Australian Government Minister for Health explains heroin use in Australia. The number of heroin overdoses, cases of HIV and Hepatitis C have risen dramatically since the policy of drug prohibition was adopted.
Source: The Sydney Morning Herald – Feb 3, 1949
Follow this link for a historical account of heroin prohibition in Australia.
IOT [Injectable Opioid Treatment] involves the prescription and supervised self-administration of injectable diamorphine (pharmaceutical heroin) or injectable methadone in a supervised clinical setting for opiate misusers
Some patients don’t respond to our current treatments. This makes the availability of other types of treatment (second line therapy) a good idea. Unfortunately, Australians have no access to injectable opioid treatment. It wasn’t always so:
Heroin was legally available on prescription in Australia until 1953. It was so widely used as a painkiller and in cough mixtures that Australia was the world’s largest per capita user of heroin. The 1953 prohibition of heroin was the result of international pressure on Australia to conform to the prohibition of heroin adopted by other countries, with some opposition from the AMA. Ironically, heroin, cannabis, and other drugs were prohibited in Australia well before their use became a major social issue.
I would encourage anyone who is interested in a balanced view of the Portuguese experience to read Caitlin Elizabeth Hughes & Alex Stevens latest paper.
A full version of the article can be found here: PDF.
It’s a good article, but there’s a point about Portugal that a lot of people seem to miss. Cue the Victoria Police:
If you’re caught by police with drugs, you may end up with a criminal record. A drug conviction may also stop you getting a job, and you may not be able to travel to some overseas countries like the USA.
In other words, if the drugs don’t hurt you a conviction will. The Victoria Police point out (quite rightly) that having criminal record is a harm in itself.
This is where the Portuguese have it right, there is no sense in the use of criminal sanction to ruin someone’s career prospects or magnify the risks of using drugs.
This is just one reason the ADLRF advocates for the urgent abolition of criminal sanctions for possession and other types of personal drug use. Please join or support our foundation today.
The London School of Economics [LSE] have a new article on their website about the failure of ‘supply-centric’ drug policy.
They argue that the Single Convention has remained intact because individual states continue to adhere to it rather than having the confidence to chart their own path.
Professor David Nutt recently delivered an interesting lecture at Oxford University which highlights the distortion and bias in media reports about drugs. This is an issue close to home.
David Nutt DM, FRCP, FRCPsych, FMedSci is Chair of the Independent Scientific Committee on Drugs, a Professor of Neuropsychopharmacology and Head of the Department of Neuropsychopharmacology and Molecular Imaging at Imperial College London.
Sir Richard Branson has made the observation that the ‘war on drugs’ has been a very costly failure. The Sydney Morning Herald has the story as well as audio commentary by Dr Marianne Jauncey from The Sydney Medically Supervised Injecting Centre (MSIC).
The online polling shows overwhelming support for the decriminalisation of drugs.
In addition to criminalizing HIV transmission, many countries impose criminal sanctions for same-sex sex, commercial sex and drug injection. Such laws constitute major barriers to reaching key populations with HIV services. Those behaviours should be decriminalized, and people addicted to drugs should receive health services for the treatment of their addiction’.
For example, in Eastern Europe, people who inject drugs represent more than 80 per cent of all people living with HIV but account for less than 25 per cent of those receiving antiretroviral treatment.
Progress made in the implementation of the Declaration of Commitment on HIV/AIDS and the Political Declaration on HIV/AIDS