Substance Abuse Prevention in Scotland and the UK - Essay Example

?Substance Abuse Prevention in Scotland and the UK The prevalence of substance abuse in Scotland has been continuously increasing. Its adverse impacts, not just on people who abuse drugs and alcohol, but also on their families and the larger society forms one of the severest problems confronting Scotland in the 21st century. In 2008, drug policies proliferated, with new policy papers emerging for Wales, for Scotland, and for the UK (The Scottish Government, 2013). Their major components are prevention, implementation, rehabilitation, and harm reduction. This essay critically discusses education and prevention of substance abuse in Scotland and the UK. The UK policy paper entitled Protecting Families and Communities, firmly focuses on the family, specifically, families where parents are drug users. A dual strategy is used: first, more available treatment and assistance for drug-using parents, and, second, parents will have greater access to information, education, and assistance to prevent and mitigate the damages related to their children’s use of drugs (Cleaver, Cleaver, & Tarr, 2007, p. 18). The Welsh and Scottish policies specify the same, rigid focus on children with parents who are drug users, especially in the Scottish policy where a section is dedicated to the children affected by their parents’ misuse of substances. These children will be the priority in the paradigm for consolidating children’s services in Scotland (Scottish Executive, 2013b). Protecting Families and Communities largely focuses on collaborating directly with communities to realise implementation, engaging local surveillance procedures and community policing (Scottish Executive, 2013a) The central objective of the earlier ten-year strategy has been to recognise substance abusers and rehabilitate them. To attain this, there had been a gradual development in the identification of drug-using delinquents and resources for their rehabilitation. Protecting Families and Communities initiated the discontinuation of this development. It is evident that there are no more resources available, and recommendations for ways to boost the number of delinquents placed into rehabilitation are inadequate (Scottish Executive, 2013b). However, there is a major emphasis on enhancing rehabilitation in prison. The Welsh policy is open on the issue of implementation: “we have arguably made less impact in this area over the period of the previous strategy than in other areas... Illegal drugs still appear to be easy to access and the prices have continued to drop” (Barlow, 2009, p. 30). Similar to the UK policy, there is a mention of the significance of community policing. It is in the domain of rehabilitation that the most thorough reforms are evident. The UK policy suggests “a radical new focus on services to help drug users to re-establish their lives” (Department for Work and Pensions, 2008, p. 116). The concept of reintegration is mentioned often all over the paper and is, possibly, the most important aspect of the new policy, revealing a transition from emphasis on the possibility of drug rehabilitation to preventing substance abuse and criminal activities (Global Youth Network et al., 2006). The policy recommends more individualised strategies which have the capacity to address specific conditions and enhance access to employment, education, and housing. The Scottish policy, The Road to Recovery, is motivated by a specific objective—to make ‘treatment’ the major objective of drug rehabilitation. As stated by the Scottish Minister for Community Safety in the preface, “this commitment to recovery, to responding to the desire of people who use drugs to become drug-free, lies at the heart of this strategy” (Barlow, 2009, p. 30). There has been a somewhat drawn out and intense debate in Scotland about the objectives of drug rehabilitation, and this discourse has apparently had its effect on the Scottish policy. As a component of this policy, The Road to Recovery proclaims that an array of necessary and proper rehabilitation and treatment services should be accessible in every part of Scotland and those services should be combined with a broader array of general services (Malloch & Yates, 2010). This emphasis on non-clinical services to reinforce reintegration is similar to the emphasis of the UK policy on reintegration. Associated with this more comprehensive model is a solid focus on individual care and person-centred care programmes (Stark, Kidd, & Sykes, 1999). There is a solid emphasis in Welsh policy on engaging clients in service planning and implementation. Although this is an attribute of the other policies, it finds specific articulation in the Welsh paper. As regards rehabilitation and reintegration, the Welsh policy states that (Barlow, 2009, p. 31): For many substance misusers, it is the provision of wrap around services, alongside the appropriate treatment and aftercare services, that will be pivotal to reducing the harm caused their substance misuse and to the ability to maintain or re-establish themselves in the community. The policy paper recommends that Community Safety Partnerships “should consider wrap around services as a core component of treatment for all substance misusers” (Barlow, 2009, p. 31). The Scottish paper conclusively establishes harm reduction as being incompatible with the core objective of rehabilitation (Barlow, 2009, p. 32): “the provision of interventions for those suffering from problem drug use has, in recent years focused on harm reduction... this [strategy] proposes a new approach to tackling problem drug use, based firmly on the concept of recovery”. The Scottish Drug Misuse Information Strategy Team (DMIST) gather, keep, and circulate information from drug rehabilitation organisations all over Scotland. This information is maintained in the Scottish Drug Misuse Database (SDMD) and consists of information regarding solvent abuse recommendations by healthcare agencies and local authority (Pates & Riley, 2012). Most support services for substance abusers, caregivers, and others who experience volatile substance abuse is presently delivered through drug charities or hotlines. However, since there are findings that volatile substance abuse is poorly understood and addressed there could be resistance to the establishment of specialised services (Leukefeld & Clayton, 1995). Any deliberation of prospective services would necessitate a more thorough examination of the need for these services and their usefulness. The possibility of death related to substance abuse seems to raise particular problems for the drug education programme in Scotland. Findings on drug education reveal that scare tactics are no longer effective with the youth. Anxiety over raising awareness of substance abuse techniques is also mentioned in the findings as the reason that substance