Category Archives:Drugs General

Parents who use drugs are at risk of losing custody of their children. But forcing a child into state-subsidised care can severely affect their mental wellbeing.

Experts recognise that keeping children with their parents is usually the preferred option, unless their home environment is neglectful or dangerous.

But there is another option for Victorian families affected by drug addiction – counselling and rehabilitation through the Family Drug Treatment Court of Victoria (FDTC).

The FDTC is currently in its second year of a three-year trial. It facilitates a voluntary, court-ordered program to help parents stop using drugs.

The FDTC is not a court in the traditional sense; but a specialist body aimed at helping families stay together. Its stated objectives are to:

• Help parents stop using drugs/alcohol, and
• Family reunification

Success Story

After successfully completing the 12 month program, single father ‘Jack’ will have his two-year-old daughter returned to his full-time care.

Jack fell into a pattern of drug use and brushes with the criminal law when he was just 14 years old. He was involved in trafficking methamphetamine, illegal weapons, counterfeit money and ammunition.

He told the ABC Law report that he is now on “the straight and narrow”, saying that the FDTC program:

“… made the difference I suppose because it’s constant … It slowly builds you up to being ready to be a parent again. And yes, it works in your favour, I’d recommend it to anyone to do it that needs help.”

Jack, like many parents affected by drug addiction, wanted to do the right thing for his daughter; and this was enough to motivate him to quit using drugs. He says that:

“I just knew it had to go and I wanted to do the right thing for my daughter, and I had the support of my family, of this program, and I just wanted to change.”

How Does the Program Work?

Parents can be referred to the FDTC by their legal representative or a Child Protection Worker.

The court then decides whether referral to the program is a suitable course of action.

To be eligible, hopeful participants must live in the relevant Northern catchment area of Victoria, and:

– Have a child aged 0-3 years old in ‘out of home care,

– Be seeking to have that child returned to their care,

– Be committed to stopping their drug use, and

– Be willing to participate in the 12-month program.

The FDTC is chaired by a Children’s Court magistrate and has a team that includes a social worker and drug and alcohol clinicians. Participants are required to attend court regularly and be tested for drugs up to three times per week.

Greg Levin, a long serving Children’s Court Magistrate, says that most participants have long histories of substance abuse and seem intent on turning their lives around for the sake of their kids.

Is it Likely to be Effective?

A study of UK and US Family Drug Treatment Courts found that the programs reduce the intergenerational harm caused by drug use – in other words, the negative impact that the use of drugs has on children, both directly and indirectly.

The study cited numerous success stories, including cases where parents had drifted in and out of the court system for many years. The authors state that:

“What the Family Drug Court offers is a way out of this relentless and damaging cycle [of crime].”

The report also found that such voluntary programs are more effective than court ordered rehabilitation schemes, as people who are forced to change rarely end up doing so.

Drug Courts in NSW

NSW currently has specialist Drug Courts in Parramatta, Toronto and the Downing Centre in Sydney.

We also had a Youth Drug Court for young offenders, but it was unfortunately axed in 2012.

NSW does not currently have a Family Drug Treatment Court; but it is hoped that the initiative will extend across Australia if the Victorian model proves to be successful.

We are constantly hearing about people who have lost their lives or committed heinous crimes due to their battle with methamphetamine addiction.

Indeed, Australia’s ‘ice epidemic’ has dominated the media for many months, with Prime Minister Tony Abbott calling it a ‘national menace.’

With all the focus on ice, prescription drug abuse often slips under the radar. But Australian Medical Association (AMA) spokesperson Dr Steve Wilson says that prescription drugs kill more people than methamphetamine each year – and the figures are growing.

According to Dr Wilson, drugs such as ice feature more heavily in the media because they are perceived as being more ‘devastating’ and ‘catastrophic’, and incidents involving such drugs involve multiple emergency personnel such as police, paramedics and doctors.

But statistics indicate that Australians are far more likely to abuse prescription drugs than methamphetamines, and that those aged in their 20s are the most likely to do so – with 10.9% reporting using pharmaceutical drugs for non-medical purposes.

Western Australia leads the country in prescription drug abuse, with residents 5.6% more likely to abuse medications compared to other states and territories.

The Acceptance of Prescription Drug Abuse

Prescription drug abuse is often seen as more acceptable than the low-level use of illicit drugs. This is not only because prescription drugs are legal, but abusers are often prescribed the drugs by doctors rather than having to seek them on the black market.

