Citation

Ramstedt M. Addiction 2021; ePub(ePub): ePub.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2021, John Wiley and Sons)

DOI

10.1111/add.15332

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

In their paper 'Applying a "Harm to Others" research framework to illicit drugs: political discourses and ambiguous policy implications', Wilkinson & Ritter [1] provide a welcome and critical discussion of using a 'harms to others approach' (HTO) to illicit drug use. Although several benefits of this approach are recognized, the paper concludes that if only HTO from individual drug use is considered, discrimination and stigmatization of drug users will outweigh the benefits. The problem of stigmatization is assumed to be especially urgent in the case of illicit drug use, as it is the less well‐off users in society who will be most negatively affected. To justify an HTO‐approach on illicit drugs, Wilkinson & Ritter claim that it is necessary to include the other major form of HTO with respect to illicit drug use; HTO related to the illicit drug market. This commentary argues that such a focus also entails a risk of stigmatizing users and that the concern of stigma and discrimination raised in this case illustrates a general challenge in policy work in the field of alcohol and drugs.

The major form of HTO related to the illicit drug market is drug‐related violent crime, which in criminology is classified as three types of violence: (1) violence where drug use occurred among the people involved; (2) violence which is perpetrated in the quest for money to purchase drugs; and (3) violence occurring because of conflicts and competition within the drug market [2, 3]. As suggested by Wilkinson & Ritter, the very operation of the illicit drug market can be regarded as a cause of these harms. However, another perspective is that the foundation of the illicit market is the demand for illicit drugs in the population, i.e. individuals' drug use. This individual responsibility for harms on the supply side could be revealed by an HTO perspective if the responsibility of users buying and consuming illicit drugs was acknowledged. This perspective has recently been used in the Swedish drug policy debate, where politicians accused drug users of being a main cause of the increasing violence in public places in Sweden, typically involving young victims and young perpetrators. In this case, however, it was not all users or the less well‐off users who were accused, but the population of well‐off users who were assumed to account for most demand...

Language: en

Keywords

Sweden; stigma; harm to others; illicit drug use; Drug policy; drug-related criminal violence