012624novidsA.pptx

PSYCHOLOGY 335 SECTION 001 – 012624 ZACH WALSH PH.D. History of Drug Laws  Proponents of drug regulation typically refer to the protection of the vulnerable and the maintenance of cultural values  Critics of drug policy cite institutionalized racism & indirect pursuit of sociopolitical interests ...

PSYCHOLOGY 335 SECTION 001 – 012624 ZACH WALSH PH.D. History of Drug Laws  Proponents of drug regulation typically refer to the protection of the vulnerable and the maintenance of cultural values  Critics of drug policy cite institutionalized racism & indirect pursuit of sociopolitical interests  Efforts to regulate the use and distribution of psychoactive substances can be traced back to antiquity  No single attribution captures the confluences of social, political, and individual forces that influence policy History of Drug Laws History of Drug Laws  5th century BCE Plato recommended prohibiting alcohol use for men younger than 18 years and regulating use for men younger than 30  Christianization of the Roman Empire and Europe in the 4th through 9th centuries CE, a variety of nonalcoholic psychoactive substances fell into disfavor & were associated with pre-Christian “pagan” religious traditions  10th century CE drug use was considered heretical. Drug prohibitions  The Inquisition outlawed cannabis use in the 12th and 13th centuries  Inquisition of the Americas prohibited indigenous peoples from the ceremonial use of psychoactive drugs & drug users continued to endure persecution as witches until the late 17th century AND BEYOND History of Drug Laws  Coffee (Africa) introduced to the Middle East in the 15th century    considered to be an intoxicant and was therefore prohibited soon accepted in Middle Eastern culture and even found sacred use 16th century church banned coffee cited as a beverage of “infidels.”  1600 the Vatican declared coffee to be sacrosanct and coffee drinking was established throughout Europe by the 17th century.  In the 17th century, many European states prohibited tobacco (New World) use, and several papal edicts were issued against tobacco  Russia, Germany, Turkey, and China all executed tobacco users History of Drug Laws   18th Century “Age of Reason” relatively liberal China bans opium  Opium wars with Britain  Early  1868 British Pharmacy Act   example of international intervention Opium sold only by pharmacists 1875 – Smoking opium outlawed in US (Chinese) History of Drug Laws  Early 20th Century US most substances were readily available   1914 Harrison Narcotic Act –   Tax on opium & cocaine (African Americans) By 1920s mass incarceration  Attempted tobacco prohibition  Alcohol prohibition (end 1933) History of Drug Laws  1930 – depression     Anti-Mexican sentiment 1937 Marihuana Tax Act 1961 UN Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs 1970 Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act   classified drugs into five schedules with escalating penalties based on potential for abuse Richard Nixon declared a “war on drugs” History of Drug Laws History of Drug Laws  Consumption has not changed much in the last decade  Afghanistan produces 90% of the world’s opium  Most US drugs come from Columbia & Mexico  Harm reduction     Decrim personal use in Spain, Italy & Portugal Heroin maintenance in Germany, Netherland, Switzerland Hard line remains in US, Russia & Iran Developments    Heroin maintenance Drug courts “the violence in Mexico, the HIV associated with needle sharing in Russia and the acquisitive crime of addicts in Britain are all proximately the result not of drug consumption, but of the conditions that have been created by prohibition.” Reuter, 2009  “Without a credible base for saying that addiction rates would not soar, there is little hope for major changes in the legal status of drugs such as amphetamines, cocaine and heroin.”  “...once a drug has been prohibited there is little evidence that the government can influence the number of drug users or the share of users who become dependent. There is no research showing that tougher enforcement, more prevention or even increased treatment has reduced substantially the number of users or addicts in a nation”  Prevalence vs. harm as outcomes of interest  Justification for $ and suffering?  Less enforcement? Reuter, 2009 Vienna Declaration (2010)  Implement and evaluate a science-based public health approach to address the individual and community harms stemming from illicit drug use.  Decriminalise drug users, scale up evidence-based drug dependence treatment options and abolish ineffective compulsory drug treatment centres that violate the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.  Basing drug policies on scientific evidence will not eliminate drug use or the problems stemming from drug injecting. However, reorienting drug policies towards evidence-based approaches that respect, protect and fulfill human rights has the potential to reduce harms deriving from current policies and would allow for the redirection of the vast financial resources towards where they are needed most: implementing and evaluating evidence-based prevention, regulatory, treatment and harm reduction interventions. Recent Developments      Summit of Americas debate in Colombia Cannabis legalization in Uruguay & Canada US state legalization UNGASS “emergency drug policy summit” 2016 Duterte “A decade ago, the international community reiterated its aspiration to achieve a drug-free world. Yet over that decade, available data shows that the production, sale, and consumption of currently illegal drugs are soaring. So are