Toronto Public Library Board
Zooming in on UNGASS
Drug Policy Futures takes a look at the extent the consensus from 2016 United Nations General Assembly Special Session, (UNGASS), and the broad menu of suggested interventions in the outcome document are reflected policy documents and practical interventions in the Member States.
The outcome document titled “Our joint commitment to effectively addressing and countering the world drug problem” offers an excellent menu for a comprehensive, balanced and effective policy to reduce drug use and its related harm in the world. Check out Drug Policy Futures full report at the following link: https://drugpolicyfutures.org/publications/
So how many of your hard earned tax dollars are going into Harm Reduction?
And what exactly are we accomplishing with all that money? Here is a link to an organization that is calling for an audit and some accountability. https://www.stepupnow.ca/government_funding_audit
Excellent article pointing out what many of us have known for quite some time.
Dr. Bill MacEwan and Paul Sullivan: Profound suffering at the heart of our beautiful city seems to defy all attempts to relieve it
Building Community Society of Greater Vancouver, a nonprofit registered society with many years of experience in social policy in Vancouver, has become increasingly alarmed by the intractable general health, mental health and addiction problems in the Downtown Eastside (DTES), aggravated by extreme poverty and systemic inequality. These health issues are now being further exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic.
For the last two decades, the DTES has been pounded by crisis after crisis. From the infection outbreaks of HIV to the opioid overdose crisis (the neighbourhood has the highest rate of death in Canada), it has suffered greatly at all levels.
This wave of crises has grave consequences for the well-being of the whole Downtown Eastside community, and indeed, all of Metro Vancouver. There is profound suffering at the heart of our beautiful city that seems to defy all attempts to relieve it. The situation is in sharp relief now, so what can we learn from it?
A person’s right to health and home
The DTES has a population of 20,000 people, 7,000 living within the low-income community. Of those, 2,500 individuals suffer with untreated severe mental illness and addiction. Adding to an already complex issue: A disproportionate percentage of this most-vulnerable DTES population is Indigenous, the legacy of generations of systemic racism. This should never be forgotten as we search for a response to this crisis.
Further, there is an understanding among health workers that there are approximately 200 to 300 individuals whose mental health issues are too severe to be addressed by the current system. Too often these same individuals suffer from a multitude of daunting challenges: trauma (both psychosocial and brain injury), serious health issues (HIV, Hepatitis C), developmental problems (Fetal Alcohol Syndrome), grinding poverty, and intractable addiction. All of these can affect a person’s cognitive abilities.
Because of the shortage of accommodation at every level of need, there is no way to free up supportive housing units when a resident is able to move on to less-expensive (to operate) social or market housing. While we need to recognize that some individuals will always need supported care due to head injury, etc., we need to develop a meaningful housing ladder that starts with treatment facilities, leads to supportive housing, and goes on to social housing (defined as affordable to those on income assistance).
When it comes to individual health, we as a society wait for individuals to seek treatment of their own accord. It is becoming increasingly clear, however, that the aforementioned difficulties, individually or together, prevent many from having the awareness or insight to be able to seek treatment. Health care is a right in Canada, but individuals with multiple brain difficulties are missing out on their right to health.
A tough question we have to ask now: Do we really want to wait for more people to die of overdoses and suicides, have poorly treated physical and mental illnesses, and repeatedly go in and out of the criminal justice system?
This lack of effective treatment undermines the DTES community despite valiant attempts to restore it to social and civic health. This critical lack drives high rates of crime, is exacerbated by glaringly substandard housing, and leads to open drug use on the streets. Providing both housing and meaningful treatment is the only way forward in the overall healing of the DTES.
Focus on effective treatment and housing
Here in Vancouver, how many people with addiction get the opportunity to access addiction rehabilitation treatments? The answer is embarrassing: We do not really know. The problem is our system for addiction therapy is run by different organizations (health, criminal justice, B.C. Housing, along with private and religion-based providers) who do not share their data broadly. Can you imagine such a disorganized approach to our current COVID-19 public health crisis?
How many major addiction rehabilitation programs have been added in the four years the opioid crisis has been going on? Zero!
