Spinning Drug-Driving - Victorian Police Style

I have no problem with arresting those who drink-drive or take drugs and drive. I don’t care what the drug is ... driving while impaired is dangerous. And please, none of the crap saying, “driving while stoned actually makes you safer because you’re more cautious”. It’s just not true. Although cannabis has nowhere near the same level of impairment as alcohol, it still does hinder your driving.

I do have a problem though with the current proposal put forward by the Victorian police. The police say they want to bring drug-driving laws into line with drink-driving and have proposed new penalties similar to the drink-driving laws. Drink-driving penalties are determined by the alcohol content in your blood (bac) and reflects how badly it impairs your driving ability. Under a certain bac, there should be no effect on your driving skills and therefore no penalty. All very logical and scientific. The proposed drug-driving laws though do not a have a minimum level which is in effect, a zero content requirement. Some zealots say that drugs are illegal anyway so anything but a zero reading is worthy of a penalty. This just opens up a loophole where the police can use random drug-driving testing as an excuse to gain an arrest to investigate another crime.

As there is no evidence on the correlation between the level of presence of a drug and the level of impairment, it stands to reason that it is also flawed to determine a penalty regime based on alcohol which is currently scaled to reflect the seriousness of an offence based on impairment. As there is no scientific data to relate fluid/saliva samples to impairment levels, a mirroring of penalty is inappropriate.
-Civil Liberties Australia submission for Review of ACT Alcohol and Drug Driving Laws

The major flaw with this proposal is that unlike alcohol, some drugs can linger in the body for weeks or even months. Cannabis can last for up to 6 weeks or more in your system but any impairment on one’s driving ability has long gone. Imagine being in a room full of dope smokers one weekend and being busted for drug-driving the following Thursday because of passive smoking. What about if you took an ecstasy pill on Saturday night and got arrested on Tuesday for drug-driving? If it’s your second offence, you might be fined $7,000 and have your car impounded.This is simply illogical and not appropriate in a supposedly advanced society.

While this data should be available from the ACT hospitals, it needs to be also presented in the context of drug impairment and elapsed time from the drug consumption to the accident, noting that drug residue will show up in testing well after any impairment may have been a factor of an accident.
-Civil Liberties Australia submission for Review of ACT Alcohol and Drug Driving Laws

The proposal irks me for several reasons apart from the obvious. Where’s the opposition to it? Who is taking the Victorian Police to task over such a blatant act of silliness? Isn’t the Shadow Police Minister suppose to keep the government in check when it comes to these issues? What about using blood samples taken from drug-driving offences to pursue an arrest for drug use?

I’m disappointed in the Victorian Police especially Deputy Commissioner Ken Lay. I thought we had finally ended the Nixon era with a rational Police Commissioner who openly supports Harm Minimisation and drug law reform. So why did Police Commissioner, Simon Overland let this proposal slip through? Are we back to the days of telling only half-truths?

Ken Lay made some remarkable comments which sounded very much like a blurb from a politician. When compared to the comments in the article made by an actual politician, the State Roads Minister Tim Pallas, it would be hard to tell who said what.

That's a strike rate of one in 67... much higher than the drink-driving rate
-Victorian Police Deputy Commissioner Ken Lay

In fact, there are more drivers killed with illicit drugs in their bodies than drivers with illegal levels of alcohol
-Victorian State Roads Minister Tim Pallas

Of course there are going to be more drug-drivers detected when some drugs linger in your body for months but alcohol is gone within 24 hours or usually less. What they also don’t mention is that while most road fatalities involving alcohol has alcohol as the cause of the accident, drugs are not responsible for most of the fatalities where drugs are detected.

Similarly, the presence of a drug(s) in an accident driver does not by itself infer that the driver caused or contributed to the accident.
-Civil Liberties Australia submission for Review of ACT Alcohol and Drug Driving Laws

This is a textbook example of spin at it’s best. By leaving out a few simple facts, much of the public will buy into it and the Victorian Police Deputy Commissioner and State Roads Minister will achieve their goal. I must say, it’s pretty sad that our police and elected officials stoop to this level so readily considering it’s 2010. Hang your heads in shame Ken Lay and Tim Pallas, hang them low.

Police Set To Crack Down On Drug Drivers With Licence Suspensions And $350 Fines From Mid-2010
Herald Sun
Stephen McMahon with AAP
December 2009

STONERS and party drug users who get caught behind the wheel face tougher new drug-driving penalties as part of a fresh crackdown to lower the state's road toll.

The State Government plans to introduce laws into Parliament next year that will include an automatic three-month licence suspension and a $350 fine for anybody caught driving while high.

The new laws will bring the penalties for drug-driving into line with drink-driving and are expected to take effect in mid-2010.

The drug test can detect speed, ecstasy and marijuana but can't pick up cocaine or heroin.

But Victoria Police Deputy Commissioner Ken Lay said roadside sobriety tests could be used to catch heroin and cocaine users who were driving under the influence.

"In the last financial year, almost 23,000 roadside drug tests were conducted with 341 offenders caught with an illicit substance in their system,'' Mr Lay said.

"That's a strike rate of one in 67... much higher than the drink-driving rate.''

Mr Lay admitted the drug testing had such a high strike rate because the police specifically tested major party hot spots.

"We know there are drug-affected motorists on the roads and a mandatory loss of licence will be an extra deterrent to those dangerous drivers,'' he said.

State Roads Minister Tim Pallas said traces of one or more illicit drugs were found in 30 per cent of drivers who died on Victoria's roads each year.

"In fact, there are more drivers killed with illicit drugs in their bodies than drivers with illegal levels of alcohol,'' he said.

"If the driver is caught drug-driving a second time they face a penalty imposed by the court of up to $7000 as well as a licence cancellation of at least six months.''

Two-time offenders may have their car impounded under laws announced in May.

"Motorists will see more enforcement through roadside drug testing programs, with an additional 20,000 tests - bringing the total to approximately 35,000 across Victoria - to be conducted in 2010,'' Mr Pallas said.

The road toll in Victoria stands at 283 -- down 13 on the same time last year.

The Brumby Government is aiming to reduce the annual road toll by 30 per cent within seven years.

Related Articles:
Creeping Police State
Human Rights And Random Roadside Drug Testing
Response by Civil Liberties Australia to Discussion Paper: Review of the Road Transport(Alcohol and Drugs) Act
FFDLR Submission on The Discussion Paper: Review of the Road Transport (Alcohol and Drugs) Act

Journalist's Shame

What sort of headline is Heroin Addicts Shame and what are the authors, Laurie Nowell and Evonne Barry trying to imply? It appears to be a dig at how much drug treatment for heroin addiction is costing the tax payer. The big question is why? Why criticise the number of addicts seeking treatment?

They point out that the number of prescriptions for methadone, buprenorphine and Suboxone nearly tripled from about 2.4 million in 1992 to almost seven million in 2007. Isn’t this a good trend? It appears not. The article throws around a lot of damning figures and statistics that can be interpreted several ways. The most obvious factor to me is that all attempts to stop drug use have failed. Another interpretation is that heroin use is on the rise after a lull preceded by a high that followed a low taking over from an increase from a previous dip. In other words, heroin use went up and down. I think the intention is more sinister though. Most of these figures have been reported on previously but it’s the blurring of heroin and other illicit drugs that make this article confusing. Is it really about the increase of heroin users or just a stab at all drug users. Then there’s this beauty:

Experts say Victoria's "social time bomb" will have costly effects during the next decade.