In many cases, prescription drug abusers go ‘doctor shopping’ – seeking prescriptions from multiple doctors, many of whom are only too happy to put pen to paper.

Recent years have seen an explosion in the number of prescriptions for addictive and dangerous drugs, including benzodiazepines, which are minor tranquilisers used to relieve stress and anxiety and to help people sleep. Approximately 1 in 50 Australians are believed to use benzodiazepines on a regular basis, with many taking it for longer than 6 months – despite the fact that long term use can result in breathing problems, unconsciousness, coma and even death.

The problem can be compounded when users mix prescription medication with illicit drugs or alcohol – sometimes with tragic consequences.

Concerned family members are often helpless to stop abusers, with one mother describing how she tried to tell Medicare and police about her son’s addiction – even giving them copies of the prescriptions. But despite her best efforts, nothing was done and her son ended up deceased.

How Can We Address the Issue?

Thankfully, action is being taken to combat the problems associated with prescription drug abuse.

ScriptWise is an organisation which aims to raise awareness about the misuse of prescription medication. It is launching a national educational campaign next week to educate Australians about the dangers, with Kim Ledger – father of the late Heath Ledger – being the official patron of the organisation.

Heath Ledger died in 2008 after accidently overdosing on a combination of six prescription drugs. It is believed that he suffered from insomnia and was attempting to self-medicate. A toxicology report found oxycodone, hydrocodone, diazepam, temazepam, alprazolam and doxylamine in his system.

An initiative which the government hopes will address the issue of ‘doctor shopping’ is the rollout of an Electronic Recording and Reporting of Controlled Drugs System (ERRCD).

The system aims to ‘develop a nationally consistent system to collect and report data relating to dispensing controlled drugs’ by requiring doctors and other health professionals to record all prescriptions of controlled drugs in an electronic register.

This will allow medical professionals to quickly check whether a patient has already been prescribed a controlled substance, and thereby prevent ‘doctor shopping.’

Despite the fact that the ERRCD was approved by the Federal Government in 2012, the rollout has been painstakingly slow, with only Tasmania adopting it so far.

While the ERRCD signifies a positive step forward, doctors are concerned by the fact that it will only register Schedule 8 drugs, which are drugs deemed to be highly addictive, and that potentially dangerous drugs such as benzodiazepines and anti-psychotics will not appear on the records.

Drug addiction comes at a significant cost to society – both in monetary and human terms.

Researchers estimate that up to 872 deaths can be attributed to illegal drug use each year, while the cost of treating those who are drug-affected is in the vicinity of $2.12 billion per year.

Of this money, around $298 million is spent treating drug users through rehabilitation programs and pharmacological methods.

But researchers have argued that there is little basis to justify the way Australia and other nations approach drug addiction – finding ‘little evidence’ that current rehabilitation regimes work in the long term.

The Problem With Rehabilitation

Traditionally, drug rehabilitation services focused on weaning people off highly addictive drugs such as heroin and ice.

However, like many other things, drugs tend to come in and out of fashion – and one of the most common drugs currently used by those seeking treatment is cannabis; second only to ice.

Other commonly abused drugs are legal highs such as nitrous oxide and steroids.

But according to researchers, rehabilitation programs have failed to develop specific programs to tackle these changing trends in addiction – and many services prescribe the same treatment plans and goals for every patient, despite scientific research showing that ‘no single treatment is appropriate for everyone,’ and stressing the importance of tailoring plans to individual needs and circumstances.

Treating those who regularly use ‘less harmful’ drugs such as cannabis alongside people trying to overcome heroin and ice addiction is, they say, futile, and can even be counterproductive.

Adding to this problem is evidence from the US which shows that many rehabilitation services are manned by people who do not have any formal training or qualifications to deal with drug affected people.

According to some experts, addiction psychiatrists are a rarity in these environments, with many services instead staffed by counsellors or other non-specialists.

This is despite the fact that research indicates that those who are drug addicted also often have underlying mental health issues – and that treating such conditions is necessary for a successful rehabilitation.

The Root of Addiction

Besides these problems, another criticism of our current approach to rehabilitation is that it fails to address the root of addiction.

What, you might ask, is the root of addiction?

Well, according to one Canadian psychologist, it isn’t the drugs themselves.

In the 1970’s, Bruce K. Alexander, a psychologist and researcher at Simon Fraser University in Canada sought to understand what causes addiction.