The Building Community Society of Greater Vancouver recommends that all levels of the community come together to forge an effective treatment plan that, like the plan for COVID-19, identifies and addresses the problem with commitment and a sense of urgency, both short- and long-term, which finally responds to individuals with mental illness and addictions.
This plan needs to have a single focus with critical supporting features. The focus: Achieving a drug-free life. Harm reduction, opioid replacement therapies and secure/safe drug supplies are helpful and should continue as means toward this goal. Access to treatment also needs to be accompanied by adequate supervised addiction-free housing so people can accomplish the tough task ahead.
To achieve the goals of the right to health and home we need to:
• Establish a single entity that will coordinate all social housing policy implementation. At present the well-intentioned patchwork of agencies, funders and nonprofits providing social housing fails the needs of underprivileged people requiring a home. The goal is to better organize a housing ladder that allows people to move up in their housing and lives.
• Establish forums and discussion platforms that help develop trust within our community. This community trust is needed to lead to a broad level of agreement that can help create the social licence needed to tackle solutions for these difficult problems.
While the DTES is an epicenter, the mental health and addiction crisis is a pervasive problem that dramatically affects all parts of Metro Vancouver as well as the rest of Canada, from cities to reserves. To ensure effective and lasting change, a multi-government strike force is needed with the power to investigate the elements that allow this ongoing crisis to continue and to make the necessary legal, policy and service provision changes that will lead to real change.
The City of Vancouver, which has so much stake in a successful outcome, can take the first step. We realize that the city can only do so much, but the one important tool the city has is in land use and zoning. If Vancouver is willing to step up to offer land to the provincial and federal governments, actually earmarked for treatment, we believe the other levels of government will be more likely to come to the table.
Building Community Society is a volunteer organization focusing on developing effective solutions for Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside. For more information, please see buildingcommunitysociety.org
Dr. Bill MacEwan is the former head of psychiatry at St. Paul’s Hospital and is a clinical professor in the department of psychiatry at UBC;Paul Sullivan is a communications consultant and former editor of The Globe and Mail and managing editor of The Vancouver Sun.
We have highlighted what we feel are a few key ideas, questions and challenges to real action. We are delighted by this op-ed that appeared the other day in the Vancouver Sun and we are happy to reproduce it here.
ABR is a New DPNC Project
MAKING THINGS EASIER
ABR is a new non-profit.
We have one goal: Bringing real recovery back into the continuum of care in addictions. We want more abstinence based beds available and paid for by governments.
Addicts should have the same claim to real health care as any other patients. Some addicts may be good candidates for a lifetime of narcotic subsistence, but most really would like to be free of these dependencies.
This is a numbers game.
We need thousands of signatures from every kind of citizen supporting this cause.
So, as of today, we have made access to our PETITION SIGN UP earlier and more visible on our https://abrnow.ca/ website.
The JOIN button appears twice very early on in the website
And each time it leads you directly to our SUPPORT LIST SIGN UP
Help us help more people begin their wonderful journey of real recovery to a full bodied life and full citizenship.
All we want from you NOW is your name and email address.
Please encourage all your friends, family and colleagues who feel as passionately as you do about this important matter to add their names and email addresses as well.
Many thanks!
Impact: A socio-economic review of supervised consumption sites in Alberta
BEAUTIFUL PIECE IN THE COURIER
Odd Squad out to make a difference
Toby Hinton a 23-year veteran of VPD
Vancouver CourierJune 29, 2012
Sgt. Toby Hinton, a beat cop on the Downtown Eastside and 23-year veteran of the Vancouver Police Department, has seen firsthand the devastating effects of drugs and alcohol. He works in an overwhelmingly negative environment. But with unprecedented access to tragic life stories, Hinton was determined to do something positive to educate at-risk groups of the dangers of substance abuse and other criminal behaviour. He, along with six other officers founded Odd Squad Productions, a volunteer band of police officers who produce movies to keep kids clean and off the street.
The non-profit group, which recently marked its 15th anniversary, has produced more than 15 documentaries telling real stories of the pitfalls of drug abuse, gangs and other high-risk behaviour.