No self respecting, hysterical reporter writing about drugs would leave out a potential apocalyptic future. In what seems like an afterthought, the above line was slotted in with no reference to anything else. It just appears in a separate paragraph below some statistics on drug driving (excluding heroin) and a line stating an increase in heroin overdoses. Who are the “experts” mentioned and what is the reference point? The answer lies in a previous article by one of the authors back in August 2008, Drugs Leading Victoria To Crisis by Laurie Nowell. Maybe he assumes we read all of his articles? What it does uncover though is that Laurie Nowell has a knack for sensational stories.

For an article that is meant to shame heroin addicts, it’s strange that the authors include this quote from a pharmacist who dispenses methadone.

We have a lot of professional people . . . teachers, lawyers. It's a very wide spectrum of people. A lot of them are very decent people who have just made bad decisions and have an illness -- and addiction is an illness.

- Darryl Bason: inner-city pharmacist

Why include a comment that contradicts the headline and doesn’t support the idea that heroin addicts deserve contempt? That’s just one of several questions that needs an answer. Like, why criticise addicts seeking treatment? Why include other drugs that are declining in use? Why use drug-driving statistics that don’t include heroin? Lets use our imagination for a minute. The article was either drafted first with no idea what the point was or the authors didn’t have enough material so they added in what ever they could find or the headline was added later by a supervisor because it wasn’t going to be published or Laurie Nowell has been designated the job of sensationalising heroin. Maybe all of the above?

In an attempt to rescue a pointless article, the authors, Laurie Nowell and Evonne Barry have cruelly and publicly degraded a small section of the community who already suffer ignominy and alienation. But it seems that Laurie Nowell has a reputation for being “creative” in his reporting especially with sensitive issues. Here are some examples:

Clearly reporter Laurie Nowell made no effort to research the Mufti or didn’t care about the points listed below

I hope there is a way for Laurie Nowell to read your account and be informed. It is insulting for him to spread his tripe - does he honestly think that readers will believe his Pollyanna account of Fehmi's creed and actions. I thought journalists were supposed to look under the surface of events - he has just seen the dust on the elephant, but not described the the elephant.

Laurie Nowell should be reprimanded by the Herald Sun for his sloppy journalism.

-The Fehmi Fantasy

and

Laurie Powell didn't even get that part right. Stories like this, don't help the mens rights and they certainly don't help Laurie Powell who doesn't mind telling a few lies to get published.

[...]

Then there was this garbage which contained lies yet again by Laurie Nowell.

-Oz Pig Page (blog)

and

How can an article with no names, dates that don’t make sense and is the most read article on the day, ever get past your editors or the authorities for that matter. Laurie Nowell might as well be making up the news.

-Comment by Reader about a Laurie Nowell article - So The False Claims Worked

and

LOL at "coma in a bottle", these journo's have no idea, constantly making up these bullshit slang names just to help illustrate the purpose of their shitty, shitty articles. I bet if it weren't for articles like this, half the people currently importing GBL wouldn't even know about it.

-Comment by Reader about a Laurie Nowell article - Blue Light

and

May I add to Barge of Brisbane's comment ... where the bloody hell does Laurie Nowell live? He obviously doesn't write from a national perspective. I reside in Denmark WA. My two 13500 litre house water tanks and about to overflow after an abundance of wet weather recently (its raining as I write) In fact much of WA has benefited from wide spread rain. Ditto Queensland and northern NSW. So did the journalist sitting in his Melbourne media headquarters just fake his story after a quick phone around? Is Nowell part of the Global Warming scare story that will benefit a few at the expense of many? A familiar pattern is developing, instill fear into the electorate that will allow Penny Wong and her ministry to institute drastic measures while pointing to questionable media items such as Nowell's to justify their actions. Is it any wonder Australians are sceptical of stories put on them by journalists and politicians ?

-Comment by Reader in the HeraldSun

Laurie Nowell was even dragged into court for his “creative” reporting - Newspaper Criticised For Heroin Ship Stories

I’m not sure what input Evonne Barry contributed to the article and it may just be that since she is a health reporter for News Ltd, her name was added automatically. Maybe she provided some of the statistics or research? Either way, adding her name to such a ridiculous article will not help her credibility.

Laurie Nowell likes exciting stories as shown by his headlines. And like most Murdoch reporters, he has a job to do and papers to sell. Whether the articles are accurate or unbiased is secondary at the News Ltd money making factory. Do these headlines ring a bell?:

Melbourne City Losing War Against Heroin

Drugs Leading Victoria To Crisis

Pokies Are For Losers

Gangland Wife Roberta Williams Hits Jackpot With 'Blood Money' Book

Parents Warned Of Online Militants

Victoria Is Australia's Abortion 'Capital'

Maybe “Heroin Addicts Shame” is his best yet. It’s sure to resonate with HeraldSun readers and keep the public hostile towards drug addicts and users. But that’s not his problem, drug addicts are shameful remember and those seeking help are a burden on the government’s finances. He has done his job and all is good at the HeraldSun.

What ever did happened to media responsibility? What ever happened to a journalist’s integrity? Are there so many second rate media outlets now that sloppy journalist can always find a job? You can thank John Howard for our disgraceful media ownership laws where someone like Murdoch can own major newspapers in every state. It appears that infotainment is here to stay and one person’s political bias or social views can be pushed into every corner of Australia. Worst still, is the acceptance of trash media in our lives and shoddy journalists like Laurie Nowell are the source of information for millions of people. No wonder the anti-drug propaganda that started decades ago is still accepted as fact when the media continues to publish articles like “Heroin Addicts Shame”.

Heroin Addicts Shame

Sunday Herald Sun

By Laurie Nowell and Evonne Barry

May 2009

AUSTRALIA'S escalating heroin epidemic is now costing the taxpayer $100 million a year.

There are now almost 50,000 heroin addicts receiving taxpayer-funded treatment in Australia as the illicit drug epidemic returns to a scale not seen since the 1980s.

Victoria has recorded the greatest increase in addicts of any state, with almost 12,000 - a number that has more than doubled since 1998 - and now costs the taxpayer more than $22 million for treatments.

An analysis released this week of PBS data has found the number of prescriptions for methadone and other heroin recovery drugs in Australia almost tripled from about 2.4 million in 1992 to almost seven million in 2007.

In June last year there were more than 41,000 drug addicts receiving treatment and that figure is estimated to have risen since then.

A dose of methadone costs, on average, $5 and with almost 50,000 addicts receiving one a day, the cost to the nation's health system has doubled in a decade.

The increase in addicts has accelerated since 2000, according to the study by Sydney's Drug Health Service at Royal Prince Alfred Hospital and the University of New South Wales.

Report author Amber Jefferson said about 27,500 - or about two-thirds of addicts being treated -- were male.

She said about 65 per cent of addicts received treatment drugs from private prescribers -- 85 per cent of them in pharmacies.

But the reality of heroin addiction did not fit the stereotype, inner-city pharmacist Darryl Bason said.

"We have a lot of professional people . . . teachers, lawyers. It's a very wide spectrum of people," Mr Bason said. "A lot of them are very decent people who have just made bad decisions and have an illness -- and addiction is an illness."

Mr Bason said about 130 people were being treated for heroin addiction at his pharmacy.

About 70 per cent of addicts were receiving methadone and the remainder the more expensive buprenorphine or buprenorphine/naloxone.

Data from the Victorian Institute of Forensic Medicine released late last year showed Melbourne had become the nation's drug capital.

Results from the state's world-first drug-drive testing program showed an increase in drivers affected by amphetamines and cannabis.