He theorised that addiction is not due to the addictive properties of drugs, but rather a flow-on effect of ‘distress’ – and that people experiencing distress turn to drugs to relieve their pain.

So how did Alexander test his theory?

Using lab rats, of course – a move that would undoubtedly enrage those against animal testing.

Alexander built a massive 95 square foot rat cage, nicknamed ‘Rat Park.’

The Park was a kind of rat-heaven – 16-20 rats were free to eat as much as they pleased, play on an abundance of rat-friendly toys, and roam the vast expanse of the cage.

But Rat Park had a sinister twist – instead of supplying the rats with pure water, Alexander and his colleagues offered the rats a choice between water and water containing morphine.

Alexander found that despite the available options, the rats generally opted for the plain water.

Like any experiment, there was also a control group of rats who were kept in smaller, much less luxurious cages.

Incredibly, when presented with the water/morphine-water choice, these rats tended to choose the morphine-water.

Alexander concluded that addiction is based largely on a subject’s environment – and that those from poorer socio-economic environments, with less social supports, are more likely to succumb to addiction when compared to those from higher socioeconomic, more supportive backgrounds.

But a word of caution – Alexander has been criticised for distorting the data in order to provoke a public debate about addiction, and numerous other experiments have failed to replicate his results.

However, research from other sources tends to support Alexander’s general theory.

For instance, many US soldiers who fought in the Vietnam War became addicted to heroin, but only 5% of those continued their drug habits when they returned to the US.

As one journalist notes, ‘They shifted from a terrifying cage back to a pleasant one, so didn’t want the drug anymore.’

By way of parallel, it is noted that there is often little support for recovering addicts once they leave luxurious rehabilitation centres and return home.

It is noted that, once confronted with the pressures of life, there is a great risk that they will relapse.

So how can we better help addicts?

Alexander’s theory suggests that rather than just funding rehabilitation programs, governments should invest in longer term community support services such as housing and employment programs in order to increase the prospects of long term abstinence from drugs..

And although rehabilitation programs are certainly important, they can better assist drug users by developing tailored treatment plans relevant to their particular circumstances, including the nature and level of their drug use.

Of course, all of this costs money – something that is hard to come by in the wake of recent funding cuts to drug rehabilitation programs.

But perhaps with a better understanding of drug addiction, the investment will be worth it in the longer term – reducing the problems associated with abuse.

It only takes a moment for your life to be turned upside down.

A moment of inattention on the road, punching an obnoxious drunk rather than just walking away, accepting a few pills from a friend – all of these acts can quickly land you before a court facing the prospect of a criminal conviction, or even time in prison.

As discussed in many of our blogs, having a criminal record can have lasting consequences on your life – including your career prospects and ability to travel.

For this reason, experienced criminal lawyers will often seek to obtain a “section 10 dismissal and conditional release order” for their clients in  cases like drug possession, drink driving and common assault – which means that no conviction is recorded despite being guilty.

Now, Western Australia is trialing an initiative which goes a step further than a ‘non conviction order’ by diverting first-time offenders away from the court system altogether if they agree to take part in treatment programs aimed at addressing the reasons behind their offending.

The Turning Point Project

Dubbed ‘The Turning Point Project,’ the trial is based upon similar ‘deferred prosecution’ initiatives which have had great success overseas.

Police will have the choice to offer certain first-time offenders the opportunity to take part in the project instead of fronting court.

Those who agree will have to participate for four months, during which they will be required to engage in a range of activities aimed at curbing their chances of reoffending.

While each agreement will be tailored to the individual and their circumstances, the types of conditions that may be imposed include things like counselling, apologising to victims, staying away from particular areas, and seeking treatment for drug and alcohol problems.

The initiative will only be open to first-time offenders for minor offences such as drug possession, larceny (theft), disorderly conduct, motor vehicle theft and trespass.

Those charged with more serious offences such as physical or sexual assault, or domestic violence offences, will be excluded from the program.

Those who complete the program will have their charges dropped – without ever having to front court.

However, those who fail or re-offend will be prosecuted normally in court.

Benefits of the Project

The Turning Point Project has won support from several players within the criminal justice system, including Western Australia’s Police Commissioner Karl O’Callaghan, Police

Minister Lisa Harvey, and Chief Magistrate Steven Heath.

The Project has been lauded as offering a range of benefits, including saving court time, saving police time that would otherwise be spent compiling briefs and appearing in court and, of course, giving offenders the opportunity to address underlying issues.

