Heroin Addiction in the UK

[Sasaferrato]

Well your continued use of the term drug abuse for starters - perpetuating stigma and discrimination - which are barriers to people seeking help and advice - as well as increasing internalised self stigma.

Research shows that use of the terms 'abuse, abuser & addict' negatively affects perceptions and judgments about people who use drugs, including whether they should receive punishment rather than improved access to health, harm reduction & human rights.

It is far less expensive to denigrate and marginalise than it is to treat. (It isn't actually, but government is determined never to look further than the first layer. ).

It is time that that government realised that a £200.00 a day habit equates to about £2000.00 of theft.

Just maybe the appointment of Lord Timpson will start and turn things round, he is a man who has put his money where is mouth is, and of his own volition employed people who others would not. Employment and a stable lifestyle have long been proven to help prevent relapse. People can quit and thrive, John Crace of the Guardian is proof of that, but they need help.

 

[ice-is-forming]

 

[bellaozzydog]

I've never portrayed it as anything other than my opinion, so I'm not sure quite why you're getting so indignant about it.

I've explained my position already and if you don't care for my opinion, then that's entirely your privilege. It doesn't make my opinion wrong. It just means you don't share my opinion and I don't share yours. Why do you have a problem with that?

I'm not seeking to bring anyone round to my way of thinking, so if others also disagree with me, that's perfectly fine.

You and some others appear to only want to argue... and I'm afraid I'm just not interested.

Am I the first person on here to google your name and think “yup that’s about right”

 

[BristolEcho]

What have I said that you believe is "wrong"?

Ice has already replied in more detail so I won't labour it to much, but whilst you using the term abuse or abuser may seem unimportant it actually has a knock on affect in how people are seen by society and services.

It's much easier to discharge someone from a mental health team if the leading line is that someone is abusing drugs. As it is also easier to take someone's kids away from them and to paint them as a bad person. As we have seen in this thread it's actually hard to define what abuse actually looks like.

Not sure if anctedotal examples or helpful, but I used to work with someone who was waiting for therapy and trying to develop skills to deal with their trauma, but when it was to much and they felt unsafe they would use ketamine rather than take their life. Now some people would say this is drug misuse, abuse and that they weren't clean etc - which is not only in my opinion inaccurate, but also damaging to the person. I see it as part of a complex way of coping with overwhelming emotions and whilst their may be "healthier" ways to manage in that moment I'd rather they did that than act on the other feelings. Simply it doesn't help anyone to label them and abuser, and I think calling it misuse in that situation is actually harmful.

This stuff all feeds back into policy and affects the lives of pwud causing massive inequalities. I'm still in a long drawn out dispute with my local service that I used to work with and the local authority over why they think that people who inject drugs don't need private spaces when they are using the needle and syringe program - would this be acceptable for any other group of people? No, but they are abusers right? So it's easy to overlook their rights and they don't care anyway do they?

You're posting on a website where many of us use substances, or know people who do and many of us that work with people who use substances. I'm sure you have your own experience too that have shaped your views, and that's fine, but people are going to discuss and challenge views that they don't agree with.

If you do want to know more about the various terms and why they can be problematic I recommend the Scottish drugs forums stigma book - SDF commits to continuing work on stigma and launches resource to broaden consensus - Scottish Drugs Forum - not everyone will agree with it of course as is the nature of stigma.

Finally I once again have to question what the purpose of this thread is. I've only been skimming it but it feels like it's just an open place for people to take digs at a marganalised group of people.

Okay that ended up being longer than I intended. To much caffeine abuse for me today.

 

[Rompipalle]

Well your continued use of the term drug abuse for starters - perpetuating stigma and discrimination - which are barriers to people seeking help and advice - as well as increasing internalised self stigma.

Research shows that use of the terms 'abuse, abuser & addict' negatively affects perceptions and judgments about people who use drugs, including whether they should receive punishment rather than improved access to health, harm reduction & human rights.

I used the term purely to differentiate between drug use which does not necessarily generate negative outcomes and reckless or risky drug use which does. It is not intended to be pejorative but rather to underline that one person's habit or lifestyle choice can adversely impact on others, even if that was never their intention. I'm well aware that many people who use drugs do so without mishap or without causing harm to themselves or to others but I see no point in denying that some types of drug-taking behaviours can and do result in disastrous consequences for other people. Referring to drug abuse, in contrast to drug use, is not intended to marginalise the person but to describe the difference between drug-taking behaviours and the adverse outcomes which can result from these differing behaviours.

