Whether or Not Needle Exchange Programs Are Effective - Essay Example

?Since their very inception a few decades ago, needle exchange programs have been highly controversial. As a means of understanding why this level ofcontroversy exists in the first place, the following analysis will discuss both the means by which needle exchange programs have been affected and whether or not their existence has ultimately been beneficial in seeking to stem the rate and growth of disease within the community of drug users. As a function of such analysis, it is the hope of this author that the reader will gain a more actionable and definitive understanding of the issues at hand as well as whether or not taxpayer funding should continue to be utilized and leveraged as a means of funding such needle exchange programs in the future. Ultimately, it should be understood that within the current juncture in time, needle exchange programs are carried out almost exclusively by nonprofit organizations and are not directly linked to any type of taxpayer funding. From even a cursory level of research, the reader can come to the realization that needle exchange programs around the nation, and around the globe for that matter, or originally intended as a means of providing drug addicts a fresh injection mechanism that would not have the risks traditionally associated with shared needles; to include HIV, hepatitis, and a litany of other blood-borne pathogens that were shared between drug users as they shared needles (Kalo & Racz, 2013). In order to understand the mentality behind needle exchange programs, it is necessary to understand the fact that the drug users themselves working to maximize the level of money that they could spend to get high; without the added expense of purchasing fresh needles as a means of effecting such an end. In such a way, each and every one of the needle exchange programs serves as a means of providing the drug user with fresh needles without the requirement that the drug addict/user will be required to pay for these clean needles. An unintended effect of such an approach is the fact that this approach often furthers a level of discretionary spending on the part of the drug user which is in turn used to purchase more drugs. As the drug users are no longer responsible for providing themselves with clean, fresh needles, the amount of discretionary spending which can be directed solely and entirely towards the drug itself is increased; at least in small part. Ultimately, determining whether or not needle exchange programs are effective is a question of which determinate it is being measured. What is meant by this is the fact that if one seeks to measure whether or not needle exchange programs have been effective with regards to curbing drug abuse, the answer is an obvious and resounding no (Xing, 2012). However, if one seeks to measure whether or not needle exchange programs have been effective with regards to reducing the overall levels of blood-borne pathogen infections among drug users, the answer would necessarily have to be a resounding yes. A number of studies that conducted the past years have definitively indicated that lower levels of blood-borne pathogen related diseases exist among communities of drug users that are reliant upon clean fresh meal supplies via needle exchange programs as compared to those who do not. 2. Scare tactics have long been employed as a means of effecting a particular goal within a particular group of individuals. One does not have to think back very far to realize the means by which scare tactics were used even within one’s own high school with respect to sexually transmitted diseases. In almost each and every health class within the United States, students were shown a series of horrifically distorted genitalia as a means of providing a stark warning with regards to the dangers of unprotected sexual intercourse (Twonbly et al, 2011). In much the same means, scare tactics have been utilized with regards to seeking to prevent drug use among children by integrating the most horrific images of what drug usage ultimately portends for the life and outlook of the individual in question. However, as might be expected, the overall effectiveness of such scare tactics comes into question when the analyst considers the fact that such a unilateral approach is affected with regards to any and all illicit substances. It is without question that illicit substances can ultimately destroy the psychological and physiological health of the user. One does not need to engage in a scholarly debate or present a number of scientific studies to prove that cocaine, heroin, and methamphetamine, to name but a few, are ultimately drugs that consume the attention, life, and energies of the users who integrate with them (Shukla & Kelley, 2007). The negative health ramifications of these drugs are as broad and varied as their side effects. However, it is also true that certain drugs do not portend the same level of risk and/or danger as the ones which have been previously mentioned. This is not to say that these drugs are not dangerous and do not represent a clear and definitive health risk. Rather, they merely represent a differential in risk as compared to the highly addictive and extraordinarily dangerous drugs which have been mentioned above. All of this been stated so that the reader can gain a level of inference with regards to whether or not categorical scare tactics are effective in reducing the overall prevalence of drug usage and children. Although it is true that children respond powerfully to scare tactics, they are also a subset of society that is extraordinarily curious and likely to challenge convention and/or the status quo. Within such a way, seeking to engage scare tactics as a means of presenting any and all drug usage along the same lines is something that is quite risky. By and large, it can be definitively stated that scare tactics with regards to drug usage and children have been more or less effective as they had been employed over the past several years. However, this level of effectiveness should not be understood to mean that more effective methods of understanding the risks and dangers of drug usage cannot be employed with regards to this particular group of stakeholders. Researchers have recently pointed to the fact that drug usage among children is almost invariably the result of internal and external influences that are not always bounded by rational thought. With such a determination, seeking to present drug usage, in all its forms, as ultimately horrific, represents something of a disservice to the many determinants which act upon initial engagement of the child with any of the drugs in the current environment. 