U.N. Drug Policy: The Harm Reduction Debate
OpenForum | April 23, 2009 | 3 Comments
The controversial term “harm reduction” defines a public health approach that aims to mitigate the damaging effects of illegal drug use through programs such as clean-needle exchange. Those who oppose this approach argue that it facilitates and legitimizes illicit drug use. Meanwhile, advocates of harm reduction point to its proven effectiveness in reducing disease. The two sides went head-to-head during a recent session of the U.N. Commission on Narcotic Drugs (CND), resulting in the adoption of a plan that will set the agenda for international drug control policy for the next decade, without any reference to “harm reduction.”
Opponents to inclusion of the “harm reduction” approach included the U.S., Russia, Japan, and Italy. The latter chose not to side with the European Union (EU) in its favor after the Vatican made a last-minute statement before the session claiming that “so called harm reduction leads to a liberalisation of the use of drugs, to an increase in the number of addicted people and to blurring of consciences,” according to the EU Observer. While U.S. President Obama backs federally-funded needle exchanges for addicts (in a break from the Bush administration’s drug policy), the U.S. delegation opposed the term as used in the plan because it included measures outside U.S. practice. Read more