Europe's approach to drugs is more enlightened ... it's tougher

E-llusion

Bluelight Crew
Joined
Nov 3, 2002
Messages
5,975
Location
ALASKA
n 2006, Governor-General Michaëlle Jean was hosting Queen Silvia of Sweden during the Swedish royal family's visit to Canada when the topic of illegal drug use came up. The GG told the Queen that Canada is taking an enlightened approach. Instead of punishing users, she said, society needs to be understanding of drug use and assist in reducing harm until the addict is ready to quit.

Alas, the Queen was not impressed. She briskly informed the GG that Sweden takes a hard-line approach, that users are given a choice between treatment and jail, and that Sweden's addiction rates are much lower than Canada's. After that, they changed the subject.

Advocates of harm-reduction measures, such as needle exchanges, methadone programs and Vancouver's supervised-injection site, often point to Europe's more enlightened approach to drugs as proof of how far behind we are in Canada. But parts of Europe are having second thoughts. Socially progressive Sweden had a brief but disastrous fling with prescription heroin back in the 1960s. After that, it embraced the hard-line approach. Today its policy is to make drugs very difficult to get, but treatment very easy - and sometimes compulsory. "The vision is that of a society free from narcotic drugs," says Maria Larsson, the Minister for Public Health.

As a consequence of grassroots support for this policy, drug use in Sweden is a third of the European average. "The lessons of Sweden's drug control history should be learned by others," said Antonio Maria Costa, who heads the UN's Office on Drugs and Crime.

Scotland took a different tack. Drug use is widely tolerated, as you know if you saw Trainspotting. Rehabilitation programs are scarce, but the national methadone program has become a vast and ineffective money-pit. Scotland has more than 50,000 heroin addicts. Drug deaths have soared, drug-related crime is high, and tens of thousands of children are growing up with addicted parents. "Methadone has quite literally become the opiate of the masses," warned Neil McKeganey, one of Scotland's foremost drug policy experts.

Two months ago, the Scottish government announced a change in direction. From now on its primary focus will be on "recovery," not just harm reduction. "Harm reduction ideas have failed in Scotland," says Prof. McKeganey. "They have failed to protect injectors from hepatitis C, failed to reduce the scale of the drug problem, failed to reduce many of the harms inflicted on others."

The Netherlands is famous for its permissive drug culture, but even it is not as permissive as it used to be. Although you can still toke up in marijuana coffee shops, pot remains illegal. A parliamentary proposal to allow regulated, large-scale marijuana production was voted down, and the government moved vigorously against the psychedelic drug ecstasy. Switzerland (which runs supervised-injection sites but also has thousands of treatment beds) voted against decriminalizing marijuana. The UK made marijuana possession semi-legal a few years ago, but experienced an explosion of pot use among minors, as well as a sharp rise in harmful effects attributed to more potent strains of weed. It has now reversed course and reclassified marijuana as a harmful drug.

Like Canada, Australia is experimenting with a supervised-injection site, in Sydney. The passionate debate over whether it reduces harm is virtually identical to the one in Canada.

I asked Scotland's Neil McKeganey if he had witnessed the drug scene in Vancouver, a city that is famous for its harm-reduction approach. He had. "I was utterly shocked," he said. "I could hardly believe that in a culturally developed, sophisticated city there could be a drug problem of such magnitude." In his view, too much emphasis on harm reduction invariably undermines prevention efforts. "To provide a setting where someone can inject street drugs is doomed. The next step is saying, maybe we should be providing them with drugs as well."

The provision of "clean" drugs is, in fact, what many advocates of Insite want next. "Many individuals who promote harm reduction believe there's fundamentally nothing wrong with drug use, except the fact that it's illegal," says Prof. McKeganey.

Every nation is different, and drug policies that work in one place may not work in another. But to him, Vancouver is a clear case study in what not to do. "It's a harbinger of what other cities could experience if they do not develop effective prevention methods."