3. Although it may seem as something strange, the link between drug trafficking and terrorism has definitively been proven. As far back as the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in the late 1970s and early 1980s, the mujahedin were utilizing the profits of opium to fund their insurgency against the invaders (Piazza, 2011). This developed into something of a culture within Afghanistan as subsequent governments and tribal warlords began deriving a high degree of profitability from the management of opium and subsequent trafficking/smuggling routes that developed through the Russian Federation and into Europe as well as the rest of the world. However, seeking to understand the link between terrorism and drug trafficking/production cannot and should not be understood as merely an issue that is concentric with the nation of Afghanistan. Ultimately, experts in terrorism have long pointed to the fact that the link between terrorism and crime is definitive. Within such a manner, it should come as no surprise to the individual observer that drug trafficking, arms smuggling, prostitution, and a litany of other offenses to include piracy and money laundering are regular activities that terrorist organizations engaged in both as a means of funding as well as a means of effecting their individual terrorist goals. Yet, the link between terrorism and drug trafficking extends even further. Due to the fact that the United States and others have been so focused upon drying up any and all funding streams that terrorist entities can rely upon, drugs and drug trafficking are one of the ways in which these organizations have sought to redefine their funding apparatus to exist outside the realm of traditional finance (Singh & Nunes, 2013). Within such a means, the reader can readily come to the understanding that drug trafficking presents a lucrative means by which terrorist organizations around the globe can seek to further their ends while at the same time involving themselves in an illicit and virtually untraceable level of profitability. As has been stated before, the linkages between terrorism and drug trafficking cannot merely be understood to relate to Afghanistan, or specifically to Islamic terrorism. Entities such as FARC in South America have utilized drug funding as a means of carrying out a protracted insurgency within the jungles between Venezuela, Ecuador, and Colombia. Within such an understanding, the international scope and level to which terrorist entities are willing to leverage drug funding streams as a means of furthering their individual goals is both profound and evidenced around the globe. 4. One of the defining aspects of criminal justice within the past 40 years has been the so-called “war on drugs”. As a function of this particular activity, the United States’ legal system and law enforcement entities have struggled to both reduce the supply and the demand of drugs through criminal sanctions. Although both the supply and demand of drugs have been targeted by this protracted “war on drugs”, it is the supply side that will be specifically discussed within this brief analysis. Ultimately, when one discusses targeting the supply side, they are analyzing the means and measures by which governmental entities within the United States can seek to target the suppliers of drugs both within and without of the nation. In determining whether or not this supply-side approach has ultimately been effective, one need look no further than with respect to the overall number and level of drugs that are both demanded and intersected within the United States on a yearly or quarterly basis. The overall level of drug use, irrespective of population gains, has done nothing but increase over the past several decades (Hoyle, 2010). New drugs have come and gone, drugs have gained and lost popularity; yet, the overall interdiction and law enforcement actions related to stemming the supply of drugs have risen analogous to this increase. Naturally, one could state that this increase is indicative of a situation in which governmental process and procedure is helping to stem and even further dried up drug usage within the United States, the true issue can be seen with respect to the supply and demand determinants of the market. From a more domestic front, the war on drugs has been wholly and completely ineffective in helping to reduce overall dependence and negative societal impacts of drug usage. In short, attacking either the supply for the demand side of the drug issue without a full and complete understanding of why drug abuse usage exists within the first place is something of an arrogant mistake (Williams, 2012). Accordingly, it is the understanding of this particular author that the supply-side approach to the war on drugs has been an abysmal failure. As long as the demand for drugs is both misunderstood and incorrectly adjudicated/punished within the current system, any approach to attacking the channels of supply will also be an effective in debating the overall level of drug availability and usage within the system as a whole. Although it is true that law enforcement agencies such as the DEA and others effectively seize and destroy tens of thousands of pounds of illicit substances entering and transiting the United States each and every year, this accounts for but a small percentage of the total amount of drugs that exist within the United States and is ultimately ineffective in combating drug usage and abuse due to the fact that it only drives up the overall price structure for the drug and creates additional strain and economic hardship as well as crime associated with drug abuse for the individual addicts. References Hoyle, E. (2010). The 'War on Drugs' has failed. It's time for a war on drugs. Prometheus, 28(3), 303-307. doi:10.1080/08109028.2010.518055 Kalo, Z., & Racz, J. (2013). Map task, a new method for improving needle exchange services. Journal Of Substance Use, 18(1), 46-55. doi:10.3109/14659891.2012.735897 Piazza, J. (2011). The illicit drug trade, counternarcotics strategies and terrorism. Public Choice, 149(3/4), 297-314. doi:10.1007/s11127-011-9846-3 Singh, N., & Nunes, W. (2013). Drug Trafficking and Narco-terrorism as Security Threats. India Quarterly, 69(1), 65-82. doi:10.1177/0974928412472106 Shukla, R. K., & Kelley, M. S. (2007). Investigating How Decisions to Use Marijuana Change Over Time. Substance Use & Misuse, 42(9), 1401-1425. doi:10.1080/10826080701212485 Twombly, E. C., Holtz, K. D., & Agnew, C. B. (2011). Resonant Messages to Prevent Prescription Drug Misuse by Teens. Journal Of Alcohol & Drug Education, 55(1), 38-52. Williams, D. (2012). THE WAR ON DRUGS. Contemporary Review, 294(1706), 324-329. Xing, L. (2012). Syringe exchange programs -- United States. MMWR: Morbidity & Mortality Weekly Report, 59(45), 1488-1491. Read More