Of drivers killed in road accidents, 15 per cent tested positive to cannabis and about 8 per cent to stimulants such as amphetamines and pseudoephedrine - figures that have tripled since 2003.

Recent tests showed one in 50 drivers randomly tested were found to have illegal drugs in their system.

And heroin overdose deaths have increased, with about 90 last year.

Experts say Victoria's "social time bomb" will have costly effects during the next decade.

Another study, comparing key police lock-ups across the country, found more than half those detained in Footscray were heroin users.

The Australian Institute of Criminology study found the next highest rate of heroin use was 15 per cent in Brisbane, then 12 per cent at Parramatta and Adelaide.

The study also found more than 73 per cent of detainees at Footscray tested positive to an illicit drug - mostly heroin or benzodiazepines (tranquillisers).

All those arrested for robbery, car theft, possession of drugs or as a result of a warrant tested positive to illegal drugs. And 80 per cent of those arrested for selling drugs were users.

Indonesian Disgrace

Indonesia, like most Asian countries have harsh drug laws which can include long jail terms and the death penalty. While the more spectacular busts might attract attention here, what we don’t hear much about are the many Aussies being jailed in these countries for months or even years for possessing just a small amount of illicit drugs. The Bali 9 and Schapelle Corby are household names for their drug smuggling charges in Indonesia and the media made sure they would all be remembered. But what about Jason McIntyre who faces 10 years in jail for 5 grams of hash or Shane Demos who got 8 months for having 5.9g of dried hash and 0.3g of heroin? In Australia, these charges would not lead to jail time and that’s if they made it to court at all. Maybe we should look at the strange circumstances and possible corruption involving drug arrests in Indonesia. Why would Jason McIntyre be facing 10 years jail when he had fewer drugs than Shane Demos? Neither had a criminal record and the drugs they had were for personal use but Shane Demos was given (only) 8 months. Why wouldn’t the Indonesian court accept certain requests for forensic evidence from Schapelle Corby’s legal team? Why did the Australian Federal Police (AFP) feel obliged to tip off the Indonesian authorities about the Bali 9 rather than making the arrest themselves. Especially considering that the AFP’s decision was most certainly condemning the Bali 9 to the death penalty. Why was a request by Schapelle Corby’s legal team for important CCTV footage from Qantas denied? Where was the the Australian government on this? The addition of shifty behaviour from Australia must also raise some questions.

Australian Foreign Minister Alexander Downer, when questioned on ABC radio, arrogantly declared that he had no control over such issues, stating: “I’m not the minister for tapes.” He also made clear that, apart from some limited assistance to Corby’s lawyers and private talks with Indonesian foreign affairs officials, there would be no political intervention by Canberra.
-Muted response by Canberra as Australian woman faces death penalty in Indonesia - wsws.org

We all know that Alexander Downer is a lying, poncy sleaze but the whole government clammed up. When Schapelle Corby’s legal team requested finger prints from the inner bag containing the cannabis, the Indonesian court denied the request and then allowed the bag to be handled without gloves by anyone. It was an obvious flaw in the investigation but neither the AFP nor the Australian government said a word. Barbaric Drug Laws What is interesting to know is that extreme drug laws have been proven not to significantly deter drug use but many countries still continue with their draconian drug laws. The US is a classic example where harsh laws have done nothing to halt the uptake of drugs and ironically they have the world’s highest rate of drug use. Some countries like Indonesia are actually proud of catching and executing drug related criminals and are not afraid to say so.

To give them a lesson, drug traffickers must be executed immediately
-General Sutanto. Indonesian National Police Chief and Chairman of the National Anti-Narcotic Body

Indonesia isn’t alone when it comes to barbaric drug policies. Thailand, Malaysia, United Arab Emirates, Singapore, China etc. are all guilty of human rights violations where it’s not only their drug laws but their so called rehabilitation for drug addicts. The latest International Harm Reduction Conference (IHRA) held in Bangkok last week exposed the shameful behaviour of these countries and called on the world to enforce human rights and harm reduction procedures. Under the guise of drug addiction treatment, these countries are complicit in torture and abuse for those detained in “work camps” or compulsory treatment centres. The spread of HIV/AIDS and Hep C is epidemic, methadone is rare, addicts are beaten, tortured and forced to live in sub-human conditions. When released, they are often abandoned by their families and seen as outcasts which inevitably leads back to drug abuse. Below is an article from the Drink and Drug News newsletter reporting on the IHRA conference.

Describing experiences that spanned 30 years in Malaysian drug dependence treatment centres, Shaharudin bin Ali Umar showed photographs of weapons used to discipline him and the scars he had suffered from repeated beatings. 'If you are suspected as a drug user you are given compulsory treatment and kept under observation. If you relapse you get more jail sentences and lashes,' he explained. 'But the result is not effective – there is a 70 to 90 per cent rate of return to drug use.' The military style discipline and abuse included beatings with baseball bats and bricks and being burned on his genitals with a lighter. 'The scars may finally have healed, but the bad memories remain forever,' he said. 'I was humiliated and beaten until I forgot what pain is.' Interrogation began at the admission process. Then detoxification took between two weeks and a month,during which 'when the guard changed they started torturing us – humiliating torture I feel too shy to tell you'. A medical check-up and 'orientation process' were followed by a phasing system,which involved 'being beaten by a religious teacher and treated as animals'. While hopeful that changes were on the horizon,he said progress was hampered by the impossibly large size of the rehab centres, lack of methadone for detox and constant beatings. 'Harm reduction in Malaysia is like a sandcastle – built up by community organisations and then torn down by enforcement activities,' he said. Srey Mao from Cambodia – whose colleague took over her conference presentation when she became too traumatised to speak about her experiences in a detention centre – told of 'a place where living conditions are not for humans'. Packed into one room 'where they don't care what age or sex you are', and where there was no toilet, food,water,nor mosquito nets,she had seen her friend die from a beating,another drown trying to escape,and a fellow inmate electrocuted. The backdrop to her presentation showed Srey Mao reaching through bars of a crowded cage. 'Srey Mao would like this facility closed,' said her colleague. 'She would like the Cambodian government or anyone who can help,to close this down.'
-Harm Reduction ‘Torn Down By Enforcement’ - Drink and Drug News

Corruption
One of the major problems with extreme drug laws is the ingrained corruption. Even without the harsh punitive laws, the immense profits from the illegal drug trade is probably the single largest cause of corruption we know of. Although most dependant drug users rarely consider the legal consequences when desperate for their next dose, once caught, it all changes if they are facing a firing squad or decades in prison. This gives incredible power to low ranking police officers who often earn very little and have absolute contempt for drug users.

Indonesia is one of the world's most corrupt countries
-Wiki Travel

Is Indonesia corrupt when it comes to drug arrests? The readers forums in our major newspapers are full of criticism for Indonesia’s legal system since the Bali bombings in 2002. The criticism continued to grow when Schapelle Corby made headlines in 2004 and the Bali 9 in 2005. But not all of the comments were anti-Indonesian as many readers declared Corby and the Bali 9 should be executed because they were drug dealers and should be subject to Indonesian laws. Were the comments made by readers just pure speculation and emotional outpouring or were they based on real life experience? The fact is, Indonesia has a long history of corruption and and bribes are deeply rooted in the legal system. Add into the mix, extremely harsh drug laws with an underpaid police force and you have opened the gates of hell for Indonesia’s drug addicts and their families. For a more detailed look, read the brilliant article below by Nick Perry.