-------------------------------------------------
Europe's approach to drugs is more enlightened ... it's tougher

MARGARET WENTE

From Thursday's Globe and Mail
July 17, 2008 at 3:31 AM EDT

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080717.wcowent17/BNStory/specialComment/home
 
LOL
Scotland took a different tack. Drug use is widely tolerated, as you know if you saw Trainspotting.


he UK made marijuana possession semi-legal a few years ago, but experienced an explosion of pot use among minors, as well as a sharp rise in harmful effects attributed to more potent strains of weed. It has now reversed course and reclassified marijuana as a harmful drug.
Also laughable. It wasn't made 'semi-legal', it was just moved down to a lower classification but was still punishable by up to 2 years in jail for possession and 7 for selling.

This article is shite.
 
Karaboudjan is correct in both his comments. Also, Neil McKeganey certainly doesn't speak for the majority of people involved in drug policy in Scotland. He seems to get called up whenever an anti-drugs message is being sought after. He is a hard-liner. A just-say-no person. A General in the war on drugs.

There is a growing dissatisfaction with his approach in Scotland, and we will most certainly begin piloting "drug consumption rooms". Some high level health people here are very impressed with Canada's approach, and especially with "shooting Galleries". They save lives. They may be unpalatable, but they're effective.

And as for a "vision of a society free from narcotic drugs" (Maria Larsson, Swedish Minister for Public Health) - such dreams are delusions of silly people. I believe Sweden makes a tidy income from it's 20 breweries!! But then that's not a drug is it :\
 
It seems like they think harm reduction is about limiting use. IMO, it's not about that. It's about making use, which is inevitable to some degree, safer. Does harm reduction cause more use? Of course, at least I think so. Make anything that's pleasurable much safer, and more people will try it out. The questions are, how much more use does it cause, and how effective is it at what it's supposed to do...



As for Sweeden, I'd argue that their drug use levels(if they are true) are lower for other reasons; socioeconomic, location, culture, etc
 
The UK made marijuana possession semi-legal a few years ago, but experienced an explosion of pot use among minors, as well as a sharp rise in harmful effects attributed to more potent strains of weed.

Do tell us about these "harmful effects" that stronger weed has. Since you don't inhale as much smoke, they're probably safer.
 
Damn lies and statistics, sends a shudder down my spine.
All I could think while reading this was 'one step forward, and two steps backward'.

A few cities and small countries dabble with being less than draconian for a little while and are expecting some dramatic change in drug use or drug culture. The practice of ingesting psychoactives is as old as man, and the unfortunate reality of addiction does not disappear under prohibition or under any law.
I cant possibly know all the details of this situation, and lawmakers wish they did. The psychological aspects of addiction can touch on some of mans deepest fears and desires, their very desire to live and their feelings on death. Love, hate, self-worth, etc. It may take generations for the drug-users to change under harm-reduction policies.

But we do know that prohibition doesn't work, as that has been the standard for centuries. Thriving black markets and crime infused drug-trade isn't the answer, unless you want to further restrict the rights of people and put soldiers with machine guns throughout our cities, and have every citizen piss test when they wake up in the morning.

I dont know the answers, but from my brief 25 years on this planet, the jail and prison inmates Ive shared space with are definitely not on a track of recovery and self-control. They are angry that they were treated as less than human, and know from more seasoned prisoners how to attempt larger more ambitious crimes to feed their addictions.
There is no respect for a system that implies you are degenerate abnormal scum who must be kept on a tight leash after they let you out of their cage.

The choice isnt between a drug-free society and a drug-ridden one, we've always lived in a society infused with drugs;
The choice is between making the addicts we have, and are inevitably going to have, criminals or treating them as people with an illness.
 
Quite ironic she talks about "Europe" in the title, yet only mentions Sweden as an example to backup her claim. Last time I checked, Europe was composed of 45+ countries. :\
 
I live in sweden and this is just government propaganda. Sweden has never prescribed heroin, it was amphetamines that was prescribed for a short time in the 60´s.

It is true that sweden has a low rate of drug use compared to the rest of europe, at least if you look at the statistics. First of all, they never ask adults about drug use, only high school students. That way the stats are always nice and low Secondly, before sweden joined the EU in the mid nineties it was an isolated country and in my guess smugglers just couldn´t be bothered shippng drugs to sweden in the 80´s. Guess what happened when sweden joined the EU. That´s right, drug use rates soared.
Sweden also has one of Europe´s highest death rates for IV drug users because of scarce methadone and sub programs.
Finally, sweden has ridiculous prison sentences for drug crimes. A few kilos of weed will land you 10 years in prison, while raping a child you´ll probably get away with less than 5 years.
 
