Producing the vulnerable subject in English drug policy

Abstract

The concept of vulnerability is now deeply embedded in English drug policy, influential in governing practices such as prevention and treatment activity but yet to be subject to critical scrutiny. In this paper, we offer an appraisal of the vulnerability zeitgeist in contemporary drug policy, drawing upon insights from similar endeavours across a range of policy areas to consider the underlying assumptions and various effects of this conceptual logic. Using an approach to policy analysis which supports the questioning of deep-seated assumptions and implications of particular representations of 'problems' in social policies (often referred to as the 'What's the Problem?' [WPR] approach, Bacchi and Goodwin, 2016), we analyse the 2017 Drug Strategy to facilitate a close perspective on the texture of governance in relation to people who use drugs in England. We explore how vulnerability and drug use are in Bacchi's (2018; 6) terms 'problematized' and 'made 'real'' as a specific kind of phenomenon, drawing attention to the presuppositions and potential effects of being labelled (or not) as vulnerable. We argue that alongside bolstering targeted support, the current problematisation of vulnerability in English drug policy supports the operation of subtle disciplinary mechanisms to regulate the behaviour of those deemed vulnerable, underplaying the role of material inequalities and social divisions in the unevenness of drug-related harms. We then use the WPR approach to guide a discussion of the burgeoning multidisciplinary literature on vulnerability, exploring orientations and effects of alternative representations of the 'vulnerable' drug users. Producing the 'vulnerable' subject in these alternative ways creates a different and deeper understanding of the 'problem' and consequently its 'solutions', allowing more space for human agency to be considered and directing attention beyond drug policy towards tackling the diverse multiple social marginalisations which make some people more likely than others to experience drug-related harms.

Governing Parental Drug Use in the UK: What’s Hidden in “Hidden Harm?”

“…Bacchi’s WPR approach is a well-established analytic method for interrogating drug policy with studies across the globe interrogating the ways in which influential high-level policy documents like Hidden Harm represent problems rather than simply addressing them (see for example, Brown & Wincup, 2019; Fraser & Moore, 2011a; Lancaster et al, 2017). It has also been used to explore parenting policy (e.g., Cook et al, 2015; Widding, 2011).…”

Including ‘inclusion health’? A discourse analysis of health inequalities policy reviews

“…This may reflect constructive ambiguity, a discursive device permitting policymakers flexibility in what 'counts' as action on health inequalities, especially when appetite for structural change is lacking (Carlisle, 2001). Others have argued that the term 'vulnerable' is used as a rhetorical device to avoid naming structural processes which put particular groups at risk; to limit the influence of such groups in policy (Stevens, 2019); and to justify responses of social control; conditionality; and responsibilisation (Brown & Wincup, 2019). This was arguably evident in the emphasis placed in some documents (particularly Equally Well) on 'vulnerable' families and targeted early years interventions.…”

Producing gender-blind drug knowledge and representations in prison spaces

“…A sensitivity to representing gendered drug experiences, expressions and needs produces more accurate knowledge about both genders. However, knowledge about women's (specific, but not special) drug patterns is still intermittent and therefore warrants specific focus in research, policy and intervention (Martin and Aston, 2014;Wincup, 2016;Thomas and Bull, 2018;Brown and Wincup, 2020).…”

“…The lack of knowledge about women's NPS use in prisons is not surprising and it reflects wider knowledge gaps about women and drugs more generally. There is now a considerable amount of research highlighting the ways framing in policies contributes to this underrepresentation (Moore et al, 2015;Wincup, 2016Wincup, , 2019Thomas and Bull, 2018;Brown and Wincup, 2020). Furthermore, women in the criminal justice system occupy a minority status and thus drug interventions have often not considered the specific treatment needs of incarcerated women sufficiently (Fazel et al, 2006;Corston, 2007;Simpson and McNulty, 2008;Fazel, Yoon and Hayes, 2017;Grace, 2017;Ministry of Justice, 2018).…”