Winning A Battle, Losing The War
Drug users in Indonesia are made vulnerable by current drug laws
Inside Indonesia
By Nick Perry
May 2009

Merry Christina was 26 years old when she and her boyfriend were arrested by police while injecting heroin in a South Jakarta slum. Taken to the district police station, the officers cut Merry a deal: she could have her drugs back and leave the prison without charge if she agreed to ‘service them sexually’. Facing a serious prison sentence if she refused, and struggling with her decade-long heroin addiction, Merry was left with little choice. She agreed to their proposition and the officers returned her drugs. She was then blindfolded and repeatedly raped and physically abused by several officers over a five day period at the station. At the same time, her boyfriend was beaten and tortured in a separate cell. When the ordeal was over Merry and her boyfriend were released without charge. ‘It is widely known among drug-using communities that if you are caught by police and are a woman,’ said Merry, now an NGO worker staying clean through a methadone program, ‘you can just sexually satisfy the officers and there is no need for you to seek legal counsel or face punishment.’ Merry’s experience is one shared by many drug users in Indonesia. Organisations advocating on behalf of drug users in Indonesia have been lobbying for the laws about drug use to be changed; however, they have faced a government that is reluctant to see drug users as victims who need help.

Torture and extortion
The Indonesian government has long claimed to be fighting a ‘war on drugs’. However, since 2006 the number of people abusing substances in Indonesia has risen almost six-fold to 3.2 million. According to a report presented by the Indonesian Coalition for Drug Policy Reform (ICDPR) there has been a correlating spike in human rights abuse cases and social discrimination against drug users nationwide. The ICDPR report draws together years of research conducted across drug-using communities in nine major cities in Indonesia. The research was carried out by the NGO Stigma Foundation (Stigma) and the Law Faculty and HIV/AIDS Research Centre at Atma Jaya University, as well as by the Community Legal Aid Institute. Alarmingly, it found that almost all respondents claimed to have been extorted for money, physically or sexually abused, or tortured by police officers while being detained on drug offences. ‘Even though Indonesia has signed an international ratification against torture, the practice among the police force against drug users is very common, and on the rise,’ said Asmin Fransiska, lecturer on International Human Rights and Law at Atma Jaya University and co-founder of the ICDPR. ‘Women in particular face sexual abuse at the hands of police officers. When they are taken to the police station, they are often forced to strip naked in front of other officers or are simply raped with the threat of imprisonment if they do not agree.’ Testimonies from hundreds of drug users interviewed for the report paint a similarly horrific picture: blindfolded beatings, cigarettes put out on bare flesh, electrocutions and threats of murder. The penalty for possession of a single gram of heroin is currently 15 years which makes extortion another common practice used by police. ‘The common custom is for police to ask how much money you are willing to pay, or what you are willing to do, in order for them to change the offence they arrested you for,’ Fransiska said.


Police blackmail users for information about other users and dealers and reward them with high-quality heroin

Jarot, a former long term heroin user, has been imprisoned three times in the past for heroin possession. After serving time in an overcrowded Jakarta prison, where more than half the inmates are drug addicts and almost ten per cent leave having been infected with HIV, he was willing to do anything to avoid another prison sentence. ‘Police blackmail users for information about other users and dealers and reward them with high-quality heroin,’ Jarot said. ‘They then become cepu [spy].’ Many of the most impoverished drug users are vulnerable to this informal - and highly illegal - relationship with police officers. They lack the cash to bribe themselves out of their convictions and they have an overwhelming addiction to feed. According to Anto Suwanto, Field Coordinator at Stigma, cepu are often the target of reprisal attacks from dealers and other users, and are sometimes even murdered for their apparent betrayals. When asked if he had ever worked as a cepu for the police, Jarot turned away, looking down. After a few moments, he quietly answered, ‘Yes’.

Self-inflicted criminals
The current laws controlling illicit drugs in Indonesia are Law No. 5/1997 on Psychotropics and Law No. 22/1997 on Narcotics. Both laws were introduced under the dictatorial New Order regime but were not repealed or even altered until very recently. The meanings embedded in these laws and the ways they have been implemented have created problems for drug users. There is little distinction made between a drug user and a drug dealer under article 78 of the Narcotics Law. The article makes both criminals deserving severe punishment. According to legal principles there must be a victim and an offender in a crime. However, in this situation, the drug user plays both roles in the offense. This presents something of a conundrum to lawyers fighting for drug users to be treated as addicts who require help, rather than as prisoners requiring lengthy prison terms. The fact that the World Health Organization considers drug use a ‘chronic relapsing brain disease’ is not taken into consideration by judges and lawmakers, explained Professor Irwanto, Chair of the Institute for Research and Community Services at Atma Jaya University. ‘The strange thing is, the law is written as such that the crime has no victim, except oneself. It is like a self-inflicted crime,’ Irwanto said. While Indonesia has taken a hardline stance on drugs for some time, often punishing traffickers with death, a sudden surge in funding for law enforcement in recent years has seen drug users facing an increasing threat of abuse and discrimination. Between 2000 and 2004, drugs were not listed by the government as a major issue to be dealt with, and were discussed in terms of welfare and protecting the youth. However, since 2005, President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono has deemed narcotic abuse a serious national problem that threatens security as well as religious and moral values. ‘Since 2006, the government has allocated 200 billion rupiah to enforcing the Narcotics Law, which has only resulted in an increase in the deaths of drug users, the number of HIV/AIDS cases and the arrests of drug users,’ said Rido Triawan, a Stigma advocate heavily involved with ICDPR. ‘Data shows that last year, many more people were arrested for using drugs, but only two per cent of the total figure were actually arrested for dealing.’

Reform on the horizon, for better or for worse
Indonesia is currently at a crossroads with its domestic drug policy. With parliament having resumed following the legislative elections on 9 April 2009, soon the newly-elected People’s Representative Council will recommence deliberating an amendment to the National Narcotics Law. This amendment was first submitted for consideration in 2005 by the Department of Law and Human Rights. Groups such as the ICDPR initially thought that this amendment would follow global trends by softening the ‘war on drugs’ ideology and shifting toward a more humane approach toward drug users. In actual fact, if this amendment is passed the situation for drug users and the state of human rights in Indonesia will almost certainly become worse. Ending the criminalisation of drug use is the linchpin of the ICDPR’s alternative approach to drug policy in Indonesia. To ICDPR members’ dismay, neither decriminalisation nor a raft of other crucial reforms were addressed in the proposed amendment to the Narcotics Law. If anything, this amendment will upgrade the criminal status of drug users and equip police with new powers to deal with them. Currently, a user can be legally detained for a maximum 24 hours, whereas the amendment will extend that detention to 72 hours. This not only increases the likelihood and opportunity for abuse to occur, it also throws potentially vulnerable addicts into an already overcrowded prison system rife with drug abuse, HIV/AIDS and violence. Another issue in prison is intimidation, explained Fransiska. Human rights lawyers are finding it increasingly difficult to defend users accused of possession because police pressure them into believing that if they fight the charges, they will receive a harsher sentence. ‘Sometimes they [drug users] will express interest in seeing a lawyer, but then after a night in prison, they suddenly change their mind. They claim they never wanted a lawyer, or they don’t know you, or that you are lying,’ Fransiska said. ‘Police are intimidating users and interfering with their proper legal rights.’ ‘Women are particularly reluctant to discuss their abuse, because they are afraid both society and their families will stigmatise them and be ashamed of the sexual abuse they have suffered,’ Fransiska said. After Sekar Wulan Sari was arrested for heroin possession, police officers threatened to sexually assault her if her boyfriend did not return with a bribe of several million rupiah for her release. After being exiled from her family, and following a lengthy rehabilitation process, Wulan helped form the Stigma Foundation. She understands first hand the risks posed by harsh articles in the amendment, particularly those that encourage the public to identify drug users in their neighbourhoods and families. ‘Not only are drug users being criminalised by the state, but now families and society are being threatened. Under the amendment, if you are aware of a drug user in your area or in your family and don’t report them to police, you could face court or prison,’ Wulan said. According to Fransiska, the responsibility for resolving drug issues should not be forced upon the community, particularly when law enforcement agencies are simply ‘incapable of carrying out their duties'.

