Bad laws are responsible for this

QATHET'S WISDOM ON THE OPIOID CRISIS

BY KATE HODGSON

Editor’s note: We felt we had to follow up with the qathet Community Action Team about this paragraph, which was in their submission on the previous page: “Crime and substance use are not interconnected. Research shows that it is social and economic marginalization of people who use substances that perpetuates crime.”

We asked for clarification because, in our November issue, we just shared the stories of two men in recovery from addictions, who said clearly that their criminal life was because of their drug use. Here’s the response from qCAT member Kate Hodgson

Thank-you for seeking clarification on the above statement [which was in the article on the previous page]. The statement in question boils down to the effects of drug prohibition (a system where all drugs are illegal and only obtained through an unregulated and uncontrolled market).

After reviewing qL’s previous issues, I can appreciate the participants’ criminalized experience as people who use substances during a time of explicit drug prohibition; this is a tragic reality of living in a system that perpetuates an enforcement approach to substance use.

It can be challenging for the public to imagine a status quo other than drug prohibition.

Unregulated drug markets drive the high costs of illegal drugs, which ties drug use to violence and criminal behavior, particularly theft and probation order breeches.

Provincial Health Officer Dr. Bonnie Henry authored an informative document in 2019 titled Stopping The Harm: Decriminalization Of People Who Use Drugs In BC, where a public health approach to substance use is highlighted and in it clearly outlines the impact drug prohibition has had on increasing crime rates, creating a lucrative illegal drug market, increasing incarceration rates among people who use drugs, and the economic costs of preventable offenses.

Substance use itself is not inherently harmful nor does it lead to increased crime. This is evident from research conducted at Insite, North America’s first safe consumption site, where analyses demonstrate that despite supported substance use in an impoverished neighborhood (DTES), crime did not increase, but rather it decreased. This is due to improving the social structural conditions for people who are using substances (e.g., a safe place to use drugs without the risk of police enforcement).

Other research has demonstrated that people who are treated with medications that replace illegal drugs, at no cost, reduces criminal activity.

A large study published in The Lancet, a well respected medical journal, showed when people are engaged on opioid agonist treatment (a medication that pharmacologically prevents withdrawal symptoms and replaces the need for illegal opioids) there is a reduction in overall crime rates. This suggests that it is not substances themselves, but the cost of illegal substances that drives criminal activity.

Under the current enforcement-based approach, some people are also more likely to be stopped by police to either be searched, or assessed for criminal-based activities. People who are unhoused and use drugs in public places out of necessity are particularly targeted, which leads to increased rates of probation breaches among this population.

Data shows that racialized individuals are also more likely to be stopped, or screened by police and is supported by the over-representation of minorities in Canadian prison systems. Research has also demonstrated that the effects of over-policing people who use drugs increased the risk of overdose and death.

As you can appreciate, drug policy in Canada is a complex phenomenon that has several intersecting social factors and is difficult to describe in a few paragraphs.