti-drug ideology not useful
User/Community groups Represented on local DAT Few resources/little power
Prisons Protects society from dealers Not best place for rehabilitation
Drug-related problems
Crime (esp. acq uisitive) DS has reduced much acq-crime Violent acq-crime on rise
Mental disorder Dual diagnosis being dealt with Most cases not being helped
Infectious diseases (eg. HIV) DS prioritises HIV prevention DS makes IDUs hard to find
Physical damage (eg. veins) NX promotes safer injecting Adulterants cause damage
Deaths (eg. overdose) DS aims to reduce deaths Deaths partly caused by laws
Specific issues
Drug testing Reduces risks on road etc. Violates work/school rights
Mass media Inform public about issues Perpetuate WoD mythology
Research & monitoring Drug Harm Index developed
NDTMS expanded etc.
DHI & NDTMS very limited


Key :

DS drug strategy
HR harm reduction
IDUs injecting drug users
MODA Misuse of Drugs Act 1971
WoD War on Drugs
DAT Drug Action Team
NDTMS National Drug Treatment Monitoring System

Who do they tell? (A46)
8 page booklet detailing the records that are kept by drug services about their clients and in what circumstances information is shared. Includes information about the National Drug Treatment Monitoring System and the Treatments Outcome Profile.
Alcopops Poster (K1)
The poster and postcards feature information on: drinking, driving and overcrowding cars; advertising; alcohol content; drinking to appear hard, risky situations; drinking alone and helping friends. Space is provided for local information.
Features
Multi-Drug Injecting in Manchester
An assessment of officials statistics revealed that needle-sharing rates and levels of HIV and HCV among IDUs in the North West have recently risen to record levels, and that the North-West has the highest rates of injecting-related HBV and HCV in the UK.
Harm Reduction, Methadone and Abstinence
Lifeline Project’s Director of Communications (video inside)