Through a Blue Lens-perhaps their most notable documentary that was produced in partnership with the National Film Board-has been viewed by millions in 22 countries. Scathed & Stolen Lives and Tears for April have both received accolades at the New York Film Festival. The squad also makes presentations to schools, community centres and boardrooms. The group has also enlisted high school students to spread the word. Its On Track program takes young achievers on a one-day workshop that includes a stroll through the Downtown Eastside. Students return to their schools as ambassadors sharing lessons learned with their peers.
Why did you choose a career in policing?
I disliked authority and needed to come to terms with that. I thought the best way was to become authority and then try to find out why I hated it so much. Not sure if that worked or not, because I still don’t like authority.
How did the Odd Squad come about?
I was doing presentations with boring visuals. I asked Ret. Const. Al Arsenault if I could borrow some slides. Immediately, the presentation was a lot more interesting. Right around this time, a bunch of beat cops sat down and decided to start doing some prevention work. We wanted to get a strong message out to youth about the consequences of bad decisions, particularly around drug use/abuse. The marriage of presentation and stills/video, along with support from the department, led us to making videos. A well-done educational film can go a lot further and reach a much wider audience.
What do you hope to achieve?
We hope to prevent people from ending up in the type of grim situation we often see on the street. We want to encourage youth to reach their potential in life and not fall victim to the consequences of bad decisions around risky behaviour. Educated and informed youth are in a better position to make healthy decisions with their bodies, and that this knowledge will carry them well through life.
What do you say to kids who may want to experiment with drugs?
I would want kids to be well educated on what they are putting in their bodies, and this starts with diet, and extends to everything else. Your body is the biggest investment you have in life: look after it! The No. 1 killer out there is tobacco. Alcohol is a huge problem in society. There are some serious consequences to the drugs that are being used by youth, starting with alcohol and tobacco.
There is virtually no quality control in any of the illicit street drugs (witness the large number of youth lost in the past year to PMMA-contaminated ecstasy). I would want to have the youth delay the experimentation as late as possible in life, so that their social bonds are developed, they have started identifying their passions and interests, their brains are maturing, and they have established a healthy lifestyle. Chances are if they are 13 or 14 they could have much more significant issues with drug use and experimentation than someone who is on their way in life at age 19.
Your advice to parents?
Get engaged. Know your kids and their friends. Educate yourself about drugs and current trends with youth. Be there for your kids no matter what. Make sure that you are a good role model and leader at every waking moment. This is what you signed up for.
How did you get your subjects to open up?
Most of the drug addicts we work with don’t want anyone else to end up in their situation. For the most part, they are united in wanting to get a strong deterrent message out to youth. In a way, I think it helps them reclaim some dignity by contributing to valuable prevention work.
How do you solve the problems of the Downtown Eastside?
That question deserves a little more space for a response. There are a number of problems including crime, housing, drug addiction/dealing, poverty, mental health and prostitution. All of these are interrelated. Overall, I think there needs to be a bit more accountability into the money spent here, and we need to change our mindset from “non-judgmental” and “low-threshold” to focusing on getting people healthier (sacrilegious to say it nowadays but helping people become clean and sober) and into a structured and safe living environment. Just maintaining a pulse is not necessarily the best goal to strive for.
Are we making progress?
In some areas there has been great progress. In other areas there has been great slippage. For example, years ago 80 individuals a year (primarily First Nations) were being killed from consuming rice wine (non-potable due to sodium content). Ret. Insp. Ken Frail took this project on and forced change to the regulation banning corner stores in the Downtown Eastside from selling rice wine. We no longer have these deaths, although there is a substitute effect, nothing to the extent that we were dealing with 15 years ago.
On the other hand, a number of rooming houses are actually doing a good job. The conditions in a few have become worse. We now regularly attend to these hotels to deal with criminal issues, police complaints, and other problems. We were not doing this in the past.
yv*****@*****il.com
© Copyright (c) Vancouver Courier
DR. MANGHAM DOCUMENT – Easier to Read Version
SWITZERLAND IS NOT ALL CHOCOLATE & CLOCKS
Below you will find the entire text of a recent report on The Four Pillar Drug Policy in Switzerland – 20 years after. What is more interesting are the comments of our colleague Calvina Fay, of Drug Free America, which precede the Swiss report.