Well, its certainly less risky in Sweden, that might make it more fun for some people.
Oops! Just vomited a little.
 
yeah that good weed always makes me want to get up off my couch, eat too much ice cream, and go on a good ol' killing spree. :p
 
E-llusion said:
Quite ironic she talks about "Europe" in the title, yet only mentions Sweden as an example to backup her claim. Last time I checked, Europe was composed of 45+ countries. :\
exactly. this is bollocks.

and comparing scottish reality to trainspotting? gimme a break. 8)
 
criminals or treating them as people with an illness.


That is the fundamental arguement IMO. Personally I think easier access to treatment ,education and 'harm reduction' until ready is the way to go.

But I think it is much more expensive. Even taken into account maintenance and salaries of prisons, cost of food and supplies etc.. Add into that an army of healthcare professionals and it's $$$$.

IMO that is the chief reason things are the way they are and slows progress regardless of which way things end up.
 
edarrin said:
That is the fundamental arguement IMO. Personally I think easier access to treatment ,education and 'harm reduction' until ready is the way to go.

But I think it is much more expensive. Even taken into account maintenance and salaries of prisons, cost of food and supplies etc.. Add into that an army of healthcare professionals and it's $$$$.

IMO that is the chief reason things are the way they are and slows progress regardless of which way things end up.

There are some impressive numbers when it comes to the cost of the 'War on Drugs', I am too hungry right now :\ to list the details but will if nobody wants to google it themselves.
But I really believe the cost will be less in the long term if people with addiction problems arent criminalized; I think it really has to do with the effort it takes to change where the money is going, and to change the deeply ingrained ideas of the older generations.
I think once this 'old guard' of politicians and bitter old people die off in the next few decades things will begin to change in regards to drug laws, human rights (gay rights especially), and the use of war to manipulate economies.

At least thats what I hope.

And everyone calls me a disillusioned cynic! =D



----------------
Now playing: Gorillaz - Feel Good Inc.
via FoxyTunes
 
Well I hope I'm not attacked for saying this since this is a liberal progressive community... I abused marijuana for quite some time (I say abused because I'd smoke it non stop everyday for months at a time) I love it just like everyone else, still do, but a year ago it brought out terrible OCD and Anxiety symptoms. I wasn't using any other drugs either. I'm guessing it just brought out latent illnesses that were prone to me. This can be considered a harmful effect, since OCD and anxiety can be horrible. I do agree weed is physically harmless... and mentally for the most part, but like everything else MODERATION. Anything is possible.
 
The provision of "clean" drugs is, in fact, what many advocates of Insite want next. "Many individuals who promote harm reduction believe there's fundamentally nothing wrong with drug use, except the fact that it's illegal," says Prof. McKeganey.

Anybody with a brain could figure out that there is nothing wrong with drug use. It should be made legal no doubt about it then maybe we could stop putting junkies in prison. Giving pharmaceutical heroin to addicts is just another way of treating them but that was only a very small study done in vancouver i think.

What the hell does this guy want anyway cut off needle exchange and safe injection sites and have everyone sharing needles? Thats not gonna cause any problems now is it 8) . What a idiot.

We are behind in addictions treatment in alot of areas in canada and im sure if good ol' stevie harper gets his way we will be behind much farther. Buprenorphine is pretty new here and is only available in a daily pickup program like methadone i think. Maybe sometime in the future you will be able to get it on prescription but thats going to take awile. Hell id like a methadone prescription for pain and i can't get it because of the restrictions around which doctor can prescribe it.

I do agree weed is physically harmless... and mentally for the most part, but like everything else MODERATION. Anything is possible.

This is the case for every drug even the great legal one alcohol. If you have a beer or 2 after work then theres no problem but if you drink a 24 pack of beer everyday then you will have a problem. Granted alcohol is alot harder drug then weed but you get the point.

Some people get bad reactions to weed after smoking it everyday for years. Ive seen this happen quite abit. I smoked it everyday as well and was stoned for a good proportion of the day but i never had a bad reaction to it. I gave it up just because i was bored with it and good weed was getting hard to come by because crack quickly became the drug of choice.
 
Top