Focusing on the role of police as primary actors in the arena of citizen safety, this article examines the impact of policing practices on the daily lived experience of people who use drugs in accessing a supervised consumption site in Vancouver, Canada. The site is located in the heart of Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside (DTES) neighborhood at a community center that I refer to as the Hawthorne Resource Centre. The method of data collection for this study comprised five months of ethnographic fieldwork, including focus groups and one-on-one interviews with community members accessing the site, site staff and management. Drawing on Foucauldian conceptualizations of power, the findings of this research suggest that governmental modes of power, including biopower and disciplinary power, are pervasively operative in various realms of the day to day lives of the Hawthorne Resource Centre clients. Evidence of the scalable nature of these modes of power are seen within the internal functioning of the Supervised Consumption Site, outside in the methods of community policing in the DTES and in weekly police practices in Oppenheimer Park. As such, this study represents a multiscalar assessment of how these Foucauldian power structures work at multiple levels and locations in the DTES. Driven by the narratives of the Hawthorne Resource Centre clients, the findings of this research illustrate not only the importance of understanding power relations within specific policy interventions, but further, highlight how specific tactics mobilized within “harm reduction policing” would be relevant and applicable to the context of the DTES.
Introduction In light of North America's persisting drug toxicity crisis, alternative drug policy approaches such as decriminalization, legalization, regulation, and safer supply have increasingly come to the forefront of drug policy discourse. The views of people who use drugs toward drug policy and drug law reform in the Canadian context are essential, yet largely missing from the conversation. The aim of this study was to capture the opinions, ideas, and attitudes of people who use drugs toward Canadian drug laws and potential future alternatives. Methods This paper was developed as part of the Canadian Drug Laws Project, a cross-jurisdictional qualitative study conducted in British Columbia, Canada between July and September 2020. The qualitative data are from 24 semi-structured interviews with a diverse sample of people who use illegal drugs. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, coded, and analyzed thematically by the research team. Results Two main themes and corresponding sub-themes are presented: (1) The experience of stigma as a consequence of criminalization; (2) The perceived benefits of drug law reform. Participants spoke in-depth about their experiences living within a criminalized drug policy context and offered suggestions for new pathways forward. Their perspectives illuminate how Canada's drug laws may shape public attitudes toward people who use drugs and the consequent manifestations of structural, social, and self-stigma experienced by people who use drugs. Conclusion Participants openly and profoundly believed that current drug laws produced and propagated the public attitudes and structural inequities experienced by people who use drugs in Canada. This matters, not only because our findings highlight the fact that people who use drugs experience stigma in tangible and clearly impactful ways, but it also suggests that the criminlilization of drugs shapes the experience of structural, social, and self stigma. Finally, participants believed that efforts to destigmatize people who use drugs would be ineffectual without the enactment of more robust forms of drug law reform such as the decriminalization of illegal drugs.
This essay looks to present governmentality as a theoretical framework through which to evaluate supervised injection sites (SIS) as a ‘political technology’ and police as extensions of this ‘technology’. Firstly, I will discuss how SIS arose under discourses of ‘public health’ and ‘harm reduction’ to fit varying political ideologies as a technology to cleanse public spaces of ‘disorderly’ drug use, thus safeguarding the urban environment as an attractive, civil and commercial space. Despite saving lives and meeting the unique needs of injection drug users, SIS can be understood as spaces of exclusion, immediately linking people to a marginalised population. Secondly, I will present the ways in which SIS can be contextualized as a powerful tool of surveillance and discipline, imposing the ‘responsibilization’ of individuals’ drug use and lifestyle habits, construing drug users as requiring surveillance and discipline to successfully conform to certain ‘acceptable’ behavioural traits. Lastly, once again through the lens of governmentality, I will demonstrate that police practises ironically work in opposition to the aim of SIS as a technology of control as they often deter drug users from frequenting SIS. Although governmentality can be philosophically conceptualized as an infringement on human freedom, in this instance, police practises need to be evaluated to increase their role in promoting SIS use. In light of the national health crisis in Canada, pertaining to injection drug use, if government control, surveillance and discipline results in the saving of thousands of lives, then in this occasion it is useful and necessary.
In recent years, a range of academic disciplines have emphasized the potential benefits of prioritizing meaningful engagement with individuals and communities who have lived and have living experience with the topics, phenomena and problems researchers seek to study. In March 2022, we were asked to produce a paper to inform a university workshop and training materials to help students and faculty engage with participatory methods. In turn, we conducted a rapid scoping review of reviews to document key recommendations relating to methodology, logistics and ethics within the various modes of participatory research. Searches were conducted in Web of Science, SCOPUS, ProQuest, Pub Med, OVID (including Medline, PschyInfo/EMBASE, APAPsych) to identify published academic reviews (e.g., systematic, scoping, literature reviews and evidence gap maps), for best practices relating to participatory research. This approach drew out aggregated best practices and lessons learned across many primary studies and increased the speed of the review. From 276 studies imported for screening, 43 full-text studies were assessed for eligibility and 28 were deemed relevant for full inclusion. Results are presented as: 1) participatory research recommendations for researchers; and 2) participatory research recommendations for academic institutions. Three sub-themes emerged within the context of suggestions for researchers engaging with participatory methods: 1) early-stage considerations for study design and planning; 2) conducting the research; and 3) dissemination and knowledge exchange. This rapid scoping review highlights key recommendations for researchers interested in using participatory approaches in their own research, and for academic and institutional stakeholders who aim to support these practices.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.