After reading “The New Jim Crow”, it became clear that the government is far from an institution of peace and order with a role of serving the citizens. Paternalistic and authoritarian drug policies effectively terrorize citizens. These harsh tactics isolate drug users by reinforcing the negative implications of their actions through disproportionate sentencing, social degradation, and a felony conviction. While these threats may prevent an individual from committing the crime in the first place, punitive measures only cause more damage in the long run, sending users into a downward spiral with no hope for escape. In the United Kingdom, the Merseyside model offers an alternative to drug enforcement. It was heartening to see that law enforcement officials followed a heartening policy which sought to rehabilitate rather than punish. Could the punitive approach the United States law enforcement officials follow be a result of cultural differences or is financial gain the underlying motive?

At first, harm reduction scared me a bit. Why should we ge giving handouts thus enabling destructive behavior? Since then, I have come to the realization, and seen the stats, to support this cause and its effects on the drug community, but it seems that the Dutch may have taken this to far. I can’t argue with the fact that their system has had positive effects, but the implications are hard to fathom. Truthfully, my argument falls apart when we look at the desirable prosperity and freedom in the Netherlands, but how far can this go? Once Marijuana becomes legal in the US, what will the next step be? Im curious to discuss this in class.

When Marlatt spoke about what harm reduction means in other countries such as the Netherlands, I was surprised at the approach those foreign countries took to control the consequences of drug usage and prostitution. I definitely felt like one of those foreign visitors when I read the chapter, “struck with what appears to be a liberal and permissive approach to drugs and sex”. (31) As we know, in the United States, it is illegal to use illicit drugs like marijuana, and if you get caught using it or possessing it, the police will arrest you and eventually, you will be sent to court and even perhaps to jail for breaking the law and taking part in life-threatening activities. Sure, there is rehab but that’s usually not until you go through all of these criminal proceedings. However, in places like Amsterdam, their public health policies are quite the opposite. They are not particularly promoting drug use and unsafe sexual activities, but they are doing what they can to help the people avoid facing the consequences of engaging in these matters. It is shocking to me to hear about how accessible drugs are given to its users in settings like the “coffee shops” but yet I am rather relieved that free sterile syringes, and condoms are widely available too to back up those actions. I understand that many people just can’t help it but to keep using drugs due to addiction or having sex with strangers because that is their way of making a living so at that point, it would be quite ineffective to have the justice system jump in and make these people’s lives more difficult just like what happened in the War on Drugs. I personally believe too that it is more effective to have these low-threshold and high-threshold programs which gives these people a variety of options on how to go about getting their lives back together and not fall under pressure with the government on how they should live their lives that I’m sure these people consciously chose to live.

It seems as if the United States would be much more efficient in following through with the Dutch model of harm reduction but I know it would be very controversial because it would seem as if the government doesn’t mind that all these illegal and dangerous activities are allowed or even favored. I think the government has to realize that the reason there are laws on these matters is because using drugs and having many sexual partners without protection can lead to very bad consequences for everyone involved in it. If these actions were beneficial to our health, of course there wouldn’t be laws limiting these actions. We have to get over the stigma we expect and protect our people the best way over the reputation we want. The Dutch model strikingly reminds me of the van we visited on our Coney Island class trip that gave counseling, free sterile syringes, condoms, etc. Their goal wasn’t to encourage people to do more drugs and sex to ruin their health or to arrest these ‘potential criminals’ but to support them in being as healthy as possible while doing these things and hopefully, on their way to ending their drug usage and safe from diseases like STDs, HIV and AIDs. Perhaps that van is the start of a new and reinvented approach to dealing with these public health matters in the United States.

Do you think the current way of harm reduction in the United States is ideal, or is there a more effective, efficient and productive approach?

It was interesting for me to think about just how much of law is unwritten, and decided by individuals, making up a larger system.  This makes for vastly different approaches to drug charges, not only in our country but around the world.  It’s bizarre to think about how relaxed other developed countries are compared to our legislation regarding the same offences, to the point that a charge could be considered a felony in the United States and a reason for assistance and medical attention in Europe.

I recently went on a field trip for my newswriting class to a criminal courthouse to watch night court arraignments.  There were several people that were charged with possession of marijuana, cocaine, or heroin that were allowed to leave the court freely.  I don’t understand how something that our country views as serious enough to be considered a felony can at the same time be released as they are considered to be at flight risk.  We had an opportunity to speak with the judge, and when asked about this said that drug laws are on the decline and this is why they are treated less harshly.  It was fascinating to observe just how much of the decision process was under his control.  Of course he had the written law to objectively follow, but there are inevitably some subjective qualities in his sentencing process.

I thought this was a good example of how harm reduction needs to be targeted towards both aspects of governance: the governmental regulations themselves and those in power to make real changes.  With drug laws changing slowly but surely, and these changes slowly being reflected in key figures like judges, the United States is hopefully on the way to more of a harm reduction based model.  But will our country ever be on the level of Europe in terms of our approach to drug laws?

