Part of our research was to examine the role played by the media in informing the public about illegal drugs.
The media are very influential in forming public opinion and through this, political action. In Australia the media have often covered stories about illegal drugs in a sensational and moralistic way that has complicated plans for a rational, cross-sector response to illegal drug use. It has long been suspected that detailed reports of where and how to buy drugs act as free advertising for drug markets and directly affect the dynamics of street-level drug markets. A number of researchers have demonstrated that, far from reducing the drug problem, the media have inadvertently promoted the behaviour (Brownstein 1991; Rodd
& Leber 1996; Lenton et al. 1998). In Melbourne research found that:
Like most people, drug users read newspapers and consequently can, and do, learn about new dealing/
using areas from mass media as well as through their usual peer networks... In Fitzroy [Melbourne] ...
a heightened media focus has resulted in increases in the drug trade on Smith Street as a response to the media reporting. (Fitzgerald 1998: 92)
A consequence of the media campaigns in the 1990s in Victoria was to put enormous pressure on the Victorian government and police to ‘do something about the problem’. What was done was for the state government to announce the introduction of harsher penalties for illegal drug offenders, including those using and selling small quantities to support their addiction. The second was an enormous increase in the number of heroin-related arrests by police.
A substantial increase in arrest rates for heroin-related offences can be seen in the statistics from 1997 following the Sentencing Amendments (Sentencing and Others (Amendment) Act 1997). Australian Bureau of Criminal Intelligence (ABCI) figures show that Victoria’s arrest rates rose to almost double that of demographically similar but more populated New South Wales. Most of the arrests according to our key informants were made at the lower, street-level end of the market. Many individuals had multiple arrests, eventually leading to incarceration as they were deemed to be a repeat, and therefore ‘serious drug offender’ – a new category of offender attracting a higher penalty.
Table 16.1 Heroin-related arrests (consumer and provider)
1998/99 1999/00
NSW 4659 arrests NSW 3782 arrests
Victoria 8153 arrests Victoria 5952 arrests Source: Australian Bureau of Criminal Intelligence 2001
These twin outcomes of the media pressure may sound like a good idea, but for a number of reasons they are not, when a holistic view of the problem is taken. Recent research in Sydney has demonstrated that traditional street policing methods and more sophisticated ways of dealing were developed; the relationship between drug sellers and buyers was strengthened; and the risk of spread of blood-borne viruses was increased through more risky user practices such as oral and intra-nasal storage, which lead to harm to both the users and the wider society (ABCI 1997). In this and other research it has been found that in intensively policed drug markets, the price of heroin increased, which increased the rate of crime as users sought to pay the higher prices; there was increased paranoia and violence in the marketplace; and dispersal of the drug market made it more difficult for police to supervise and engendered a reluctance to carry and therefore have available clean injecting equipment, and hasty injecting (Brown & Sutton 1996; Maher et al. 1998; Edmunds et al. 1996; van de Wijngaart 1997).
Another harm has been less obvious. In our study we found that the illegal drug users, who first entered the criminal justice system because of their drug use, were more likely to sell illegal drugs to support their habit than they were to commit other types of criminal offences. For this they received harsher penalties. On the other hand, we found that drug users whose drug use is just another facet of their already criminal lifestyle tended to commit robbery and theft offences to support their habit and as a result commonly received lesser sentences. Those that sold drugs to willing buyers to support their habit received harsher penalties because of the Sentencing Amendments.
Such outcomes are not equitable and seem to imply that it is better to hurt other people to support your drug habit than to sell to willing buyers. The inequity of this was pointed out by several of the key informants.
Federal criminal intelligence informant: ‘I sometimes think that the criminal justice system is so driven by moral panic over illicit drugs that it loses sight of the level of actual harm which is happening… The sentences given for crimes where someone has been horrifically hurt and their lives ruined, are very often less than for someone who has sold drugs to willing buyers.’