Many thanks to Hans Koeppel for this overview of the last 20 years of drug
policy and a current update from Switzerland. Interesting how the Swiss
government declares its heroin distribution program a “success.”
The retention in the program is good because who wouldn’t want to stay in it
and get free heroin…. The employment rate improves because the government
creates jobs for the addicts. Their overall health improves because the
government provides regular healthcare for them. Their housing situation
improves because the government provides housing for them. I suggest that
all of these things could be provided without providing the heroin but
instead providing abstinence based treatment to get them drug free and they
would be MUCH better off. The fact that addicts, aged 50-60, are being sent
off to retirement homes for the elderly, due to their declining health, is
just plain sad. Their lives are being wasted on drugs, compliments of the
government. Most people (who don’t use drugs) remain healthy and active
well into their 80s these days.
Calvina
The Four Pillar Drug Policy in Switzerland – 20 years after
Hans Koeppel, M.D.
Swiss Physicians against Drugs, June 2012
In the 1980s, Switzerland had a drug policy consisting of three pillars: Prevention, Therapy, and Law Enforcement. At that time, as the number of heroin addicts increased to tens of thousands, the authorities in several cities tolerated so-called “Needle Parks”. An open drug scene was established where thousands of addicts injected heroin in public, slept in parks, dealt in all drugs, and lived in slum-like misery, most of them in poor health. Several overdosed every day. The media published hundreds of reports on this scandalous situation and, eventually, the police were forced to close the parks and send addicts back to their own region.
In order to cope with the increasing number of heroin addicts, methadone programs were expanded. More than 17,000 heroin addicts were included in those programs which previously were very strict. Concomitant heroin or cocaine use was sanctioned by exclusion. Thenceforwards addicts received unusual high dose of daily methadone. Positive urine tests of heroin and cocaine had no consequence; nobody was excluded because of breaking the rules. Injection rooms were installed. Most of them still exist and they recently celebrated their 20th anniversary. During this time period, the concept of harm reduction was created. Drug liberalizers proposed to add it to the national drug policy as a fourth pillar. In this context, drug use was seen as a lifestyle – a human right. Harm reduction meant providing substitution programs for the majority of heroin addicts, which included the distribution of methadone as well as heroin. To introduce heroin distribution, a so-called trial was established. Although it failed to help addicts stop drug use, the maintenance of 70% of the addicts on these programs was celebrated as a success. As a result, the health authorities set up these so-called heroin-assisted treatment programs in several cities.
These events were accompanied by thousands of articles in newspapers to promote drug liberalization. Each article started with the sentence: “The drug war has failed”. “Law enforcement criminalizes sick people.” Pictures of people injecting heroin, needles and syringes or joints, were part of the message to habituate the public on drug paraphernalia. The continuous media campaign had a big impact on prevention and therapy.
Prevention
As a consequence, drug use skyrocketed. The consumption of marihuana, ecstasy, heroin, and cocaine was seen as a recreational activity. The Green Party, which started a referendum to legalize marihuana, claimed drug use as a human right.
The media praised the positive effects of the high evoked by drug use, while deriding those who warned of its dangerous effects on body and mind. These people were described as hard-liners, sectarian, or extreme right, by the media
All jobs in the field of drug prevention and counseling, among health authorities and social workers, were occupied by advocates of the drug liberalization movement. They became the experts in all drug issues and other opinions were excluded. Eventually, information about the harmful effects of drug use, was no longer distributed.
The prevailing opinion among members of the younger generation was that it was only a matter of time before marihuana and other drugs were legalized. Fortunately, the voters rejected any form of legalization of marihuana in two referendums, the last in 2008.
The drug problem is no longer publicly discussed and has vanished from the political agenda. In some sense, the establishment of heroin distribution has had a positive effect on drug prevention. Heroin is no longer attractive, but is now seen as a “loser drug”, therefore, very few young people ever start using heroin.
