Sunday 23 May 2021

Common Sense Drug Policy

It's been some since we mentioned drug policy here in the UK and, apart from a couple of police initiatives, anything positive happening. Whilst this situation is most unlikely to change, especially with a Tory government in control, it's worth reminding ourselves that there is an enlightened alternative as outlined in a Transform report published last week on the Portuguese experience. (Graphs and references are not shown).  

DECRIMINALISATION IN PORTUGAL: SETTING THE RECORD STRAIGHT

BACKGROUND

In 2001, Portugal decriminalised the personal possession of all drugs as part of a wider
re-orientation of policy towards a health-led approach. Possessing drugs for personal use is instead treated as an administrative offence, meaning it is no longer punishable by imprisonment and does not result in a criminal record and associated stigma. Drugs are, however, still confiscated and possession may result in administrative penalties such as fines or community service.

Whether such a penalty is applied is decided by district-level panels made up of legal, health and social work professionals, known as ‘Commissions for the Dissuasion of Drug Addiction’. Where an individual is referred to a Commission for the first time and their drug use is assessed as non-problematic (low risk), the law requires their case to be ‘suspended’, meaning no further action is taken. Fines can be issued for subsequent referrals. Where some problematic trends are identified (moderate risk), brief interventions are proposed — including counselling — but these are non-mandatory. In ‘high risk’ cases, where more serious problematic behaviours and dependence are identified, individuals may receive non-mandatory referrals to specialised treatment services.

In the vast majority of instances, problematic drug use is not identified, and cases are simply ‘suspended’. Individuals referred to the Commissions overwhelmingly view their purpose as helping to reduce use and educate on drug risks. They are non-judgemental in nature, and a primary focus is safeguarding the right to health of those referred.

Importantly, the decriminalisation of personal possession is only one part of broader health-centred drug policy reforms that involve an increased focus on harm reduction and treatment provision. By ‘accepting the reality of drug use rather than eternally hoping that it will disappear as a result of repressive legislation’, Portuguese reform allows drugs to be treated as a health, rather than criminal justice, issue. The benefits of these reforms, therefore, arise from both decriminalisation itself and the establishment of a wider health-based response to drug problems.

Portugal was not the first country to decriminalise some or all drugs, and it has not been the last. However, it is one of the most prominent and influential. The Portuguese model directly influenced the 2020 decriminalisation measure passed in Oregon, for example, as well as proposed decriminalisation in Norway. Portugal is regularly held up as the leading example of drug decriminalisation, so understanding the outcomes is vital.

DRUG-RELATED DEATHS

In the first five years after the reforms, drug deaths dropped dramatically. They rose slightly in the following years, before returning to 2005 levels in 2011, with only 10 drug overdose deaths recorded in that year. Since 2011, drug deaths have risen again but remain below 2001 levels (when there were 76 recorded deaths).

In 2001, Portuguese drug death rates were very similar to the EU average. While rates fell in Portugal following reform, they increased across the rest of Europe in the same timeframe. From 2011 onwards both Portugal and the rest of the EU have trended similarly, rising until 2015/6 — however, the gap between the two remains considerably wider than it was pre-reform. In real terms, drug death rates in Portugal remain some of the lowest in the EU: 6 deaths per million among people aged 15-64, compared to the EU average of 23.7 per million (2019). They are practically incomparable to the 315 deaths per million aged 15-64 experienced in Scotland, which is over 50 times higher than the Portuguese rates.

CRIME

The move away from criminalising and imprisoning people who use drugs has led to a dramatic change in the profile of the prison population. In 2001, over 40% of the sentenced Portuguese prison population were held for drug offences, considerably above the European average, and 70% of reported crime was associated with drugs. While the European average has gradually risen over the past twenty years (from 14 to 18%), the proportion of people sentenced for drug offences in Portuguese prisons has fallen dramatically to 15.7% in 2019 — now below the European average.

Most of this decline occurred in the first decade following decriminalisation and the establishment of a health-led approach. Since 2010, the actual number of people in prison for drug offences has remained relatively steady, but a rise in overall prison numbers means the proportion of people serving sentences for drug offences has continued to fall.

It has also been suggested that reform has led to a reduction in drug seizures. However, drug seizure data is difficult to analyse so any conclusions should be treated with caution: reduced seizures may be a result of fewer drugs on the market or they may simply be down to reduced police activity.

DRUG USE

Levels of drug use in Portugal have been consistently below the European average over the past twenty years. This is particularly the case among younger people: Portugal has some of the lowest usage rates in Europe among those between the ages of 15-34.

