In this paper, we explore settings of ecstasy use other than those that are part of the rave scene. Little is known about its use in other settings. Data from young adult (18-25 years old) active ecstasy users were collected using surveys (N = 158) and qualitative in-depth interviews (N = 66). Recruitment involved targeted and theoretical sampling. Data analysis was guided by the constant comparison method, common in grounded theory. Our findings indicate that ecstasy use has extended to social settings beyond raves, including dance/music venues, bars in inner-city neighborhoods, neighborhood cruising sites, and private residences. Users may attend multiple settings, and it is common for use practices to be transmitted across settings. An understanding of emerging social settings of ecstasy use and the associated use patterns provides baseline information for the development of effective and appropriate prevention and intervention programs, including drug treatment, as well as for policy makers.

No abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to understand how people with problematic drug use access positive social capital. Social capital is defined as relations that provide valuable resources to individuals through participation in social networks. People with low socioeconomic status remain at a disadvantage for acquiring positive social capital, a component of recovery capital. The concept of social recovery emphasises the relational processes of recovery. Design/methodology/approach In-depth life history data were collected from 29 individuals who used heroin, cocaine, crack, or methamphetamine for at least five years, have less than a high school education, and unstable employment and housing. Qualitative data were coded for social networks accessed throughout the life course, distinguished by bonding, bridging and linking social capital. Findings Social networks included drug treatment programs; non-drug-using family and friends; religious/spiritual groups; workplace networks, and social clubs/activities. Bonding and/or bridging social capital were acquired through treatment, family and friends, religious/spiritual groups, workplaces, and social clubs. Linking social capital was not acquired through any social networks available, and many barriers to accessing mainstream social networks were found. Limitations This is a small study conducted in the US. Social implications A greater focus on social recovery is needed to achieve sustained recovery for individuals lacking access to and engagement in mainstream social networks. Practical implications Social recovery is proposed as an analytical tool as well as for developing prevention, intervention, and treatment strategies.

No abstract

No abstract