Unfortunately, the young generation is not so worried about recreational use of cocaine, ecstasy, and marihuana. At weekend parties, all these drugs are excessively used. During these parties, drug counselors limit their intervention on organizing laboratories testing the purity of illegal substances.
Drug prevention, which means informing people to avoid drug use because of the harmful effects, no longer exists. The health authorities prefer to emphasize the dangers of eating disorders, smoking, gambling, and other addictions. Despite this situation, the perception of marihuana has changed, and more people now realize the negative consequences of drug use.
Drug use in Switzerland is an interesting and evolving situation. Unfortunately, no continuous monitoring exists, therefore casual studies, such as the following, provide insight into what is happening.
Cannabis Monitoring in 2008
The study shows the changes in Marihuana use, comparing 2004 and 2007. The diagram relates to young people between 13 and 29 years of age. The lifetime prevalence went down from 46.1% in 2004 to 43.5% in 2007 (total of former and present users of Marihuana). In 2007, 11.2% used Marihuana in the six months before questioning. In 2004, the figure was 13.3%.
Women
Men
Total
2004
%
2007
%
2004
%
2007
%
2004
%
2007
%
no use
60.3
61.9
47.7
51.3
53.9
56.5
former use
31.1
31.2
34.5
33.5
32.8
32.3
present use
8.6
6.9
17.8
15.3
13.3
11.2
Source: Arbeitsgruppe Cannabismonitoring (Annaheim B. et al.)(2008) Veränderungen im Cannabiskonsum 2004 bis 2007. Edited by Bundesamt für Gesundheit (BAG)
The rate of marihuana use remains at a high level and does not appear to be going down significantly. However, it seems to have lost a little of its attraction.
Therapy
Drug addiction must be seen as a severe chronic disease, which eventually results in premature death. The most effective solution for addicts, to avoid this outcome, is to terminate the use of the toxic substance. This way out of drug use is very difficult to achieve. Very often addicts will experience several cycles of withdrawal, rehabilitation, and relapse, before they are finally physically and mentally weaned off the drug.
This idea of abstinence-oriented treatment has been clouded by the conception of harm reduction. Drug addiction is seen as similar to diabetes; people with diabetes need insulin, and addicts need heroin. So the logical solution is to distribute heroin to those who need it. In this climate, facilities which offer abstinence-oriented treatment are rare. They have difficulties being acknowledged and financed by health authorities. Many of them have had to close because of lack of money, and their clients are being redirected to substitution treatment. Most of the rehabilitation programs offer “partial withdrawal” (cocaine or heroin withdrawal, but not methadone) and substitution of methadone.
Harm reduction
Together with injection rooms, needle and syringe exchange, the drug policy is primarily based on methadone, buprenorphine (Suboxon) and heroin distribution. The following, from the summary of the annual report “Heroin assisted treatment 2007” (HAT), edited in 2008 by the Federal Health Authorities, gives a good picture of the present situation.
Heroin assisted treatment 2007
(in alphabetical order)
Age: The mean age of the patients was 40 years, and the median was 39. The ages ranged from 19 to 70.
Centres: Heroin-assisted treatment is currently being offered in 23 institutions (including two centres in prisons) which have an interdisciplinary structure and hold special authorization from the Federal Office of Public Health.
Concomitant substance use: Especially with regard to alcohol, cocaine, cannabinoids and tobacco, it can be seen that patients who had been in treatment for a year or more consumed the relevant substance on fewer days and hence had less concomitant substance use than the newly enrolled patients.
Costs: One patient-day in a HAT centre cost on average 57 francs in 2007 with an overall benefit to the economy of 104 francs. Treating a heroin-dependent in a HAT centre therefore saves society 47 francs per day, mainly in the form of costs for criminal proceedings.
Delinquency: A study published in 2002/3 revealed that, according to statements by patients themselves, there is a dramatic short-term and long-term decrease in the delinquency rate (particularly serious theft and drug dealing – by more than -80%) and patients’ victim experience. Similar figures emerge from analyses of criminal offences recorded by the police (downward trend of -65% after one year’s treatment or longer and more than -80% after four years’ therapy) and Criminal Records entries (downward trend of more than -80% after four years’ treatment).