After Sekar Wulan Sari was arrested for heroin possession, police officers threatened to sexually assault her if her boyfriend did not return with a bribe of several million rupiah for her release

The planned reform has thrust the death penalty for drug offences back into the limelight. If passed, the maximum penalty for possession of one gram of heroin will be increased from 15 years prison to death, providing police with even greater ammunition to leverage drug users for money and gratification.

Lobbying for a black campaign
ICDPR members admit that tackling law reform in Indonesia is complicated and overwhelming, but they do not ‘view laws as being almost untouchable’, as Fransiska claims many organisations continue to do. The ICDPR have lobbied the government through international mechanisms as well as by directly targeting politicians with mixed results. The United Nations Commission on Narcotic Drugs met in Vienna on 11 March 2008 to review the effectiveness of the last decade of international drug policy. The Indonesian government sent a delegation of Health, Education, Security and National Narcotic Agency (BNN) representatives who signed an international ‘Political Declaration’ on narcotics. The ICDPR sent its report to Vienna as a means of lobbying international states, particularly progressive European countries which provide funding to Indonesia, to encourage the government to change its human rights and drugs policy. The UN system tends not to cast judgements on particular governments, so the Indonesian delegation essentially signed the agreement without ever being directly addressed about its own domestic policy. ‘It seems the meeting [in Vienna] was fairly non-transparent,’ said Professor Irwanto, ‘with Indonesia being represented by people who may not have necessarily understood the real issue of drug abuse.’ When coalition members met with parliamentarians on 10 December last year for International Human Rights Day, they were surprised to learn that many politicians believed drug users were victims and supported, in theory, a shift toward drug policies that focused on decriminalising drug use. But lobbying for support from legislative candidates in the lead up to the general elections was virtually impossible as being seen as being soft on drugs remains a potential source of ‘black campaigns against their re-election efforts’, Fransiska said. Even though the amendment has not yet been passed, the ICDPR is pessimistic about its chances of being rejected by the incoming parliament. Stigma is focusing its attention on younger candidates linked to NGOs in the hope that future legislators will have a fresh perspective about the current perpetual cycle of targeting drug users and ignoring human rights abuses. ‘After we know who the legislative members are, we will approach them in order to get support for our work,’ said Ricky Gunawan, program director at the Community Legal Aid Institute, after the recent elections. With newly-elected legislators to take their seats in the coming months, and with the ICDPR planning to meet once again with representatives from the Indonesian Human Rights Commission, National AIDS Commission, Supreme Court and Ministry of Health, their overarching concern now is that many of the steps toward reform made in past months by advocates may have been in vain.

Nick Perry is currently living in Indonesia where he is the subeditor on the national news desk at the Jakarta Post newspaper. Nick holds a Bachelor in Communications (Journalism) degree from the University of Technology, Sydney, and regularly submits articles for publications both in Indonesia and abroad.

Tobacco Tax Increase Hurts The Poor

A cigarette price increase to fund smoking prevention programs sounds like a good idea. . . . That is unless you're poor.

There currently is a call for a tobacco tax increase to be used to fund more smoking prevention initiatives. A proposed rise of 2.5¢ a cigarette would push a pack of 40s up another $1 and is hopefully going to reduce smoking by 2.6 per cent. This equates to about 50,000 less smokers and $400 million dollars in addition revenue. It sounds like a win-win situation by lowering the amount of smokers and providing more funds for anti-smoking campaigns. But there are some nasty holes in this strategy. Smoking costs the community $31 billion dollars every year which makes $400 million dollars seem a little insignificant . The real problem though is, who are the people who won't quit despite the price rise. For those who earn an average wage, it won’t matter too much but those who are less fortunate, it will hit hard ... very hard. Monetary penalties are biased and for people who have a good income, it offers little incentive to abide by whatever rules they are are penalised for. We see it intrenched in our society like parking fines, court fines, tax penalties etc. For example, if you are in court and can afford expensive legal representation, you have a greater chance of getting off. That leaves those who can’t afford to ‘buy’ off their conviction and are stuck with budget solicitors. What about speeding fines? If your in a hurry, why would a few hundred dollars worry you if you’re on your way to meeting where you could earn thousands of dollars? Being in a hurry to drop off the kids to your grandparents so you can make it in time to that part time cleaning job is not worth your week’s pay for a speeding fine. Monetary penalties are not relative to your wealth.

We all know smoking is wrong and those who smoke are evil, weak and decadent. Luckily we have someone to guides them away from their wicked ways. Addiction is just an excuse. -The ideology of government anti-smoking programs

Smokers are addicts. Very simple to understand but what’s harder to grasp are the levels of addiction and the addict's situation. A financially secure tobacco addict can simply keep smoking if their addiction is bad enough. But what if you can’t afford it? The calls for an increase in tobacco excise, like most policies regarding addiction, is based on wishful thinking. Addiction can cause those with less disposable income to act completely different to our expectations and when faced with price increases will often accommodate the increase by missing out on something else. Instead of fresh healthy food, they might buy cheaper alternatives. If they need new shoes for their kids, they might keep them wearing them for a few more months. The car needs new tires? That can wait until next year. Simply increasing the cost of something is a broad remedy to discourage use. We see it in the way a tighter monetary policy is used to control inflation. We see it with alcohol being priced out of the reach of heavy drinkers. It might achieve some of it’s intended outcomes but the cost to some is far greater. It is a lazy way to achieve results and requires some spin to get support.

"With rising costs in food, petrol and housing, tobacco is now relatively inexpensive'' -Quit executive director Fiona Sharkie

Relatively inexpensive! Smoking is about 10-20% of a household budget for low income earners, about the same as food. Increasing the price of tobacco will have a profound effect on these budgets and absurd comments from anti-smoking groups show they care very little for people but more for statistics and numbers. Like most drug related programs, financially challenged and the worst effected lose out by broad, disproportional strategies. Strategies that give great headlines and target the easily converted. Of course there is never an analyses of who doesn’t quit smoking and how it effects them but plenty of back slapping at the many who have been rescued from their evil ways. The call for proper analysis is raised every time a “price increase” strategy is put on the table but it gets approved very quickly to avoid full scrutiny.

"With tobacco costing the Australian community $31.5 billion every year, it is essential proven tobacco control strategies, including tax increase, are put into place as soon as possible ...'' -Quit executive director Fiona Sharkie

We have just seen “Alcopops” receive a huge tax increase in an effort to stem “binge drinking” of teenage girls. While it is generally taboo to criticise any effort to reduce smoking levels, alcohol strategies do face scrutiny. This latest “price increase” strategy for “Alcopops” has come under criticism for lack of research, not being effective and for disproportionately effecting the less fortunate compared to average wage earners. I wonder why those same people are basically ignored when it comes to tobacco.