Looking at the police and prison statistics, we found that as a result of the harsher penalties for drug offenders in Victoria, very young men, who may have no concurrent offending and little previous criminal offending history, are entering prison at a much earlier point than is the case for property and violence offenders. Victoria has the lowest rate of imprisonment of all the states in Australia, half that of demo-graphically similar New South Wales. It also has the highest rate of secure custody prisoners – the more dangerous offenders (Beyer et al. 2001). Apart from the brutalising effects of non-violent young men being incarcerated with older, violent prisoners, being in prison carries very high risks for contracting blood-borne viruses, in Australia particularly of hepatitis C.
Over 40 per cent of the Victorian prison population is infected with hepatitis C (voluntary screening), and there are multiple opportunities for exposure to others’ blood through syringe sharing (there is no needle exchange, and opioid replacement therapy is not always available), amateur tattooing and piercing, fights, and sharing toothbrushes and razors (Crofts et al. 1995). HIV prevalence in the Australian prisoner population is around 0.2 per cent – ten times that of the general population where needle exchange and opioid replacement has been available since the mid-1980s.
In Australia prisoners are eventually let out, and as such they increase the risks of infection to their children, their families, their associates and the wider community. Research is increasingly showing that the traditional law enforcement approach to street-level users and sellers is extremely expensive, has little if any visible positive outcomes and indeed may be directly increasing harms. Thus there has been considerable debate about whether alternatives should be tried. This comment is representative of the view of our criminal justice key informants:
Senior magistrate: ‘We will never get rid of the problem of illicit drugs, but at least we should try and take some control of it through providing addicts with an alternative source…you might prevent overdoses and deaths and… give users some space to sort out their lives without having to worry about where their next fix is going to come from.’
We were surprised by the radical but consistent views of these key informants, many of whom thought their views were unique. We found the justice sector views more consistent with the views of the health sector key informants than they were with the policies of the agencies for which they worked. (A more comprehensive discussion of these views is soon to be published in the International Journal of Drug Policy.) Police in Australia appear to be increasingly seeing their efforts at the lower end of the drug market as a waste of their time.
Senior police detective: ‘We would be very happy for health to take up the drug users... We should be able to push [drug users] in the direction of the health services rather than arrest and charge them...
With kids dying ... you have to do something about it. The kids themselves are probably good kids but they are stuffed up by the drugs.’
Conclusion
Despite a harm minimisation policy in Australia, there is still a strong public expectation that police will uphold the law and proceed against drug users. The criminal justice sector is therefore faced with the paradox of being expected to adopt a harm minimisation approach while also being expected to pursue the traditional punitive approach, which increases the harms. They must work within this policy paradox and they will do it most effectively if they work in partnership with health and social welfare sectors.
The complex nature of illegal drug offending and its potential for substantial harm at an international, national and community level means that it is extremely important that health, social welfare and criminal justice sectors work together on the issue. I have only touched on the bottom level of the drug chain and that is in itself very complex.
A large, generally defined problem, particularly one clouded by traditional associations with moral depravity, is obviously difficult if not impossible to address. However, a problem that has been rationally examined through intelligence and research and from a range of perspectives, that has been teased apart and its component parts and complexities defined from a range of perspectives, has a much greater chance of success. It is essential to have a clear, shared national goal founded on rational, evidence-based research.
Then complementary sector goals and strategies that do not undermine the overall goal and the efforts of other sectors can be developed for tackling illegal drug user issues.
In Australia relationship-building between sectors is not particularly well developed – no sector has had a history of working together. Having worked in both sectors I can confidently say that professionals in different sectors still tend to hold stereotypical views of one another that get in the way of good communication and collaborative strategies. There are also few formal systems in place that allow or enable government sectors to work together on joint issues. This is probably true for most other countries as well.
To respond adequately to illegal drug problems it would be necessary to address the existing institutional barriers that are getting in the way of cross-sector collaboration and problem-solving.
A complex problem requires a complex solution. I believe cross-sector, collaborative efforts are the only productive way to respond to lower-level drug offending. A greater role by health and social welfare sectors will enable police to divert their resources to those more serious offenders higher up the drug chain. It will also avoid the harms associated with vigorous traditional policing methods at the lower levels – harms which, though perhaps not immediately obvious – may result in long-term damage to the health and prosperity of the nation.