Discontinuations: 169 patients discontinued HAT in 2007 (not counting 7 discontinuations arising from a transfer to another HAT centre.) Discontinuation questionnaires recorded six deaths in 2007. 71% of the patients who left the programme changed to either abstinence-oriented treatment (16%) or to methadone substitution (55%).
64% of those who enrolled between January 1994 and March 1995 were available to answer questions as part of a six-year follow-up study: 111 had completed either methadone treatment or abstinence-oriented therapy since discontinuing HAT, and 16% said they had not consumed any illegal drugs in the last six months before the survey.
Dosage forms: About 2/3 of treatments were given in an injectable form, and 1/3 in an oral form.
Employment situation: With regard to the employment situation, 19.0% of the patients were active in the employment market and 20% were seeking employment when they enrolled in the treatment. By contrast, a year or more after the start of treatment, 33% of all the patients had a full-time or part-time job, 9% were seeking employment, 5 people were in training and 2 had been offered a job.
Enrolments: 130 patients newly enrolled in the HAT programme in 2007. The mean age of the enrolling patients was 38 years. 69.8% of the patients stated that they started HAT on their own initiative.
Gender: 76% of the persons treated were male, 24% female.
Heroin dependency in Switzerland: In 2002 the FOPH put the number of heroin-dependent people in Switzerland at between 18,500 and 25,500. The total number is estimated to be falling by 4% per year.
International: Studies from the Netherlands, Germany, Spain and the UK confirm the positive results from Switzerland. Other studies are ongoing in Canada and Belgium. Treatment with diacetylmorphine is thus one of the best evaluated treatments in the field of addiction, and both the scientific and clinical evidence can be regarded as proven.
Housing situation: Patients who had been in treatment for at least a year were more likely to lie in a stable housing situation (96%) and be living alone (58%) than newly enrolled patients (73% and 46% respectively).
Patient numbers: The number of patients was 1283 at the end of December and the maximum number of HAT places available 1444, which gives capacity utilization of 89%.
Physical stress: Among the people tested at enrolment, 75.5% had positive hepatitis C virus (HCV) test results, 39.7% positive hepatitis B (HBV) and 56.2% positive hepatitis A (HAV), the lowest prevalence being for HIV at 7%. Vaccination was planned for the majority of the HAV and HBV-susceptible patients.
Psychological stress: Compared with a representative survey of the general population using SCL-27, the HAT patients in Switzerland have higher average scores on all scales, which indicate a higher level of psychological stress in the HAT patients. The scores on the enrolment questionnaires in 2005-2007 are higher than those in the questionnaires to monitor progress in 2006-2007: a sign of diminishing psychological stress during the course of treatment. At enrolment another confirmed psychiatric disorders is diagnosed (apart from the addiction diagnosis) in 49% of the patients (suspected diagnoses not included because they cannot be confirmed until a later stage).
Retention rate: More than 70% of all the enrolled patients were still in HAT after one year and 60% after two years or longer. The period spent in heroin-assisted treatment which 50% of all the treated patients at least achieved (median retention rate) was three years.
Satisfaction: 91.1% of patients are generally very or largely satisfied with the treatment they have received in the HAT centres.
Staff: At the end of 2007 a total of 370 people with an average workload of 60% were employed in the 23 HAT centers operating 365 days a year.
Substitution treatments: In 2006 HAT accounted for 8% of the total of 16,388 substitution treatments carried out in Switzerland, while 87% of the substitution patients were maintained with methadone. The remaining treatments included buprenorphine, morphine and codeine.
HAT Annual Report 2007
More than 50% of addicts leave heroin distribution programs because they no longer want to attend a treatment center daily, as is required. However, if they are on a substitution program such as methadone, they are given the dosage for a whole week, rather than daily. Because the effect of heroin vanishes after 3-5 hours, most of these heroin patients receive an additional, high dosage of methadone for the night and next morning, in order to avoid withdrawal.