[Article Bumped up from May]

Who Is April Morrison?

Last year one of my neighbours told me she was so happy that we don't get any "junkies" in this neighbourhood. When I asked her how she knew this she this she said we would know if they did because they would break into our houses and leave "AIDS infected needles" laying around. I tried to tell her that was a stereotyped view but she told me I was being unrealistic and would know better if i knew any junkies.
-April Morrison

Each morning, secondary school teacher, Aril Morrison gets up early for work. She showers, has breakfast, pats her cat good-bye and heads off for another day at a job she loves. April has been a school teacher for many years and is well respected by her peers.

I get a lot of positive feedback and praise from parents, staff and students for being a dedicated teacher who the young people respect. People often tell me that my job must be difficult because adolescence is a difficult age group, but I really don't find it to be that much of a challenge. All of my appraisals have been extremely positive. A few years ago I was also made a year level coordinator.

April lives in one of the better parts of a large regional city in NSW with good neighbours and close to the city centre. Although single at the moment, April has recently separated from her fiancé after a relationship of nearly 10 years. Her ability to have children is fading with time which was an issue of contention with her ex fiancé but for April, getting married and having children is not a priority.

I'm not sure I believe in marriage. I think it is too religious based and this is evident by the current refusal to let same-sex couples get married. I am reaching an age where I may miss out on having children if I do not do it soon, but I am ok with that. It may be a decision that I regret later on in my life but I will cross that bridge when I come to it. I have thought about adopting or fostering a child. There are many children out there who already need a home to live in, but my former partner was only interested in having his own children. I am not bitter about the breakup and I still have a lot of respect for him.

April is a contributing member of her community with the same concerns and worries as anyone else. She is polite, caring and humble, a hard productive worker, a tax payer with has no mishaps with the law, is an important part of a caring family and a role model for her students ... in fact she is probably a good role model for all of us.

Really, I am just a normal person, and I do also see myself as being a good person. I care about the world, I care about doing a good job and being a positive role model for my students, and I care about my friends, family and pet cat.

But something is different about April. After a hard day’s work, she doesn’t head straight home, she heads the opposite way to a neighbourhood that is not so good. April is going to her drug dealer to purchase heroin. Why would April purchase heroin? Because, April is a heroin addict. For over 10 years now, April has had to rely on heroin to maintain a balance in her world, our world. April Morrison might be your next door neighbour, work colleague or friend. You would have no idea that April was dependant on heroin and you probably never will. Her fiancé was one of the few who did know and although not a drug user himself, he accepted her decision before they committed to a relationship.

My partner and I had been in a relationship for nearly ten years and he struggled to accept how my use impacted on our financial situation. We definitely didn't struggle, but he made much more money than I and was unhappy with me spending my money on heroin. He did not use any substances besides the occasional beer, cigarette or puff on a joint. He knew that I used before we started the relationship but he grew less and less tolerant of it as time went on. I admit that I did hide it a lot to avoid arguments, but this approach was not very successful. When you have lived with someone for seven years they are able to read your body language quite easily. The pinged eyes are a complete giveaway. Another issue for us was that I did not want to have children while I continued to use heroin.

April might also be your local school teacher in charge of your children’s education. Even as you read this, your child may be looking up to their teacher, Ms Morrison, asking for her help on some school related issue. Do you feel uncomfortable knowing a heroin addict is teaching your children? I know most of the answers already. STOP. Why do you think a heroin addict shouldn’t be teaching your teenage children? Do you really have an informed opinion? Do you really know what a heroin addict is? Let me explain. Heroin is simply an opiate, derived from morphine. Millions of people are taking morphine based drugs daily. Teachers in NSW, politicians in Canada, judges in the US, pharmacists in Adelaide, priests in Italy, police officers in Canberra, Aboriginal elders in the NT, prosecutors in Britain, factory workers in Brazil, particles physicists in Germany, editors in Singapore, car salespeople in the Ukraine, grandmothers in Israel, health care directors in Paris, road crossing monitors in Greece, prison wardens in New Zealand and digital typographers in South Africa. Morphine is addictive and many people using morphine form a dependancy. Whilst morphine is the gold standard of pain medication, heroin was withdrawn from use in many countries after the US ruled it a drug with no medicinal value. The US has since waged a war on heroin via the UN which many countries feel obliged to follow. Heroin though, is still used in quite a few countries for medicinal purposes including addiction treatment. In their crusade to demonise heroin, the US led the way with propaganda campaigns and the spread of misinformation which has become the normal practice for other countries. The image of heroin junkies shooting up with dirty spoons and needles in rat infested hovels is the image put forward by governments for over 30 years leading to several generations believing this fallacy because that is what they have been told. In reality, heroin is just another opiate. Yes it’s more addictive and gives an instant effect when injected or smoked but after a few minutes, it’s like any other morphine based drug. In fact, the chemical structure of heroin just allows the morphine to cross the blood-brain barrier quickly and the end result is the morphine itself. The real problem with heroin addiction is current drug policy outlawing drug use that makes heroin expensive but someone working and on a methadone program can avoid the stereotypical image of a homeless, sickly looking junkie. They can pay for the drug and avoid most of the problems caused by having to fund their habit illegally. Heroin is basically non toxic with virtually no side effects except constipation. It’s the same as taking legally prescribed opioid medications. You have to ask yourself, would you even be worried if your child’s teacher was on medication for pain due to an accident? Of course not so really, what is the difference? The difference is perception. The perception that has slyly been drilled into us by government scare campaigns and a drug hysterical media that feeds that perception. Each morning, April visits a small pharmacy on her way to work to receive her methadone. This keeps her stable during the day and enables her to work without suffering withdrawal symptoms. Living in a small city increases the chances of being seen receiving treatment for addiction so April has to be very careful. She would love to tell her family, friends and co workers but experience has taught her otherwise. Also accessing clean needles is a problem where chemists don’t have the same mentality as in a large city. April instead goes to the needle exchange where they understand the realities of addiction. This simple task is also a risk if someone she knows recognises her.

My family do not know about my dependency. I don't want to risk losing them by telling them. When I started using heroin on a regular basis I did lose some friends who I thought would be more understanding and would stick by me. I was essentially the same, but I guess some people saw me as being less of a person. This hurt me a lot.

Being a heroin addict is not easy and certainly not glamourous. Why do people do it? Why not just go to rehab? This may seem a logical question but if you think of the numbers of drug addicts over the years and how millions of them have tried and relapsed, it is no longer a simple question. Firstly, if it was that easy then there would be no problem with long term drug addiction. Secondly, it is not a black and white situation as portrayed by the MSM and anti-drug groups. If we listened to gooseberries like Bronwyn Bishop or Piers Akerhead then you are already a “bad person” because you didn’t “Just Say No”. If you, being a bad person can’t be strong willed enough to pop down the corner and do a quick detox or rehab then you’re a nasty, dirty junkie who needs jail. Research shows us that long term drug addiction is a physical problem and will power has very little to do with it. It is often compared to diabetes where the body doesn’t produce the right chemicals to live a normal life and the patient needs a natural replacement. For diabetics, that is insulin, for heroin addicts that is opiates. What most people probably don’t realise is that drug addiction is a chronic reoccurring disorder and far more complex than a newspaper can explain amongst all the sensationalist hype needed to attract readers.

Addiction to drugs is a chronic medical illness. It is caused by a complex interplay of biological and environmental factors. Studies have implicated several genes in predisposing individuals to drug abuse and addiction.
-Medical Assisted Treatment of America

The general view of drug addiction as a social problem stems back to the US where most of the world’s drug perceptions are based.