In the first five years after drug policy reform, use of illegal drugs rose slightly among the general population but fell again in the following five years. Use among 15-24 year olds fell throughout the decade, and among the general population was lower in 2012 than in 2001.

However, consumption trends in Portugal have been keenly disputed and often misrepresented. While drug use during individual lifetimes among the general population appeared to increase in the decade following reform, use within the past 12 months fell between 2001 and 2012. Both the World Health Organization and the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime consider use in the past 12 months (recent drug use) or within the past month (current drug use) as better indicators of trends among the general population.

Since 2012, past-year use appears to have risen, particularly among those over the age of 25. This is, however, based on relatively limited data from SICAD (the Portuguese drug dependence agency) and only one further dataset — in 2016. In any event, Portugal continues to retain one of the lowest rates of drug use in Europe.

Consumption figures alone tell us relatively little about the level of harm experienced through drug use. A rise in drug use among individuals using only occasionally, and recreationally, is unlikely to lead to large rises in deaths or other harms. For this reason, measuring levels of high-risk drug use, particularly among people who inject drugs, is important. As of 2015, there were an estimated 33,290 ‘high risk’ opioid users in Portugal. Per 100,000 population, this is above the European average. However, it is lower than when decriminalisation was established in 2001. Researchers have also noted a fall in the proportion of individuals referred to Dissuasion Commissions found to be dependent on drugs, suggesting a general reduction in problematic drug use — though this may, in part, be linked to police not repeatedly referring the same individuals if they are already in treatment. In 2018, 90% of individual cases were found to not demonstrate problematic use.

Drug policy reform in Portugal was combined with a change in approach to drug education, moving away from abstinence-based ‘just say no’ campaigns. Drug use in schoolchildren has been consistently below the European average for the past twenty years. Rates in 2019 were roughly the same as 2001. In line with European trends, as reported by the European school survey on alcohol and drugs (ESPAD), they have shown a gradual, consistent decline in the last 10 years. ESPAD also reports that perceived availability of drugs among children in Portugal is lower than the European average.

HIV TRANSMISSION

Drug policy reform in Portugal included wide-reaching needle and syringe programmes aimed at reducing risk of infection among people who inject drugs. In 2001, Portugal had 1,287 new HIV diagnoses attributed to injecting drug use. It had over 50% of all new HIV diagnoses attributed to injecting drug use in the EU in 2001 and 2002 despite having just 2% of the EU population. In 2019, with only 16 new diagnoses, it only had 1.68% of the EU total.

While HIV diagnoses have gone down across Europe in this period, the trend in Portugal is much stronger. Owing to its previously extremely high levels of transmission, Portugal retains some of the highest HIV prevalence rates in Western Europe among people who inject drugs (at 13%). However, this still marks a significant downturn since the millennium, when half of all new HIV diagnoses were attributed to injecting drug use. AIDS diagnoses in people infected through injecting drug use have also fallen dramatically over the past twenty years: from 518 in 2000 to just 13 in 2019. Again, this is a stronger downward trend than the EU average: in 2000 Portugal had 15% of new EU diagnoses; in 2019, it had less than 5%.

HEPATITIS B AND C

Hepatitis C prevalence among people who inject drugs has been estimated as the highest in Western Europe and is a result of multiple epidemics in the late 20th century linked in part to unsafe drug injecting practices up to the 1990s. Prevalence of hepatitis B (which, unlike hepatitis C, is commonly spread through means other than blood-to-blood contact) is below the Western European average. The EMCDDA reports that the number of new yearly hepatitis B and C reports have fallen consistently over the past twenty years.

TREATMENT AND HARM REDUCTION PROVISION

A key feature of the new Portuguese drug policy, alongside decriminalisation, was the expansion of treatment services. Between 2000-2009, outpatient treatment units increased from 50 to 79. However, the number of individuals in treatment for drugs steadily decreased between 2009-2018, which may be linked to significant reductions in health and welfare budgets following the impact of the global financial crisis. Following the absorption of the country’s independent Institute for Drugs and Drug Addiction into the National Health Service (which itself saw budget cuts of 10% in 2012) health spending continued to fall until 2015 — to under 9% of GDP, from roughly 9.9% in 2009.

A reduction in absolute treatment numbers may also be related to reduced levels of problematic drug use, as discussed above. A study comparing patients entering treatment for heroin dependence pre- and post-reform found an overall decrease between 1992 and 2013, which the authors suggest could be linked to a fall in the number of newly dependent individuals. EMCDDA data also indicate a changing profile of individuals entering drug treatment, with admissions for opioids steadily falling over the past ten years but admissions for cannabis going steadily up.