The average age of addicts in substitution programs goes up yearly. Some of these addicts are in heroin distribution programs for more than fifteen years. Heroin addiction has changed to an illness of old men. Most of the addicts are in a poor state of health and get support for their daily needs. In 2010, in the city of Berne, the number of addicts who moved to a home for the elderly peaked at 5%. They were no longer able to live alone and take care of themselves, though most of them were only between 50-60 years of age. The staff in these institutions administers the daily dose of heroin.
Heroin programs were conceived to support addicts until they were ready to stop consumption and live drug free. The reality is that these substitution programs are not working, as addicts are not ready or strong enough to go to drug free therapy even after years of substitution. Drug consumption has become a life style, until death. To be drug free is a long-term objective, never achieved by the majority of heroin addicts. They never get the chance to live drug free. They continue to be monitored by the health administration for life.
Drug death rate in Switzerland over the last 25 years
The decreasing number of deaths indicates that the Swiss drug policy is successful, in some sense. During the time of the Needle Parks, “Platzspitz” and “Letten”, the death rate was at a record high, but has fallen since. After the turn of the century, the number of overdose deaths, per year, has remained at approximately 200. Addicts dying of other harmful consequences of long-term drug use are not included in these statistics.
To have an idea what this high number means, it can be compared to the number of deaths that occur in road traffic accidents. In Switzerland that figure is approximately 450 per annum.
Drug death rate from 1985 – 2005:
Drogentodesfälle in der Schweiz 1985-2005, Fedpol (Federal Police statistics), BAG)
Between 2005 and 2010 the figure remained high. Astonishingly health authorities did not take measures to bring numbers down, as did the traffic control authorities.
Law enforcement
Twice, activist of the Green Party and drug liberalizing promoters collected signatures to start a referendum. In 1998 their proposal called for legalizing all drugs. The voters rejected it. Then in 2008 there was another proposal to legalize Marihuana only. Again it was rejected. Unfortunately, the voters agreed in 2009 to make heroin distribution legal. The perception was that it is an act of humanity to give addicts the “needed” medicine.
Every year the police confiscated high amounts of all different drugs. Dozens of hemp shops were closed by the police. These shops had sold hemp plants, seeds and products like pipes, hemp beer, hemp shampoo, soaps, T-shirts with hemp plants on it, cushions of dried hemp plants. Farmers are prohibited to feed their cows with hemp, because THC could pollute the milk. There is a strong hemp lobby in Switzerland planting hemp. Very often the police confiscated them.
Still the police must be very strict to stop the establishment of new drug scenes. Parents of under aged people are informed, when the police catch those smoking marihuana. Actual, there is a change of law in discussion. Instead of punishing marihuana user by a judge, they should be fined by the police. Police departments are against this, but most political parties do not oppose to it. Last week, the new law was discussed in the Swiss Parliament. The majority said yes to a fine of 100.- sfr. (at about 94 dollars).
In conclusion, after revision of all pillars of Swiss drug policy, the result is that drug use is at a high level for marihuana, ecstasy, and cocaine. Nobody is warning of the harmful effects of these substances. Public perception is that these drugs are as good as legalized, and that law enforcement, as it relates to drugs, is useless and old fashioned.
On the other side, the majority of the population is strictly against easing the rules in direction of drug liberalization. The promoters of legalization had once the intention to make Switzerland an outstanding model for legalization. They were successful to introduce so called heroin assisted treatment. Fortunately they failed in any further liberalization.
Heroin is no longer used by the young, as it is seen a loser drug, leading to sickness and death. This opinion may be the only prevention message of heroin distribution. The continued high death rate related to heroin addiction leads to the conclusion that harm reduction is not working. It is clear that a new, more effective drug policy has to be established.
Sources:
Heroin assisted treatment 2007, published 2008, BAG
Source: Arbeitsgruppe Cannabismonitoring (Annaheim B. et al.)(2008) Veränderungen im Cannabiskonsum 2004 bis 2007. Edited by Bundesamt für Gesundheit (BAG)
Drogentodesfälle in der Schweiz 1985-2005, Fedpol (Federal Police statistics), BAG)