Prior to the later 20th century, the general viewpoint of addiction, and particularly for opioid addiction, was that of a social and moral problem rather than a medical condition requiring treatment. The passage of the Harrison Narcotics Act (US) in the early part of the 20th century also tended to stigmatize those with an opioid addiction reinforcing the perception that these people were not only as social deviants, but also criminals whose behavior deserved punishment. Toward the latter part of the 20th century however, there was a growing change in the public's understanding and perception about addiction.Facilitating this change in public perception was the introduction of the medical model of addiction as a treatable condition that helped to bring about an increase in human rights laws.
-Medical Assisted Treatment of America

Why does April say of her heroin addiction?

I use most days and the days that I don't can be very difficult. I am on methadone and this helps. I don't just use simply to avoid physical discomfort. I'm not after any sympathy, but I do have a diagnosis of PTSD. I function very well in the sense that I am optimistic, usually happy and I hold down a full time job, but I have been through a bit of shit and sometimes that plays on my mind. I know I can only speak for myself, but I guess I am making this point because I don't think it is fair to say that people simply choose to use drugs. I didn't wake up one day and think to myself "the sun is shining outside and I have nothing to do. I think I might develop a heroin addiction". It is much more complicated than that. I admit that I dabbled in drugs prior to the traumatic incident, but it was only afterwards that I really developed a dependency. It was a way to get rid of pain when nothing else could (including counselling). It does frustrate me that I have to hide this part of me, but I do it out of fear of being judged. Even though I would still be the same person if I told people (not to mention that heroin use is only one part of my life and does not consume my entire identity), I know that people get hysterical about it. I have experienced that hysteria and have come off second best. I also want to say that I have never resorted to crime to pay for my habit. I have also never dealt. This is not to say that I judge people who do. I have been employed the entire time so my salary pays for it. I also used my savings.

All though April Morrison is not her real name, it is unimportant. What is important is that this lady could be anyone you know. Whether they have an addiction problem or not, they are human beings like you with the same needs especially understanding. The simplistic world of drug users that the MSM and others portray is usually not true and until we embrace drug addiction as a health issue, people like April will be forced into hiding. Prison is no replacement for hospital.

You can ask April questions if you like via the comments.

Diary: Is My Pharmacist Committed?

DIARY: Some chemists are notorious for the treatment of methadone patients. And I have had my share of run ins with arrogant pharmacists who feel methadone patients are somehow less important than other customers. But the switch to another medication meant I was a normal customer again, away from the stigma of being just another junkie on methadone. Well, I was wrong...

I am guessing most methadone patients have had the frustrating experience of waiting in line for service only to be overlooked when a regular customer comes to the counter. I am also guessing that many methadone patients have found themselves at odds with the pharmacist on at least one occasion. If you happen to pick the wrong chemist, it can cause methadone patients much, unneeded grief which often erupts into an outburst of frustration and anger. The chemist gladly informs their 2nd rate customer that they are off the program. The ex customer has to then find another chemist, which is usually for the best in the long run.

That all changed for me when I switched to SROM ... well I thought it did. Not having to go to the special counter for methadone patients was a big bonus and I was treated as regular customer who was just receiving a normal prescription. So I thought at first.

My script is presented monthly and I pick up weekly. I had some extra medication at the start so I could come in a few days late if I was unable to get to the chemist on time. I usually pick up Thursday evenings for the following week but sometimes I would leave it until Friday or Saturday and I would just receive a week’s worth of medication. One day that all changed with a different pharmacist. The pharmacist decided that my weekly pick up started on the day I came in and since I was one day late, I would be short a day. She explained the script said “pickup dose every 7 days”. She knew it was a technicality and since my doctor was on holidays, she couldn’t ring him. I finally sorted it out with the owner and I agreed to come in every Thursday to keep it simple. My doctor also changed my script to say “weekly pickup” so I could come in any day within the week.

I stuck to the Thursday agreement but this week I was at a funeral and I forgot to pick up my dose. I came in the next morning as soon as the chemist opened but agian was told that my week now started on Friday instead of Thursday. I was furious and stormed out. I came back to point out the new script but the pharmacist just casually flopped over to the counter sucking on a lollipop and slapped the prescription down without saying a word. I showed her the new wording but she didn’t even respond. I was a customer for fuck’s sake but a junkie is a junkie and I wasn’t worthy of customer status.

I rang the owner but he couldn’t get his head around the days. He said that if i got my medication on Friday, next Thursday would only be 6 days. I said that shouldn’t matter as we had been through this before all I wanted was to pick up my meds on Thursdays like usual. He got mixed up with days and numbers and kept repeating the same illogical outcomes even though he agreed he was wrong only 30 seconds before. His final solution was come in on Thursday as normal and he will just give me 6 days worth to get it back in line. WTF? One mixed up chemist!

It was so simple. I have a one day buffer which means I have my last dose Thursday morning, pickup my script that night and start the next morning, Friday. I have the buffer because I take my dose before 7am so it kicks in by 9am otherwise I am in massive pain and start withdrawal. If I have to wait until the chemist opens at 9am, I am not getting my meds working until 11am-12pm.

I asked them to ring my doctor but somehow this was not an option anymore. Can you picture an insulin patient having to miss a day because they came in a day late? What about someone on medication for a heart attack? A day early is different but this is after the due date. Originally they stated that the script specifically said that medication was every 7 days but when I purposely had the script changed to clear this problem up it wasn’t the issue anymore. They conveniently changed their mind that this was the reason.

Funny enough, I used to come in late one or two days for the first few months and nothing was even mentioned, until I got the pharmacist from hell. Why was I treated with suspicion but they still wouldn’t ring my doctor? I was doing fine coming in every Thursday but one day I come in Friday morning and my medication gets pushed back a day. The pharmacist treated me like shit and this just would not happen with other customers.

I approached another chemist near by and they said they would be happy to treat me as a customer regardless of when I came in. As long as my script said “weekly pickup” and I didn’t come in earlier than the due day, it was up to me when I picked up my medication. I asked them to ring my doctor to make sure but they said it wasn’t necessary because they understood the logic of “weekly pickup”. I wonder what a customer of 10 years has to do to get treated like I was. It all came down to one junior pharmacist and the owner who couldn’t do the maths in his head. One phone call to my doctor would have cleared it all up.

Just as I was getting my life together, I get let down by my doctors and then the chemist. I have enough problems to deal with! It seems that addiction warrants others to put you through extra misery without consideration for being a person with needs and feelings. There are very few positive experiences being an addict with depression and it is extremely upsetting when your only relief, your medication is unnecessarily interfered with. It is easy to become cynical when it happens regularly whilst having the public consider you less than human as well.

Many methadone patients (including myself) have become loud and angry when obvious discrimination occurs and usually it results in punitive action which only inflames the patient even more. I’ve seen it dozens of times at pharmacies especially certain ones that seem to thrive on acting superior to the patient. No one can really understand until they have been through it and I don’t wish it on anyone. I have never heard one single methadone patient ever ask for anything more than being treated the same as everyone else. Is that too much to ask? ... and people wonder why there are relapses.

For more horror stories, visit A.T. Watchdog. If you think we have it bad in Australia, try the US.

Rudd & Welfare Payments for Drug Users?

Last year, ex PM John Howard said he was going to quarantine welfare payments for people convicted of drug offences. In an interview before Howard's announcement, Rudd had already said he was in favour of restricting payments of drug addicted parents. Is Rudd going to invoke Howard's harsher strategy?