According to the latest available yearly data there are an estimated 17,246 individuals in opioid substitution treatment in Portugal. Using this data, combined with EMCDDA estimates on levels of problematic opioid use in European countries, it can be estimated that over half of people with problematic opioid use in Portugal are in some form of opioid substitution treatment, slightly above the European average.

Harm reduction has also been a central tenet of the Portuguese drug policy reforms. The latest available data indicate that 1.3 million syringes are being distributed per year. This is significantly down since 2003, when the figure was at 2.6 million, but is still one of the highest in the EU.45 Portugal also has an estimated 2,137 needle and syringe programmes in operation, roughly three times the number of Spain — despite being a quarter of the size in population. Nonetheless, some advocates have been ‘frustrated by what they see as stagnation and inaction since decriminalisation came into effect’, particularly in relation to overdose prevention centres, naloxone provision, and needle and syringe programmes in prison. Portugal did finally open its first mobile overdose prevention centres, in Lisbon and Porto, in 2019. Other harm reduction efforts have been praised — including in relation to the provision of safer smoking kits — but it is clear that continued investment is needed.

SOCIAL COSTS

A 2015 study found that the social costs of drug use in Portugal fell 12% between 2000 and 2004, and 18% by 2010. While the former figure was largely driven by the reduction in drug-related deaths, the latter was linked to a ‘significant reduction’ in costs associated with criminal proceedings for drug offences and lost income of individuals imprisoned for these offences.

CONCLUSION

Portugal has set a positive example for what can be done when drug policies prioritise health rather than criminalisation. At the turn of the century, Portugal was facing a crisis, including high levels of HIV infection among people who use drugs. Many impacts of reform were felt immediately: new HIV infections, drug deaths and the prison population all fell sharply within the first decade. The second decade saw slower improvement in key measures, as well as an upturn in drug deaths. However, many of these factors need to be put into context. Drug policy is still only one variable interacting with a complex mix of social, economic, cultural and political factors, and cuts to wider health provision in that period will have played a part in this. Nevertheless, Portugal is in a much better position than it was in 2001 and recorded drug use and drug deaths as a proportion of the general population are both well below the European average.

Portugal’s experience is a lesson in what can be achieved when policy innovation and political will are aligned in response to a crisis, and hopefully it will continue to evolve and lead on this issue. However, while ending the criminalisation of people who use drugs is hugely important both in its own right, in reducing stigma and as an enabler of any effective public health response, it only addresses part of the harms caused by prohibition. With innovation taking place elsewhere, including regulated cannabis sales in North America and safe supply of opioids and other drugs in Canada, there is also room for Portuguese drug policy to learn from and build upon other reform efforts, and continue in its global leadership role.

7 comments:

  1. [sarcasm alert]

    There's too much of this 'common sense' nonsense around.

    What we need is an escalation of a good old fashioned war on drugs that politicians can make endless empty promises, policies that achieve little but allow the drug barons to continue an uninterrupted supply of illicit, harmful street drugs; policies that terminate successful harm reduction strategies; that allow crime, death & chaos to remain endemic.

    https://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/19306899.police-crime-commissioner-end-funding-heroin-addiction-treatment-scheme/

    The Message is being heard Loud & Clear... we need the implementation of Tory policies that ridicule, demonise & dismantle such harmful & radicalised nonsense. Chaos is King.

    The probation service has been dispatched to the knackers yard; the NHS is struggling but will soon be in a similar place; independence, freedom & creativity is being successfully held at bay - my friends, we have a knee on the country's neck. Nolite ergo solliciti esse ... we're almost there!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. CLEVELAND'S new Police and Crime Commissioner Steve Turner has been told he is “making a mistake” by ending funding from his office for a trailblazing heroin addiction treatment (HAT) scheme.

      Conservative Mr Turner says he will not fund the Middlesbrough-based project when funding from the PCC runs out in September and said he had seen no actual evidence, beyond anecdotal accounts, that it had reduced crime in the town.

      But Councillor Chris Jones, a Liberal Democrat who stood against Mr Turner in last week’s PCC election and is also a member of Cleveland’s Police and Crime Panel, said: “I think he is making a mistake to remove the funding.”

      The Home Office-licensed scheme launched in October 2019 and was the first of its kind in the UK. It administers medical grade heroin injections from the Foundations Medical Practice, in Acklam Road, to ‘high risk’ individuals with entrenched addictions with a view to reducing their reliance on street-bought heroin and steering them away from crime to pay for it.

