Students for Change

The Canadian Students for Sensible Drug Policy (CSSDP) is a national youth and student network providing the necessary education and resources to empower chapters formed by youth and students to work on substance use issues facing their community. Chapters engage in activities such as peer and public education, drug policy reform and harm reduction projects. CSSDP specifically advocates for drug policies that are scientifically studied and proven effective in decreasing the negative impacts of drug use on individuals and communities.

SFU has their own chapter headed by Jeremy Janz, a current SFU student. We were informed of Jeremy’s role in CSSDP at SFU by Mark Haden from Vancouver Coastal Health, however, making contact with Jeremy has been difficult and is ongoing. They have also seen considerable success in generating interest in their cause among students using existing social networking platforms. What is most interesting and related to our goals is that CSSDP is completely operated by students for the purpose of combating the stigma associated with drug use and changing views of youth towards drugs to advocate for more effective drug policy.

In October 2009, the CSSDP will be holding their annual conference in Vancouver hosted specifically by the SFU and UBC chapters. Called Blueprints for Beyond Prohibition, this year’s conference will build on the 2008 conference examining 100 years of failure of prohibition and present, explore and debate existing alternatives to drug prohibition in Canada. It will bring together students, community members, drug users, politicians, law enforcement, researchers, clinicians and legal experts for an informed, collaborative and critical ‘visioning’ of regulated systems for currently-illegal substances. As this is very similar to what we are hoping to do, it would be beneficial for us to get in contact with CSSDP about a possible collaboration. 

We are hoping to use our event to generate interest in the social issue of addiction among SFU/UBC Business students in particular to drive participation in the CSSDP’s event. By seeding interest in drug policy alternatives at our event, we can direct participants toward furthering their policy ideas and putting their ideas on business’ contribution to solving social issues by being apart of Blueprints for Beyond Prohibition. Through their involvement, the CSSDP can garner membership from our participant base and encourage participation in their event.

This is mutually beneficial for both our event and the exposure and direct membership and participation for the CSSDP. We are also evaluating the possibility of awarding the top teams from our event paid enrollment in the October event hosted by the CSSDP, as decided by our panel of speakers. This would provide an incentive for participants in our business event to take their envisions for policy alternatives to a much larger and broader audience.

Broad Exposure

A discussion with Mark Haden, a supervisor at Vancouver Coastal Health, a published author on drug policy in Canadian and international journals, an advocate of the failure of drug prohibition, a public educator on drugs and drug policy, and a member of the Keeping the Door Open (KDO) coalition. 

Mark is an advocate of drug policy reform with a number of publications on policy alternatives, and as such was very interested in being involved in our event. He provided a great deal of resources to assist in policy and in organizing and facilitating discussion at a dialogue such as the one we are proposing. As a member of the KDO coalition, Mark participates in open dialogue on drug policy and other drug related issues in Vancouver, much like the event we are hoping to launch for students.

To begin with, Mark described our dialogue event as ‘fascinating challenge’, whereas developing drug policy alternatives is no easy task. However, Mark welcomed the idea of ‘thinking outside the box’ and utilizing a collaboration of people for discussing policy alternatives especially those who may not commonly be exposed to an issue such as a addiction. In order to have the creative and innovative discussion necessary, we must have a variety of individuals speak about this issue and expose participants to a variety of views. The idea of collaboration is essential to the development of such novel alternatives. 

In exposing participants to such a variety of views however, it was recommended that we steer the discussion away from a debate format. As Mark suggested, the debate format often quickly narrows the discussion to only those views and people will tend to be less creative. Using more of an open dialogue approach to looking at addiction and drug policy will allow for a broader range of thought; people will be much more creative and apt to explore the edges of what is possible in approaching this topic. It was also suggested that the discussion not focus on the failures of current or previous policies, but strictly on the creative aspect of developing an alternative method. Perhaps our event discussion can focus specifically on foundations of a new model for drug policy and the best approach for an alternative.

A really great suggestion for recognizing the views of the whole group of participants was to use an activity that asks all the participants specific questions on how a specific drug should be controlled for a variety of drugs. This engaging exercise would create a collective model and help promote discussion in the smaller group exercise involving the development of policy alternatives.

Drug Distribution International (TSX: DDI)

The shift from traditional enforcement approaches to innovative approaches, or at least consideration of alternative approaches, seems to be gaining ground not only with U.S. administration but on a global scale.

Last week the United Nations released its annual World Drug Report which supported drug decriminalization as an approach to dealing with global drug issues- a reversal in opinion from previous years. It showed strong approval for public health rather than criminal enforcement strategies for for drug control and drug prohibition and control has only resulted in profits for gangs, cartels, and drug lords. It went further to say that controls on drugs have created a ‘black market’ of large proportions that utilizes violence and corruption.

The UN report has a heavy focus on Portugal, who in 2001 instituted a decriminalization of all drugs making them an administrative offense not a criminal offense. Although initial criticism of this decision was high, research emerging now shows that it had profound impact on drug issues. The report stated decriminalization has lead to a large reduction in drug overdose and HIV infection, has decreased drug use to the lowest in the European Union, and seen a 150 percent increase in the number of people entering addiction treatment along with a decrease in a number of other drug-related problems.

