Domestic & International Societal Tolerance of Harm Reduction Measures
Despite the fact that statistics provided by nations and regions with the most progressive and effective policies regarding the issues of addiction and substance abuse suggest that unconditional dedication to and prioritization of harm reduction result in far and away the best statistical results in the way of treatment and recovery, the United States has proven reluctant to embrace such strategies. This reluctance stems from a number of different cultural and societal differences between the United States and those nations that have embraced harm reduction measures more widely.
Whether or not one agrees with the harm reduction methods employed in places like the Netherlands and parts of Scandinavia, it would be decidedly difficult for anyone to make the case that the United States is leading the way in the global, perpetual fight against substance abuse, drug and alcohol addiction, and the myriad consequences of such issues for the afflicted addicts themselves as well as the societies and communities in which they reside. ?In the dozen years since the National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse released its first report on substance abuse among the nation?s prison population, no progress has been made in reducing the numbers of inmates with substance abuse problems crowding the nation?s prisons and jails, according to a new report. In fact, 65 percent of the nation?s inmates meet certain medical criteria for substance abuse and addiction, but only 11 percent received treatment for their addictions? [1].
The United States has a reputation amongst scientific and medical/clinical communities around the world for boasting one of the harshest and most ineffective, societally harmful and damaging collections of policies towards substance abuse, drug and alcohol addiction, and the individuals who suffer from such conditions. While the United States treats addiction as a criminal issue and incarcerates individuals afflicted with relevant conditions and disorders, many other countries around the world admit such problems are issues of mental health and not typically of criminality. Needless to say, such nations also believe that, for the sake of society and of addicts themselves, their response to the issue of substance abuse should not contradict that valuable knowledge. And as progressive nations prove harm reduction measures to be vastly more effective than criminal punishments, even detractors of such strategies are forced to re-evaluate their positions. ?The Netherlands developed needle exchange centers in the 1970s in response to an outbreak of hepatitis B. The idea gained acceptance in other countries with the advent of the AIDS pandemic. The oldest continuing needle exchange program in the United States, located in Tacoma, Washington, has been operational since 1988? [2].
For years, a number of European nations have displayed a much better grasp on the issues of substance abuse and addiction than what has been adopted by relevant authorities in the United States. We would do well, as a country and community, to follow the examples set by those with knowledge and experience greater than our own.
SOURCES
[1] https://thenationshealth.aphapublications.org/content/40/3/E11
Originally published at https://rtrwellnesscenter.com on September 5, 2020.