An example which springs to mind pertains to a voluntary group to which I belong, which maintains and improves the amenity of an old cemetery which for decades fell into increasing disrepair and was hardly used by anyone, apart from a number of rough sleepers and local drug users. The cemetery was absolutely littered with discarded drug paraphernalia from years gone by, as well as more recently-used needles and syringes. It was highly dangerous for everybody, including the users themselves.

The overall condition of the cemetery is greatly improved and we find fewer and fewer discarded sharps these days but our intention was never to marginalise the groups of users who still frequent the cemetery. It is my belief that most of the users who spend time in the cemetery now seem to be less likely to discard their gear there. On that basis, they are showing the place greater respect and this is reciprocated. They remain welcome there, just like everyone else, who now feel safer whilst visiting the cemetery and feel that it is a pleasant place to be. It's no longer a no-go area for anyone... and that can surely only be seen as a positive?

The term "addiction" admittedly can have negative connotations but it is also just as widely used in other non-substance-related contexts, so does this mean that nobody can apply the term "addiction" to any sort of habit they have, whether it generates dependence or not? Does it mean that we should no longer use the term "dependency" either?

I absolutely would prefer to see drug users being able to take their drugs in a safe manner and for them to be able to access healthcare and support services when they need them but I will not turn a blind eye to the negative consequences of misuse of drugs when it causes harm to others.

 

[BristolEcho]

I used the term purely to differentiate between drug use which does not necessarily generate negative outcomes and reckless or risky drug use which does. It is not intended to be pejorative but rather to underline that one person's habit or lifestyle choice can adversely impact on others, even if that was never their intention. I'm well aware that many people who use drugs do so without mishap or without causing harm to themselves or to others but I see no point in denying that some types of drug-taking behaviours can and do result in disastrous consequences for other people. Referring to drug abuse, in contrast to drug use, is not intended to marginalise the person but to describe the difference between drug-taking behaviours and the adverse outcomes which can result from these differing behaviours.

An example which springs to mind pertains to a voluntary group to which I belong, which maintains and improves the amenity of an old cemetery which for decades fell into increasing disrepair and was hardly used by anyone, apart from a number of rough sleepers and local drug users. The cemetery was absolutely littered with discarded drug paraphernalia from years gone by, as well as more recently-used needles and syringes. It was highly dangerous for everybody, including the users themselves.

The overall condition of the cemetery is greatly improved and we find fewer and fewer discarded sharps these days but our intention was never to marginalise the groups of users who still frequent the cemetery. It is my belief that most of the users who spend time in the cemetery now seem to be less likely to discard their gear there. On that basis, they are showing the place greater respect and this is reciprocated. They remain welcome there, just like everyone else, who now feel safer whilst visiting the cemetery and feel that it is a pleasant place to be. It's no longer a no-go area for anyone... and that can surely only be seen as a positive?

The term "addiction" admittedly can have negative connotations but it is also just as widely used in other non-substance-related contexts, so does this mean that nobody can apply the term "addiction" to any sort of habit they have, whether it generates dependence or not? Does it mean that we should no longer use the term "dependency" either?

I absolutely would prefer to see drug users being able to take their drugs in a safe manner and for them to be able to access healthcare and support services when they need them but I will not turn a blind eye to the negative consequences of misuse of drugs when it causes harm to others.

So the problem there are that people don't have access to private, or safe spaces and the knock on affect this causes. Which I think you are also acknowledging.

What do you think changed that now people aren't leaving as much paraphernalia there?

I don't think anyone here is turning a blind eye to the negative consequences of substance use - in fact most of us are probably fighting for better approaches to reduce the negative consequences for everyone. Improve access to healthcare and housing, destrorying the stigma, and treating people like humans will do a lot to help with all of that. Unfortunately the language you use does marganalise people, but we can't force you to change it though it will likely continue to be challenged.

To be clear I'm not removing all responsibility for people who leave discarded needles around, but I see it as a symptom of much wider problems. Trying to inject in unsanitary conditons whilst running the risk of being seen causes all kinds of problems.

 

[Rompipalle]

So the problem there are that people don't have access to private, or safe spaces and the knock on affect this causes. Which I think you are also acknowledging.

What do you think changed that now people aren't leaving as much paraphernalia there?

I don't think anyone here is turning a blind eye to the negative consequences of substance use - in fact most of us are probably fighting for better approaches to reduce the negative consequences for everyone. Improve access to healthcare and housing, destrorying the stigma, and treating people like humans will do a lot to help with all of that. Unfortunately the language you use does marganalise people, but we can't force you to change it though it will likely continue to be challenged.