      Cllr Jones said: “Mr Turner obviously doesn’t think giving drug addicts heroin works and he won’t be using his budget to pay for it.

      “My reply to that is has the war on drugs we’ve been fighting for the last 50 years worked?

      “I have major concerns and see the scheme as part of the solution, along with other ideas and initiatives.

      “You can talk about tackling the drug dealers, but there is so much money to be made from drugs that if you take one dealer out there are five more waiting to take their position, and you are fighting a losing battle.”

      He added: “The previous full-time Police and Crime Commissioner [Barry Coppinger] had the scheme funded by proceeds of crime so in fact you had crime paying to solve crime, and I thought that was fantastic.

      “I’ve spoken to a lot of people about the scheme and they’ll say ‘absolutely terrible, I don’t agree’, but when you explain to them the mechanics of it and how many victims of crime it potentially takes out of the equation because of addicts no longer feeding their addictions, they see it from a different angle. You have to look at the bigger picture.”

      Cllr Jones said he and other members of the police and crime panel would be holding Mr Turner to account in terms of his election manifesto and the promises he made to residents living in the borough.

      Speaking to the Local Democracy Reporting Service (LDRS), Mr Turner, who prior to his election referred to “well-meaning programmes which do little to tackle the drugs problem at source”, said he did not take such decisions lightly.

      Mr Turner said: “I have looked at the numbers and the output of the scheme and while I absolutely appreciate how fantastically beneficial it has been to the people that have been on it, I genuinely believe it is a public health issue. The HAT programme when it started was controversial and it is still controversial now – the results on one hand are spectacular, but on the other hand they don’t deliver from a policing perspective."

      Delete
    2. “Nobody has yet shown me a document that says crime in Middlesbrough has dropped since the scheme started. It seems to be based purely on speculation and what these addicts say they used to steal, and the actual statistics don’t support that claim. Even if we were able to scale the scheme up and put the same size operation in other areas in the borough we would still be helping less than 40 people and for the same money we could put anywhere between 20 to 30 officers onto the streets of Cleveland.”

      Mr Turner suggested the scheme could be paid for in the future by the Government-funded Project Adder, which stands for addiction, diversion, disruption, enforcement and recovery.

      It was announced in January that over the next three years Middlesbrough will receive £4.5m from the scheme which aims to tackle drugs misuse and the criminal gangs who profit from the illegal trade in drugs, but also offer support to recovering addicts.

      Involving Cleveland Police, Middlesbrough Council and local health services, it will see a new intensive approach, combining targeted and tougher policing, with enhanced treatment and recovery services also being provided for.

      Mr Turner said: “Project Adder is Government-funded and very much public-health based, and designed for programmes like the HAT scheme. Just because funding is not coming via this office it does not mean there isn’t funding to look at elsewhere for these schemes. My office will always signpost and support anybody who wants to get help in any way or any organisation that wants to deliver a scheme of that type of nature. It is important that we do support addicts wherever we can and there are other organisations across England that do that.”

      Middlesbrough has the highest rate of opioid – a class of drugs which includes heroin and strong painkillers – use in England and for every thousand people in the town it has been estimated that 21 are using heroin.

      Members of Middlesbrough Council’s health scrutiny panel have been examining the opioid crisis as part of a probe over the past 18 months and have urged funding for the HAT programme to be prioritised by South Tees health chiefs and kept rolling for the “foreseeable future”.

      They also suggested Project Adder could help cover the costs, along with funding from probation services.

      A report compiled by panel members also backed the use of drug consumption rooms, already in use elsewhere in Europe, Canada and Australia, which aim to reduce drug-related deaths by providing space for safer and more hygienic use of substances, promoting access to support and taking drug use out of public places.

      Delete
    3. There were 60 drug-related deaths in Middlesbrough between 2017 and 2019 – the second highest number in England during that period.

      The LDRS approached Danny Ahmed, who is the clinical lead on the Middlesbrough heroin assisted treatment scheme, to comment on the funding situation, but he said he was not in a position to do so at this stage.

      Mr Ahmed previously said it was a “no brainer” to continue with the programme given the costs incurred by users’ impact on the community and he would like to see funding locked in for a longer period of time and see it widened so more people benefit.

      The HAT scheme was extended into a second year using £288,000 provided by Mr Coppinger from proceeds of crime funds, while the Durham and Tees Valley Community Rehabilitation Company agreed to contribute £50,000.