-Jacqui Larsen

I found the Harm Reduction overview interesting because before I went to Europe my study abroad professors told me about Amsterdam and how often a lot of students visit there simply because they speak English and are surprised by how open they are about marijuana and prostitution. One of my classmates from Amsterdam who studied abroad with me in Spain was extremely open with his usage of marijuana. To him it was something just like smoking a cigarette or having a shot of alcohol. I personally believe that both marijuana and prostitution should be legalized. Instead of shunning them out from society, I think it would be better to embrace them and try to help them especially in regards to prostitution. Often prostitutes are taken advantage of because what they’re doing is illegal but we should be able to provide a safe environment for them and have them get regular help check ups as part of the job.

The part that stuck out to me in Chapter 2 of Harm Reduction Around the World was “The Dutch Model.”  Even though the system seems to work in Amsterdam, with fewer drug users in general and high school students using considerably less cannabis than 59% of American high schoolers, it astounded me that a system like that would purposely exist.  Maybe because I am an American and our government deals with drug use differently, but I am surprised that anyone would use the Dutch Model.  Sometimes, we talk about drugs in my classes and people say that legalizing drugs will make people less attracted to them.  It’s just like how the Prohibition increased alcohol consumption and how that decreased when the ban was revoked.  In that sense, it makes sense that the Dutch model would work.  However, the idea is still strange to me because of how strict drug policies are in America.  I am interested in visiting Amsterdam just to see how things are there and how the system works.  Is there anyone else who shares this interest?

In Harm Reduction Around the World, one part that stuck out to me was the mention of drug tourists in Amsterdam. Because of how lax the laws and/or the following of them was, Amsterdam would get a special type of tourist. I understand that tourism is good for the economy, but is the reputation that comes with and gets spread around by them really worth it? Instead of a reputation for the culture and history Amsterdam possesses, it gets one for its red-light district and drug availability.

It was interesting to read Harm Reduction Around the World because one is able to see the different attitudes of varying countries towards drug related crimes. The fact that countries like Holland and the United Kingdom had mitigating polices made me wonder if there is an ulterior motive behind mass incarceration in the United States? If one logically reasons why the United States does not have a reductionist policy, no real answer surfaces. It just seems so logical to follow a reductionist approach rather than a intransigent stance.

Furthermore, as Albert mentioned in his post, America’s policy on handling methadone when compared to that of Amsterdam’s is much more stringent. It is definitely discouraging for an addict, in America, to somehow seek help because of the stigma. The whole methadone story reminded me of the controversial Needle Exchange Program. Interestingly, this program was first started in 1983 in Amsterdam. Just like, Amsterdam’s policy on mandatory condom use in sex work, this program helped curb HIV transmission rates among citizens,  On the other hand, the Needle Exchange Programs still remains controversial and in a sense tightly regulated in the United States. It just seems like there is an unfortunate pattern that is observable in the United States’ attitude towards drug regulation policies.

Don’t we want all drug addicts to recover and eventually become productive members of society? How can we expect a person to recover if his mean to recovery are impossibly difficult?

Reading chapter two of “Harm Reduction Around the World” by Alan Marlatt was very eye opening for me, especially with the harm prevention programs the Dutch and United Kingdom have in terms of drug related crimes. It made me wonder why the United States can’t apply such a model to itself especially with positive results from these two main examples. Holland separates drugs into soft and hard drugs and allows drug addicts to purchase soft drugs in designated locations in order to prevent them from going to dealers who may recommend them hard drugs such as heroin or cocaine. The harm prevention programs in Amsterdam and Holland also gives out methadone in an easier way, where the individual would merely go into a specialized van and take the dosage. It is more efficient than America’s policy where everything is highly regulated to the point where individuals are stigmatized and discouraged from receiving treatment via methadone. Amsterdam’s sex business also prevents many individuals from being harmed, with mandatory condom use and patrolling police offices that protect both worker and client. These methods prevent the contraction of H.I.V. and prevent both the escort and client from being harmed. However, I believe the best harm prevention policy in the chapter was U.K.’s policy of not handing out an arrest on the first time someone is caught with a drug, but instead they give a warning and resources to assist the individual with their addiction.

Government in urban areas should enact many of these harm prevention programs in order to combat the public health crisis many of these areas face. Compared to the United States, where drug addicts and sex workers usually have no way to rehabilitate their way into society because of taboo and threat of imprisonment, harm prevention provides a safe environment for these individuals. Although the chapter stated that it might not work in the United States because of scalability, it would be interesting to see if pilot programs would be put in place in order to test the effectiveness of the program. Plans that provide prescription grade drugs to individuals would prevent them from taking a drug that has been contaminated with fillers. Nevertheless, in order to enact these programs, the government must agree. The article “Emerging Strategies for Health Urban Governance” provided suggestions for what government can do. Ideas such as allowing more people to participate in government planning, having networked organizations, having concentrated goals, and having a way to enforce planning are all good ideas. The article also noted that many urban areas have a government with limited funds and uneducated government officials. I think potential cabinet members who are experts in what they do should be appointed in order to inform and suggest to the government leader of the area what the best course of action would be.