To be clear I'm not removing all responsibility for people who leave discarded needles around, but I see it as a symptom of much wider problems. Trying to inject in unsanitary conditons whilst running the risk of being seen causes all kinds of problems.

BIB- At first we wondered if it was just that so much of the clearing of overgrown vegetation which we did during the first couple of years since setting up the group, had only revealed older paraphernalia and that there wasn't much recently-used stuff but that wasn't the case. The excessive overgrowth had certainly provided places for some of the users to stash their stuff but as we've cleared so much of it in order to uncover headstones, there are now not so many places to stash it, without running the risk of being stung to pieces by brambles and nettles. I once came across a woman whose forearms were blistered really badly because she'd been rummaging around in a patch of nettles, purportedly "looking for a watch".

The cemetery now has more open spaces and instead, we find that the users tend to sit on the benches we've placed round the cemetery and we just don't end up seeing their sharps and syringes lying around in these locations, so I think some of them are taking their stuff away with them and just not leaving any of their gear in the cemetery in any of their previously favoured spots. Occasionally, they leave something innocuous like a syringe wrapper or a plastic ampoule for sterile water. I found one syringe and needle a couple of weekends ago - and it had been left right outside the locked space where we keep the sharps container....but that's been the first for several months, although other volunteers may have found some during that time.

Lovely though the location now is, a cemetery is probably still not the optimal place to be injecting anything... and this behaviour does still present an avoidable risk to people who simply wish to enjoy the peaceful space, walk their dogs or pay their respects to their loved ones.

 

[VivaE]

I don't think anyone here is turning a blind eye to the negative consequences of substance use - in fact most of us are probably fighting for better approaches to reduce the negative consequences for everyone. Improve access to healthcare and housing, destrorying the stigma, and treating people like humans will do a lot to help with all of that. Unfortunately the language you use does marganalise people, but we can't force you to change it though it will likely continue to be challenged.

Taking the blame out of the terminology that's directed at those who suffer from addiction is of course crucial in terms of understanding addiction, approaching it intelligently and sympathetically and, most importantly, treating it.

It's a disease, no different to any other, expect for the anti-social factors that accompany it. And those can't be ignored and it's why it remains such a difficult and challenging field to attract proper, committed, long-term funding, state and otherwise. Those that do most for addiction are those who've been there, done it and managed to come out the other side to wear the t-shirt. They're literally life savers.

I see no probs with the terms 'addiction' and 'dependency'. They're both perfectly reasonable descriptors of the nature of the disease and those who suffer from it.

I'm assuming that's not the marginalising language you have a problem with?

 

[BristolEcho]

Generally I will use dependency, or more often just substance use tbh. I struggle a little bit with addiction mainly as it's felt unhelpful at times particularly in work, and I can just be funny about words anyway - plus things are always evolving and context is important with all words. I don't get annoyed when people use it though compared to clean and abuse etc. Again depending on whose using it and the context.

Underpinning all that I just feel our understanding of addiction and substance use in general is so polarised by morality and old school approachs. I have just come from somewhere that works like it is still the 80's so that doesn't help my perception.

 

[Rompipalle]

Am I the first person on here to google your name and think “yup that’s about right”

It was entirely deliberate.

 

[ice-is-forming]

VivaE that being dependent on a substance is a disease is your opinion - not a fact.

 

[VivaE]

VivaE that being dependent on a substance is a disease is your opinion - not a fact.

It's not just my opinion.

 

[BristolEcho]

It's not just my opinion.

Oh really?

 

[VivaE]

Oh really?

Oh really what? It's the opinion of many in the addiction field that it's a disease. If you disagree with that opinion, fine, just do not come at me with this 'oh really' as if I've made a claim that has no basis in fact or substance and/or as if I'm positioning myself as some authority on addiction.

 

[BristolEcho]

Oh really what? It's the opinion of many in the addiction field that it's a disease. If you disagree with that opinion, fine, just do not come at me with this 'oh really' as if I've made a claim that has no basis in fact or substance and/or as if I'm positioning myself as some authority on addiction.

Alright. I was just wondering on how it wasn't just your opinion - which it is as you've just stated. "Come at me"

 

[panpete]

Addiction often goes hand in hand with undiagnosed mental health conditions, history of trauma, neurodivergence etc.

If, as a society, we were better at indentifying and addressing such problems in children and young people, we might have fewer addicts. And I include alcohol addiction in that.

This.

 

[kenny g]

Well I deescalated the situation by stopping him assaulting my daughter and would do exactly the same thing again, with foresight, had some adult launched a verbal and physical attack on a three year old.

Clearly an entirely fictitious account.