The income‐generating behaviour of injecting drug‐users in Oslo

Abstract

Drug users' income-generating behaviours, such as prostitution, acquisitive crime and small-scale dealing, have a major influence on the harm caused to the non-using population. Using data on the drug use and income sources of 900 drug-injectors in Oslo, this paper has two aims: to present data on Oslo income-generating behaviours and compare these with those in the Netherlands and Scotland; and to explore conceptual issues in the comparison of self-reported dealing income with other sources. Eighty-three per cent of respondents reported income from social benefit, and 43% had sold drugs in the last month. Half the females reported income from prostitution. The income-generation differences found in the comparisons section do not seem to reflect variations in drug and other social policies, but may relate to differences in the profitability of dealing. Using self-reported dealing income to compare the contributions of different income sources may be misleading, however, since it does not reflect financial profit or the value of dealers' drug consumption. Adjusted figures show that theft accounts for 23% of total drugs expenditure, while the corresponding figures for dealing and prostitution are 42% and 21%, respectively.

Income generating activities of people who inject drugs

“…Also consistent with other studies (Bretteville-Jensen and Sutton, 1996;Grapendaal et al, 1995); social security was the most prevalently reported source of income followed by drug dealing and sex trade work, and women were more likely than men to engage in prohibited income generation; a finding largely driven by a much higher proportion of women engaging in sex trade work.…”

“…Consistent with previous studies, a substantial proportion of IDU generate income through prohibited activities (Fischer et al, 1999;Bretteville-Jensen and Sutton, 1996), and those engaging in such activities possess several markers of higher intensity addiction (Sherman and Latkin 2002;Grapendaal et al, 1995). Also consistent with other studies (Bretteville-Jensen and Sutton, 1996;Grapendaal et al, 1995); social security was the most prevalently reported source of income followed by drug dealing and sex trade work, and women were more likely than men to engage in prohibited income generation; a finding largely driven by a much higher proportion of women engaging in sex trade work.…”

“…High levels of prohibited activity have also been found to coincide with periods of heavy drug consumption (Grapendaal, et al, 1995;Nurco et al, 1985;Ball et al, 1983). Additionally a lack of employable job skills, past criminal histories and high profits derived from drug dealing have been identified as factors influencing substance dependent individuals to engage in prohibited income generating behaviour (Sherman et al, 2006;Rothbard et al, 1999;Bretteville-Jensen and Sutton, 1996;Hammersley et al, 1989).…”

“…The costs of incarcerating substance addicted individuals for their criminal income generating acts is only one aspect of the negative social impacts of this phenomenon. Theft, fraud and other types of acquisitive crime financially burden society and activities that surround drug dealing have been associated with public nuisances and increased drug consumption by making illegal substances readily available (Bretteville-Jensen and Sutton, 1996). Additionally, confrontations related to the illegal drug market account for the majority of violent interactions involving drug users (Casavant and Collin, 2001;Erickson 2001;Caulkins and Reuter, 1996), making drug dealing a dangerous activity.…”

Increased drug use and the timing of social assistance receipt among people who use illicit drugs

“…(Immervoll, 2009;Nelson, 2004;Walker, 2004) Higher income may improve individual health outcomes through its direct influence on material conditions (ability to work, housing, health care access and nutrition) and indirectly by enabling control over life situations. (Deaton, 2002;Marmot, 2004) However, observational studies have found that higher income among PWUD is also associated with high-intensity drug use (Bretteville-Jensen & Sutton, 1996;DeBeck et al, 2007;Deschenes & Anglin, 1991;Grapendaal, Lewu, & Nelen, 1995;Sherman & Latkin, 2002), suggesting a more complex relationship between income and drug use. While this association may be explained in part by the need for individuals with higher intensity drug addiction to generate more income in order to meet their drug use needs (Bourgois, 1998;Deering et al, 2013;Maher, 1997), observational studies also suggest that some income generation strategies can contribute to higher intensity drug use or create additional barriers to decreasing drug use.…”