      The former PCC said efforts to break the cycle of committing crime to fund addiction had failed, whether it be prison, increased sentencing or police crackdowns.

      By the time the current funding ends the overall cost of the scheme will be approximately £729,000.

      Fourteen people took part in the first year of the programme with a study by researchers from Teesside University stating offending had been reduced by 60 per cent among the participants.

      The researchers said that prior to entering the programme the participants had accumulated 52 years of prison time between them and cost the state £4.3m, which included policing and criminal justice system costs and costs to victims through having items stolen or damaged.

      Delete
  2. All that our current drug policy does is create a myriad of criminal markets, and then outsources them back to criminal networks.
    It's unfortunate, but drugs are, like climate change or Coronavirus, a significant problem of global proportions, that causes great harm to both individuals and societies as a whole. Drugs exist, there here, they're not going away anytime soon, and as a consequence require a careful and considered management strategy.
    Actually, prostitution and sex work requires a very similar focus, it's here, prohibition cant stop it, and if you can't stop it, it needs to be managed in a way that best protects both the individual and society.
    Drugs and drug policy are a very emotive issue for some people, it touches moral and ethical nerve ends, but the current approach is no solution to the problem.
    There's a short film that might provoke some thought and comment on our drug policies here.

    https://youtu.be/dj_5JkgxmRU

    How best to live with a problem you just can't get rid of?

    'Getafix

    ReplyDelete
  3. https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/most-women-not-need-there-20631829

    Most women do not need to be there': What happens to the female offenders who are spared jail by our courts

    The Manchester Evening News has looked back on cases where women avoided prison sentences and why.

    Women have made up a quarter of offenders in England and Wales over the last five years. A number of these female offenders have passed through Greater Manchester's courts, which are among the busiest in the country. The sentences these women receive frequently spark debate between M.E.N readers.

    In comments sections below court cases, it's often claimed that women get off lightly, simply because of their gender, and that this is unfair to male defendants.

    Earlier this year, Natalie Schmitz was narrowly spared jail after dealing cocaine and ketamine as she had turned her life around. Mum-of-six Michelle Samuels escaped a prison term for her part in a street brawl, after her case took over three years to come to court and she had not committed any further offences during that time. And Simara Knopka, who was spotted by an M.E.N photographer driving from court just minutes after being banned from the roads, too avoided jail due to her mental health issues. Each of these stories led to heated discussions.

    Two major factors are in the background. The first is that each case is unique, and so sentencing is not an exact science. Sentences depend on the circumstances of offenders and their crimes, their history, criminal or otherwise, the discretion of judges, the persuasiveness of arguments made by lawyers, and the interpretation and application of sentencing guidelines.

    And there is also the debate, amongst campaigners and criminal justice professionals, about the societal cost of imprisoning women, who tend to commit less serious offences than men. The issues informing this debate were laid out in 2018, in the Conservative government's Female Offender Strategy. "We know that there is a higher prevalence of need amongst female offenders, such as mental health problems, and self-harm," the then-justice secretary, David Gauke, wrote. "Many experience chaotic lifestyles which are often the product of a life of abuse and trauma; almost 60% of female offenders have experienced domestic abuse."

    "70.7% of adult women and 62.9%of adult men released from custody between April to June 2016 following a short custodial sentence of less than 12 months re-offended within a year," he added. "There is persuasive evidence that short custodial sentences are less effective in reducing re-offending than community orders," the politician went on, introducing the strategy. Short sentences generate churn which is a major driver of instability in our prisons and they do not provide sufficient time for rehabilitative activity. The impact on women, many of whom are sentenced for non-violent, low level but persistent offences, often for short periods of time, is particularly significant. The prevalence of anxiety and self-harm incidents is greater than for male prisoners. As more female offenders are primary carers than their male counterparts, these sentences lead to a disproportionate impact on children and families and a failure to halt the inter-generational cycle of offending."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Earlier this year, it was reported that the rate of self harm in women’s prisons increased by 8%, year on year, up until September, compared to a decline of 7% in men’s prisons.

      Kate Fraser, Women in Prison Northern Development Manager, told the Manchester Evening News: “We know that most women in prison are there for six months or less which is long enough to lose your home, job and your children, with the Government's own strategy acknowledging that most women do not need to be there.

      “Prison is a traumatic experience with the rate of self-harm in women’s prisons six times higher than men’s. However, there is another way. When women are sentenced in the community, they can be better supported to tackle the root causes of crime like domestic abuse, mental ill-health and harmful substance use.”

      Delete