Similar initiatives trialled in the United Kingdom since 2014 have had outstanding success rates, with around 75% of participants completing the agreements.

Such scheme also have a public interest benefit – first-time offenders who make silly, one-time mistakes will be allowed to get on with their lives without the burden of a criminal conviction hampering their chances of securing gainful employment or furthering their careers.

Most importantly, first-time offenders receive assistance to reduce the likelihood of offending in the future – which offers a considerable benefit to themselves as well as the wider community.

Music lovers nationwide are gearing up for the annual Splendour in the Grass festival, to be held at the North Byron Parklands in just under a fortnight.

And, as usual, festival organisers have warned that drug detection dogs will be in attendance, along with a strong police presence.

But in recent times, festivalgoers around the world have called on law enforcement personnel to take a more liberal approach to drug use in order to promote safety and prevent tragic overdoses.

One Canadian festival even took the initiative of providing attendees with drug testing kits to allow users to ensure any illicit drugs were not laced with toxic substances.

Testing to Prevent Fatalities

Organisers of the Evolve Festival, held in Antigonish, Nova Scotia, aimed to revolutionise the festival scene by offering free drug testing to all attendees.

Festivalgoers could utilise the service by handing officials samples of any drugs that they intended to take. Staff would then run litmus tests on the samples and provide a report detailing the chemical breakdown of the drugs. The kits are able to run tests on LSD, speed and ecstasy.

Staff decided to implement the free testing service after a number of attendees overdosed last year because they didn’t know what was in the drugs they were taking.

Organisers argued that testing was more beneficial than preventative measures such as sniffer dogs as drug use was inevitable at music events.

Testing Canned After Insurance Debacle

But well-intentioned organisers faced hurdles in implementing the plan.

The event’s insurance providers, Wynward Insurance Group, reportedly pulled the plug on the event after it heard about the decision to offer free drug testing.

After considering cancelling the festival altogether, organisers were able to secure new insurance underwriters at the last minute – but were forced to sign a waiver promising not to provide drug-testing kits to attendees.

Despite the debacle, the festival’s executive producer, Jonas Coulter, hopes that media coverage of the controversy will push others in the industry to consider introducing drug testing kits in the future.

Speaking to the media, Coulter explained the reasoning behind testing kits, saying, ‘it’s not about condoning drug use, it’s about offering information and letting people make hopefully wise decisions.’

Drug Testing Kits Backed By Experts

While insurers and some members of the public remain wary of such moves, medical experts have embraced the idea.

Vancouver’s chief medical health officer, Dr. Perry Kendall, backed drug testing kits, saying that ‘from a pragmatic, humane and ethical perspective we should try and mitigate the dangers for those individuals.’

He said testing could allow users to identify the presence of dangerous compounds such as fentanyl, which has been linked to a number of recent drug overdoses.

Similar comments have been made by Australian health professionals after a number of highly-publicised drug overdoses at local music festivals.

Earlier this year Dr. David Caldicott, who monitors drugs in emergency rooms, spoke out against Australia’s zero-tolerance approach to drugs.

Dr. Caldicott suggested that Australia should support the use of drug testing kits at festivals in a bid to prevent fatal overdoses.

He stated that when kits are available, consumers readily change their behaviour, stating that ‘if the result of a test on a pill is something other than what they thought it would be, [users] frequently elect to abandon taking that pill.’

He also spoke about the success of drug testing kit initiatives in Europe, where festivals commonly allow users to check drug content as part of a ‘harm-reduction intervention.’

And it seems that drug testing kits have the support of the general public: a recent survey found that 82% of Australians aged between 16 and 23 supported the idea of pill testing.

Testing Offers Other Benefits

Besides allowing drug users to know exactly what they are consuming, pill testing has been shown to have numerous other benefits.

For instance, there is evidence to suggest that such regimes promote ‘purer’ drugs, allowing drug users to warn others of any drugs known to contain dangerous ingredients. This puts pressure on drug manufacturers to refrain from lacing or cutting drugs with harmful substances.

Experts also say that pill testing facilities provide an educative function, enabling the dissemination of drug-related information to a target audience.

Such initiatives have reportedly been used ‘to establish contact and as the basis for follow-up work with members of not-yet-problematic, but nevertheless high-risk, groups of recreational drug users.’

However, Australian police maintain that a punitive approach is the best option. Sadly, this means that users will continue to put themselves at greater potential risk every time they consume drugs.