the harms related to current policies, with dramatic increases in overdoses, prison overcrowding, HIV and hepatitis transmission, a more revenuegenerating and increasingly violent illegal market, and in the condoning by some of extrajudicial killings against people who use drugs – killings that often take place in broad daylight.” Evaluating progress made against the 2009 targets: Target 1: Eliminate or reduce significantly and measurably ‘the illicit cultivation of opium poppy, coca bush and cannabis plant’. Target 2: Eliminate or reduce significantly and measurably ‘the illicit demand for narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances; and drug related health and social risks’. Broader UN priorities: Right to life, health & justice Recent Developments Here Canada letter to UN “Of primary concern to Canada is the rapidly increasing rate of opioid-related overdose deaths, and the devastating impact this crisis is having on individuals, families and communities. This crisis has been driven by both the overprescribing of opioid medications, and the emergence of substances such as fentanyl and its analogues, which are being illegally imported, and mixed into the illegal drug supply – often without the users’ knowledge.” “…drug policy rooted in a public health approach… is evidenced in the new Canadian Drugs and Substances Strategy announced in December which restores harm reduction as a key pillar alongside prevention, treatment and enforcement” Recent Developments Here Canada letter to UN “Providing a continuum of care to support individuals who use drugs at every point in their journey is essential. Those who are outside of the treatment system, for whatever reason, must be treated with dignity and respect. In addition to preventing overdose fatalities, lowering the transmission of infectious disease, and reducing the rates of drug-related crime, harm reduction measures can also help bring drug users into first contact with the health care system, where they can access treatment.” “Canada would like to reiterate its position that all drug policy must be rooted in the recognition of, and respect for, human rights. Sanctions for crime, including drug-related crime, should be proportionate to the nature of the offence. In this regard, Canada opposes the use of the death penalty in all cases, everywhere, and continues to call for its abolition.” Recent Developments Here November 2020 Recent Developments Here November 2020 Recent Developments Here Someone Owes Bath Salts an APOLOGY ‘Bath salts’ drug behind Miami face-eating attack could be banned in Canada National Post Wire Services Jun 5, 2012 – 12:28 PM ET | 2. The civilized world needs to learn where this evil stuff is made and bomb the general area to pure ash. Making it and sending to the US and Canada is nothing short of an ACT OF WAR 3. I don't understand why there was such a delay. As soon as a case of drug abuse involving something like MDPV is reported, it should take something like 48 hours to make it a controlled substance, if it isn't already. In fact, the law should simply ban all addictive drugs - so that, since MDPV is "highly addictive", it would automatically be illegal without having to be identified specifically. 4. Good luck stopping it. Right now we can't stop Heroin, Cocaine, Meth., Crystal Meth., Crack, Crank, Ecstasy etc As long as there those who want to get high, there will be more than willing providers. Now , if a few of the "Bath Salts" pushers get their faces or other parts of their anatomies eaten raw in public, I would imagine there would be a The Moral Model  Philosophical foundation of the “War on Drugs”  Use of prohibited drugs is purposeful unethical & immoral conduct  Users are blameworthy & selfish hedonists    justified targets of punishment deserving of health, employment and legal problems punishment is a viable deterrent The Moral Model  Pros      Simple Absolute Reaction is straightforward Reinforcing for abstainers Cons     Inconsistent with evidence Expensive Pathogenic Cruel Alternatives to The Moral Model  Medical model      addiction is like other diseases Heritability Course Primary relative to other disorders reduces blame  Increases   treatment (why) Loss of control Progressive Alternatives to The Moral Model  Psychodynamic model   Developmental experiences lead to psychic conflict Conflict is painful and this pain is numbed by drug use  Drug  use is secondary – self medication Family Systems   Addresses familial transmission of substance use Parental addiction causes disequilibrium  Expressed  Adoption of unhealthy roles  The  by dysfunctional behavior of other family members identified client is representative of dysfunctional family Modeling of substance use Alternatives to The Moral Model  Learning     Classical associative learning ABC s Drug use represents a system of positive and negative reinforcement Social learning  Expectancies  Self-efficacy  Social pressure  Substance  in the face of anxiety and need use outcomes Failure to habituate to anxiety Alternatives to The Moral Model  Biopsychosocial    Substance use is multi-determined Diathesis-stress Bio  heritable  factors related to drug metabolism Psycho  personality traits  psychopathology  Social  Peer groups  Community/ family norms Alternatives to The Moral Model  Public health model/ Harm reduction   Use on a continuum from excess to abstinence Harmful consequences also on a continuum  Safer route administration  Alternative, safer substances  Reduce frequency of drug use  Reduce intensity of drug use  Reduce harmful consequences of drug use