The fear over drug decriminalization appears to be that it would then become a legitimate economic enterprise. The opposing argument is that it already is economic with drug controls creating a lucrative black market for drug trafficking and distribution. The problem with this is that the large gains go into the hands of gangs and drug lords and it has been argued increase crime.

The current drug controls do little to address addiction directly, with little focus on treatment or assistance. Decriminalization may increase the amount of individuals entering treatment and decrease some of the adverse residual effects of drug abuse, as observed in Portugal. However, for this method to work there would need to be adequate measures in place to still control drugs and it would need to be in collaboration with a well structured addiction treatment program to be successful.

Celebrity Endorsement

The overwhelmingly traditional approach to drugs and drug use among policy makers and levels of government has been through enforcement means. This was especially evident over the last eight years with the Bush administration’s ‘War on Drugs’ which the current Obama administration has openly stated the approach has been a failure. This approach centers on curbing the illegal drug trade by decreasing supply and demand for such substances. It utilizes a set of laws and policies intended to discourage the production, distribution, and consumption of targeted substances.

The current administration’s Director of National Drug Policy, Gil Kerlikowske, stated in May that the War on Drugs would no longer be used to address drug issues as it is counter-productive and contrary to policy favoring treatment over incarceration for reducing drug use. A recent U.S. drug policy reversal in Afghanistan echoes these policy initiatives; the Obama administration has vowed to eliminate its poppy eradication program to combat the drug trade and focus on intercepting drugs and chemicals used to make them as well as going after drug lords.

President Obama and his National Drug administration also appears to making a similar shift in drug policy in the U.S itself- one that echoes the principles of drug policy here in Vancouver. Kerlikowske’s drug strategy shift from the war on drugs is Vancouver’s 4 pillars strategy exactly, according to an SFU criminologist, and recognizes that addiction is a disease and treating addicts as criminals has been largely ineffective at addressing drug issues. Kerlikowske stated himself:

“We have learned a great deal about the disease of drug addiction and know that treatment works. Through comprehensive and effective enforcement, education, prevention and treatment we will be successful in reducing illicit drug use and its devastating consequences.”

From a local perspective Vancouver currently makes use of both addiction treatment and alternative approaches to drugs and addiction, including Insite safe injection site and needle exchanges with its Four Pillar strategy. Dr. Evan Wood, editor of the Harm Reduction Journal and Director of the urban health program at BC Center for Excellence in HIV/AIDS, the body that conducts independent research on the effects and benefits of Insite in Vancouver, has spoken about the failure of prohibition and that drugs are not a simple law enforcement problem. Research has shown considerable benefits to Insite’s presence in the community, previously addressed in another post.

A successful, sustainable solution to drugs and addiction must approach the issue of addiction as a disease. This would stress treatment and health alternatives in place of enforcement and incarceration. Completely removing enforcement would likely provide adverse effects and there would likely be strong opposition. Dealing with the social issue of addiction requires an integrated approach- treating the addiction itself, combating the residual effects, controlling drug supply and demand, and enforcing those who are trafficking substances. Perhaps a better approach would be an integration of harm reduction, decriminalization, and control policies to have a single collaborative approach for addiction.

HARM REDUCTION

Harm reduction is a systematic way of approaching and addressing drug abuse and addiction. It focuses on keeping people safe, minimizing death, disease, and other residual affects from this high risk behavior while openly recognizing that such behavior may continue despite the risks.

This view goes beyond the traditional notion of drug enforcement and the abstinence model for dealing with substance abuse. It centers around the concept that risks associated with drug use not only affect the users but all members of the community through residual affects associated with disease, loss of public space, drug related criminal activity, and decreases in real and perceived public safety.

The International Harm Reduction Association defines harm reduction as:

Policies and programs which attempt primarily to reduce that adverse health, social, and economic consequences of mood altering substances to individual drug users, their families, and communities, without requiring decrease in drug use.

The overall intention of harm reduction is to reduce the more immediate harms associated with drug use through realistic and practical programs, such as needle exchanges, safe injection sites, and educational outreach programs. Harm reduction is a broad response to substance abuse that complements prevention, treatment, and enforcement and recognizes the role of the user in the initiatives. All parties must ask two questions; first, what specifically are the harms associated with different psychoactive drugs, and second, what can be done to reduce the risks of those harms occurring?

According to a publication by the Government of British Columbia aimed at establishing this model in communities across BC, there are six principles of harm reduction which must be encompassed: pragmatism, upholding human rights and dignity of users, focus on harms over addiction itself, maximization of intervention options, priority of immediate goals and incremental gains over time, and active involvement of users.

There is increasing evidence and support for solutions that encompass harm reduction principles. It is seen as an improvement on traditional drug enforcement for dealing with addiction and its residual effects. Many policy makers are incorporating this view with elements of enforcement for an integrated approach- such is the case in Vancouver with the City’s Four Pillars Drug Strategy and harm reduction initiative such as needle collection and Insite safe injection site. Novel solutions to addiction are including these ideas more and more by addressing more than the addiction itself and the affects on communities as a whole.