References
ABCI 2001 (2002) Australian Illicit Drug Report 1999–2000. Canberra: ABCI. Australian Bureau of Statistics website www.abs.gov.au.
Beyer, L., G. Reid & N. Crofts 2001, ‘Ethnic based differences in drug offending’, Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology 34(2).
Beyer, L., & G. Reid 2000, Drugs in a Multi-cultural Community – An Assessment of Involvement, McFarlane Burnet Centre for Medical Research for the Department of Human Services, Victoria, Australia (Full report: http://www.dhs.vic.gov.au/phd/0008087/)
Brown, M., & A. Sutton 1997, ‘Problem oriented policing and organisational reform’, Current Issues in Criminal Justice 9: 21–33.
Brownstein, H. 1991, ‘The Media and the Construction of Random Drug Violence’, Social Justice, 18: 85–103.
Crofts, N., J.L. Hopper, D.S. Bowden, A.M. Breschkin, R. Milner & S.A. Locarnini 1993, ‘Hepatitis C Virus Infection among a Cohort of Victorian Injecting Drug Users’, Medical Journal of Australia, 159: 237–41
Crofts, N., T. Stewart, P. Hearne, X.Y. Ping, A.M. Breschkin & S.A. Locarnini 1995, ‘Spread of Blood-Borne Viruses among Australian Prison Entrants’, British Medical Journal, 310: 285–8.
Crofts, N., J. Webb-Pullman & K. Dolan 1996, ‘An analysis of trends over time in social and behavioural factors related to the transmission of HIV among injecting drug users and prison inmates’. Technical Appendix 4. Evaluation of the National HIV/AIDS Strategy 1993–94 to 1995–6, AIDS Communicable Diseases Branch, Commonwealth of Australia.
Edmunds, M., M. Hough & N. Uriquia 1996, Tackling Local Drug Markets: Crime Detection and Prevention Series. Paper 80, Home Office Police Research Group, London.
Fitzgerald, J.L., S. Broad & A. Dare 1998, Regulating the Street Heroin Market in Fitzroy/Collingwood, VicHealth and the University of Melbourne.
Justice Department 1999, Court Outcomes, Statistical Unit, Department of Justice Victoria
Lenton, S., T. Stockwell & R. Ali (eds) 1998, Proceedings of a National Workshop on the Prevention of Heroin Overdose, National Centre for Research into the Prevention of Drug Abuse Monograph. Curtin University of Technology, Perth.
Maher, L., D. Dixon, M. Lynskey & W. Hall 1998, Running the Risks: Heroin, Health and Harm in South West Sydney. Monograph No. 38. National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, University of New South Wales.
Ministerial Council on Drug Strategy 1998, National Drug Strategic Framework 1998/99 to 2002/03.
Building Partnerships. A strategy to reduce the harm caused by drugs in our community, Australian Federal Government, Canberra.
Multicultural Affairs Unit 1997, A Nation of Immigrants: A State of Diversity. Fact File 4. Multicultural Affairs Unit, Department of Premier and Cabinet, Melbourne.
Rodd, H., & S. Leber 1996, ‘Beyond gangs, drugs and gambling’. In D. Bretherton (ed.) No Longer Black and White, vol. 1. Media Responsibility in Ethnic and Racial Conflict. Proceedings of a conference on the media and ethnic and racial conflict. International Conflict Resolution Centre, School of Behavioural Science, University of Melbourne.
Sentencing and Others (Amendment) Act 1997 No. 48 (Amendments to the Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic) No.
49/91) Victoria, Australia.
Single, E., & T. Rohl 1995, The National Drug Strategy: Mapping the Future. Supplementary Report commissioned by the Ministerial Council on Drug Strategy, Canberra: AGPS.
Van de Wijngaart, G.F. 1997, Drug Problems among Immigrants and Refugees in the Netherlands and the Dutch Health Care and Treatment System in Substance Use and Misuse, 32(7) and (8).