With the introduction of the ‘income management debit card’ in last night’s budget, the basics have been established and the plan is to roll it our nationally starting with Aboriginal communities in NT. Can the government resist extending it too far?

An article from Blogocracy last week talks about the proposed debit card for Aboriginal parents who are negligent towards their children. It quotes an extract from an article in The Australian.

A NATIONAL welfare card that will allow the Government to control payments to negligent parents across the country will be unveiled in Tuesday’s budget.

The debit card - to be introduced in selected indigenous communities before being rolled out across Australia - will ensure half of the cardholders’ welfare payments are spent on approved goods and services, such as food and clothing for their children, rather than wasted on alcohol and drugs. The card will not carry a photograph but will be PIN-coded to prevent it being sold on the black market and abused by welfare-dependent parents.

The Government last night confirmed plans for the card, saying it would slash red tape for business and make it easier for welfare recipients to obtain goods by widening the number of outlets where quarantined welfare payments could be accepted.

It will initially be introduced into Aboriginal communities in the Northern Territory and the Kimberley region of Western Australia, where the Government has begun quarantining welfare payments to improve standards of care for children. But the Government plans to roll the program out across the country and into white communities.

-The Australian

The article is prior to the budget so there is still some uncertainty. Nevertheless, comments started to speculate whether the welfare card should be distributed into the white community. Instinctively many started on why drug users should have their payments restricted or even stopped. There was plenty of opinions both ways but a comment from one reader put the problem in perspective:

This is a band-aid solution - it does nothing to address the real issues. I don’t think it will result in any real change at all. People aren’t going to stop problem drinking or drug use because of a card. When you make it harder, you just make people more deceptive.

-jm of adelaide

JM of Adelaide had hit the real issue. The crackdown on negligent parents was not the only problem, the use of penalties on drug addicts was. A debit card as a welfare penalty is one more issue that people with health issues like addiction have to deal with. There is an underlying health problem being ignored and applying a restriction will just create more desperate and maybe more deceptive practices to obtain money for drugs. Blogocracy content and it's readers are leagues above the usual Daily Telegraph/Herald-Sun/Courier etc. crap but many of the comments made were still ignorant of the health issue and were happy to dish out harsh penalties to those who really need help.

... if they test positive to drugs they automatically go on to the welfare debit card, if they are not already on it, and are subject to testing for the next 3 months. If they are already on the debit card they lose 10% of their cash payment, and 10% each time they test positive, after a month of no positive test they go back to normal. If they wipe out their complete cash payment Centrelink starts paying their rent and the have the debit card for food. At the end of the day though there is only so much you can do to help people.

When you drive down the street on a dole Thursday and see people passed out in the median strip there is something wrong. As the tax payers who support the system that gives them the money to do this we are responsible. The current system is not making the problem any better so we have to try something different, and anything we can do to stop them drinking themselves to death has to be an improvement.

-Link

I was interested to know how Link deducted that the “people passed out in the median strip” receive payment on “dole Thursday”. The fact is there is no set day for unemployment payments. Similar to how my brother once said that the streets were out of control on ‘methadone day’ assuming that methadone patients got dosed on the same, one day of the week. Interestingly, he said it was Thursday as well. Also, Link’s plan to penalise drug use is as ignorant as it gets. It’s a familiar argument though, where if tested positive, instead of getting help, you get punished. What if the person was given drugs for free? There’s no misspending of their welfare payment but would be penalised anyway. Moral welfare?

Why should government welfare go to supporting a drug habit(thats all drugs not just the illegal ones).Which currently they do.Should government be in the business of encouraging its citizens drug dependence.Then having to pay for the medical conditions that result from that dependence.

-sandgroper

When it becomes mainstream for welfare, who determines who receives the card and what they can buy? If someone has a drug problem are they allowed to buy smokes or porn? What about a heroin addict on treatment, would they qualify? And if they lapse for for a few weeks, what then? Most people on treatment lapse sometimes and if they don’t have cash ... that leaves begging, borrowing or crime.

I still like the idea of drug & alcohol testing people when they get the dole. -Link

So you go out for a family diner paid by your brother, have a few glasses of red wine and tested the next day. Where does this leave you? What about pornography testing? Gambling testing? The ‘income management debit card’ cannot be used to purchase alcohol, tobacco, pornography, gambling or to withdraw cash.

There was even that favourite of the modern right, “if you have done nothing wrong, you have nothing to hide”.

If you want the money it is because you want to spend it on things the government did not provide it for.

-sandgroper

The need to punish drug users was often outweighing the actual discussion of restricting welfare payments of those who neglect their children. It was becoming a forum for why drug users/addicts should get payment at all.

If any parents, aboriginal or otherwise, want to kill themselves with drugs and alcohol they can do it for all I care. I just don’t see why tax-payers should subsidise it, and if this card goes towards preventing that then I’m all for it.

-Banjo of Brisbane

And even this.

Yet a terrible thought crossed my mind going through this topic. Some of the worst addicted at worst might kill their children in the belief they will get more for their addictions, or at the least will blame the kids for their reduced ability to obtain drugs and alcohol and foist even more and terrible abuse on them.

-Adrian of Nowra

If the purpose of the ‘income management debit card’ is to stop purchases of alcohol, tobacco, pornography, gambling or to withdraw cash, what's to stop the government expanding the program to include workers? The current plan is targeted at a specific group but the government hasn't announced it's drug policy yet.

A lot of posters seem to assume that only welfare recipients neglect or abuse their children. What about parents who have jobs and waste their money on drugs, alcohol and gambling and neglect or abuse their children? Will the government confiscate their wages and issue them with a card?

-janetheunhowardhugger

Would you support the quarantining of payments for all Australian parents who use drugs and neglect their children? The moralists will argue feverishly for this and in today's political climate, it may be a vote winner. Somehow though, I feel the emphasis will be on the drug usage separately from the neglect of children. The one bright spot is that both Nicola Roxon and Kevin Rudd have mentioned that future drug policies need to be more individualised. An extremely important point that Howard's Zero Tolerance badly missed with it's blanket approach. Remember Howard was determined to change drug terminology and lump all drug use into one evil bucket of death.

And I’m seeking to conclude our point about child welfare to say that that policy was put out by us in July this year prior to Mr Howard making any such statement. Secondly, on the question of broader quarantining of welfare payments, we believe that the smart thing to do there is to take the advice of a combination of the police and the relevant health authorities as to what is best in individual circumstances. And I’ve tried to look at the detail of what Mr Howard has said. It’s full of holes, and I’d much rather see what concrete proposals he’s really additionally suggesting here. Our approach to this is to make sure that we’ve got a tailored approach to individual circumstances which is based on the best law enforcement advice, and the best advice of the health professionals.

-Kevin Rudd. Radio Interview ABC 774 Melbourne. November 2007

Once again we are seeing a health issue being treated with disciplinary action. I have no qualms about parents who neglect their children being scrutinised and dealt with but these new measures and the possible outcomes are also targeting drug addicts are a priority. They are not targeting drug addicts to help them as there are many other ways to help that are being ignored. Punitive actions are counter productive and do not address the core problems. I once described these actions as fighting a fire. You need to attack the base not the tips of the flame. It might dull the fire and keep it out of sight from a distance but the core fuel is burning hot as ever. Simply put, welfare quarantining for drug addicts solely because of their drug use does not fix the problem, it makes it worst. Medicine diagnosed addiction hundreds of years ago. Society just chose to treat it as a crime.