Minimisation+of+Harm+minimisation

Alex McDonald n6842356

The above image is a basic visual representation of Australia’s drug policy since 1985, and the three pillars which are the three areas of focus is Australia’s drug strategy. Harm reductions focus is on reducing the damage done when illegal drugs are used. Supply reduction is the main area involving the criminalisation of drugs, and is focused on disrupting or preventing the production and distribution of drugs. The final pillar is Demand reduction, with goals to promote abstinence to drug use and seek to provide help and support to addicts or users.
 * Present your Artefact **

The above picture, is the representation of the current trend for many countries policies, largely in Europe, regarding illicit drug use, as the focus in these countries drifts away from the more direct absence and criminalisation of users, to the view point that addiction is more a health issue then a criminal one. Countries following this approach have achieved considerable success regarding the issues involved with illicit drug use. Australia’s official drug policy is, on paper following the ideas behind the successes of these other policies, however huge differences in the amount of money and resources provided for criminalisation/drug law enforcement and the actual treatment or harm minimisation areas of the policy, are keeping Australia as a prohibition country, to the detriment of the communities affected by this problem.
 * Name The Public Health Issue Central to you Analysis **

By the 1980’s a strong drug culture had formed in most of the nations of the world. Abstinence and criminalisation of illicit drugs was the policy used in most countries (Bennet C, 2008). The emergence of HIV in the 1970’s, as well as the discovery that it was a blood borne virus capable of being easily transmitted by drug use involving contaminated needles, was the main reason for the creation of the harm minimisation policy in Netherlands (Bennet C, 2008). In 1985 Australia formed its first national drug policy, based on the principles of harm minimisation and the three pillars, Harm reduction, Supply reduction and Demand reduction ( Anex, 2012).
 * Literature Review **

Harm minimisation is one of two general approaches to the issue of illegal drug use in countries. The second approach is referred to often as an abstinence/criminalisation policy. The ‘abstinence’ policy refers to the a zero-tolerance approach to illegal drug use, using criminalisation for both users and suppliers of drugs to attempt to eliminate drug use in communities. America’s national illegal drug policy is well known for its use of the abstinence approach, which has been referred to as the ‘war on drugs’ (McDonald D, 2011).

At their extremes the two policies have very different approaches to the same issue, as well as different goals they attempt to achieve. As stated, abstinence uses the threat of legal action and incarceration for all involved in the use and supply of illegal drugs. Drug addiction is also viewed largely as a personal choice rather than a medical issue. The aim of this policy is to prevent drug use completely ( Anex 2012). Harm minimisation approaches the issue by accepting drug use is an inevitable fact in today’s society and attempts to reduce the harm caused to both individuals using drugs as well as the communities they are involved in (Douglas B and McDonald D, 2012).

Australia’s drug policy, despite being labelled as a harm minimisation policy is more often viewed as a mixture of both policies (Douglas B et al, 2012). Harm minimisation does criminalise the supply and use of drugs, which are covered by the supply reduction pillar as well as part of demand reduction (McDonald D, 2011). The use of drugs is often dealt with by methods other than prison however, as addiction is shown to be treatable in a health setting and prison often trapping the person in a cycle of drug use and crime. In Australia however the resources provided by the government for use in the drug policy are heavily weighted in favour of law enforcement, with little being provided for use in harm reduction or demand reduction (McDonald D, 2011). The issue involved with this is that evidence based research show law enforcement to be the least effective area in reducing the cost and damage caused by illicit drug use(Douglas B and McDonald D, 2012).


 * Analysis of the Artefact and you own learning reflections **

The cultural artefact that I chose was based on the way how I thought our drug policy was actually handled. Each three pillars were of equal importance and were therefore given equal support and funding. After researching and examining the issue deeper however I found that the truth was a lot more biased away from the important areas of harm minimisation and more towards the criminalisation side. In my life I have luckily had very little to ever do with illicit drugs being around me, but even still the cycle of just convicting someone with a drug problem and throwing them in jail seems rather counterproductive especially with the research and evidence we have on addiction these days. I have however also learned that things aren’t always completely black and white in regard to the way things might appear, and in regards to the drug policy of Australia though there is a desperate need to change the way we implement our policy different views and opinions of different communities need to be incorporated to actually be able to enforce change. In regards to learning while doing this assignment is probably to dig into things more deeply, because the facts and situations I discovered initially turned out to be quite different to what I eventually ended on.


 * References **

Peter G. Miller (2001) A critical review of the harm minimization ideology

in Australia, Critical Public Health, 11:2, 167-178, DOI: 10.1080/09581590110039865

Cary Bennett (2008) The emergence of Australia's national campaign against

drug abuse: a case-study in the politics of drug control, Journal of Australian Studies, 32:3,

309-321, DOI: 10.1080/14443050802294018

Jean V. McHale (1991) Harm reduction and the needle exchange scheme some legal

problems, Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law, 13:1, 27-36, DOI: 10.1080/09649069108413928

McDonald, D (2011) // A background paper for an Australia 21 Roundtable, Sydney, 2012, addressing the question ‘What are the likely costs and benefits of a change in //

// Australia’s current policy on illicit drugs?’ //, Australia 21, Canberra.

Douglas, B., McDonald, D (2012) The prohibition of illicit drugs is killing and criminalising our children and we are all letting it happen, Australia 21, Canberra.

Douglas, B., McDonald, D., Wokak, A (2012) The prohibition of illicit drugs is killing and criminalising our children and we are all letting it happen, Australia 21, Canberra

Anex (2012), Australian Drug Policy: harm reduction and

‘new recovery' (Discussion Paper: Draft for Consultation). Anex, Melbourne, Australia.

Ministerial Council on Drug strategy (2012) National Drug strategy 2010-2015 A framework for action on alcohol, tobacco and other drugs

Reflections

http://healthcultureandsociety2013.wikispaces.com/%27Who+do+you+love+most%27%3F

http://healthcultureandsociety2013.wikispaces.com/%27Know%3DNo%27