abuse has not, recently, been aimed at explicitly as a component of drug education in Scotland (Flanagan & Fisher, 2008). While some individuals and groups have demanded specialised substance abuse education, customary drug education discourses concerning the vulnerability of younger children may keep on hindering substance abuse education. Studies demonstrate varied responses to awareness-raising programmes, an opposition among practitioners to publicise the status of substance abuse and logistical problems in enforcing product adjustments to mitigate substance abuse, including the absence of fieldwork to verify the efficacy of governmental services to prohibit the selling of drugs, alcohol, and tobacco in Scotland (Weinstein, 2012). In spite of this, several harm reduction strategies that are derived from making substance abuse more noticeable can be found from within the array of existing policy papers. There is conclusive evidence that substance abuse does not receive adequate attention. This is due to the fact that only a few of those who engage in substance use eventually become substance abusers and, of those who keep on using substances, only a few will develop severe health disorders related to their substance use (Stockwell et al., 2005; Freeman, 2001). Moreover, findings show that stigma related to substance abuse may complicate difficulties of concealed use. Pates and Riley (2012) states that substance use is viewed by young individuals as ‘hazardous’, something which could cause serious problems because it pushes users to hide their use and the negative consequences as a result, may stay concealed; this indicates that responsive strategies are needed to shed light on the harm reduction approaches that can be implemented, though, this would have to be administered in a manner that did not, consequently, boost possibility of experimentation (UNODC, 2012). In attaining greater understanding of the opinions of practitioners in Scotland regarding substance abuse, the police, social work services, and local authority may be effective (McKeganey, 1998). Moreover, although there could be a certain extent of opposition to future resource distribution intended particularly for substance abuse, a greater knowledge of substance abuse as a first step towards misuse of illegal drugs may merit greater emphasis (NHS, 2004). As stated by the EMCDDA (2011), discouraging or reducing substance abuse at a young age may work as an initial prevention of participation into the types of drug abuse that do presently receive emphasis. Conclusions Alcohol is a legally permitted substance in Scotland. Its legal status presents substantial opportunity for regulation: the market is not hidden and can be controlled through the law and other courses of action. On the contrary, the drug market is mostly out of control because it is covert and seldom disrupted by the intervention of the criminal justice system or the state. Nevertheless, policies for illegal drugs and alcohol are mostly disparate. The latest emphasis on the prevention of substance abuse is currently on the treatment of substance abusers. The UK government is developing programmes that will concentrate on the possibility of reallocating resources and working in partnership so as to attain new objectives. Nevertheless, numerous of these latest policies remains at the initial phase of development and a major concern is how and whether such nationwide approaches are transformed into local strategy, and, more importantly, whether the present economic decline will hinder efforts towards reintegration and rehabilitation of substance abusers. References Barlow, J. (2009) Substance Misuse: The Implications of Research, Policy and Practice. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers. Cleaver, D., Cleaver, H., & Tarr, S. (2007) Child Protection, Domestic Violence and Parental Substance Misuse: Family Experiences and Effective Practice. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers. Department for Work and Pensions (2008) Raising Expectations and Increasing Support: Reforming Welfare for the Future. London: The Stationery Office. EMCDDA, 2011, United Kingdom Drug Situation, [online] Available at: < http://www.nwph.net/ukfocalpoint/writedir/userfiles/file/FOCAL%20POINT%20REPORT%202011%20FINAL%20HR.pdf> [Accessed 20 April 2013]. Flanagan, R.J. & Fisher, D.S. (2008) “Volatile substance abuse and crime: Data from UK press cuttings 1996-2007”, Medicine, Science and the Law, 48(4), 295-306. Freeman, E. (2001) Substance Abuse Intervention, Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Systems Change Strategies: Helping Individuals, Families, and Groups to Empower Themselves. New York: Columbia University Press. Global Youth Network et al. (2006) Monitoring and Evaluating Youth Substance Abuse Prevention Programmes. Washington, DC: United Nations Publications. Leukefeld, C. & Clayton, R. (1995) Prevention Practice in Substance Abuse. London: Routledge. Malloch, M. & Yates, R. (2010) Tackling Addiction: Pathways to Recovery. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers. McKeganey, N. (1998) “Drug Misuse in Scotland: Policy, Prevalence, and Public Health”, Journal of Drug Issues, 28(1), 91+ NHS, 2004, Drug Use Prevention among Young People: A Review of Reviews, [online] Available at: < http://www.nice.org.uk/nicemedia/documents/drug_use_prevention_summary.pdf> [Accessed 19 April 2013]. Orr, K. & Shewan, D., 2006, Substance Misuse Research: Review of Evidence Relating to Volatile Substance Abuse in Scotland, [online] Available at: < http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/147377/0038818.pdf> [Accessed 19 April 2013].\ Pates, R. & Riley, D. (2012) Harm Reduction in Substance Use and High-Risk Behaviour. London: John Riley & Sons. Scottish Executive, 2013, Protecting our Future, [online] Available at: < http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/158170/0042803.pdf> [Accessed 20 April 2013]. Scottish Executive, 2013, Getting our Priorities Right, [online] Available at: < http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/159094/0043262.pdf> [Accessed 20 April 2013]. Stark, C., Kidd, B., & Sykes, R. (1999) Illegal drug use in the United Kingdom: prevention, treatment and enforcement. London: Ashgate. Stockwell, T. et al. (2005) Preventing Harmful Substance Use: The evidence base for policy and practice. London: John Wiley & Sons. The Scottish Government, 2013, National Forum on Drug-Related Deaths in Scotland, [online] Available at: < http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2013/03/1645> [Accessed 20 April 2013]. UNODC, 2012, World Drug Report 2012, [online] Available at: < http://www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/WDR2012/WDR_2012_web_small.pdf> [Accessed 20 April 2013]. Weinstein, S. (2012) The Educator’s Guide to Substance Abuse Prevention. London: Routledge. Read More