Hi everyone,

Was just interested to see if anyone had prognostications for 2007 as far as AOD goes? I’m thinking particularly of the political climate. The NSW state election is first cab off the rank in March – I can’t see any great changes in approach from a Iemma government successfully re-elected and I’m assuming a change in policy would occur if Peter Debnam’s team are elected. I’ll start a seperate post for the NSW election during January – it might provide for some interesting discussion.

On the Federal front, it’s most likely an election will occur during 2007 as well. Institutions like the ANCD seem to be really well ensconced at that level and I’d be surprised if they were changes should there be a change in government, but again, an ALP government would take a different approach to health policy and this would be reflected in AOD policy. I’ll start a seperate post as well on the Federal election in a few months but in the meantime, anyone have some predictions for 2007?

Thanks to all those who’ve embraced the site at this early stage, I hope you have a great break if you’re getting one. There’ll be limited new content until the 30th December but obviously the site is available the whole time for discussion to continue.

And remember, any suggestions you have for the site are always welcome.

Merry Xmas!

The Sydney Morning Herald has run a report quoting the NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics. Essentially, no link has been demonstrated between the MSIC and crime. Therefore, do you see it being possible for anti-MSIC proponents to at least agree that one if its downfalls isn’t an increase in crime?

I have to say that the initial response to this site has been excellent. Thanks to everyone thats posted comments and I can see there’s already the foundation for some very interesting discussion. That said, what else would you like to see here? What topics would you like to discuss? The site isn’t about me posting about what I want to hear, so feel very free to suggest topics or additional features. One feature I’ve added toda is the ability to receive posts via email – the link is at the bottom of the page.

I intend on posting a new topic every couple of days, so keep the ideas coming in!

I came across a report summarising some research completed recently on cannabis use in both the USA and Australia. The claim being made in the article is that the gateway theory has been well and truly refuted. In my time working with young people in particular I’ve never seen the gateway issue occur in any quantifiable way. I’ve certainly worked with people who jumped boots and all into the scene with their friends and progressed through a range of substances, but it never seemed to follow the traditional gateway interpretation. Anyone else like to share their experiences or have the debate on Drugtalk exhausted everyone 😉

In another discussion, Michael B asserts “The science involved is irrelevant – issues around drug use are simply a moral perspective.”

Now, to me that seems a fairly long bow to draw, but I’d be really interested to hear people’s thoughts. And the idea of the issue being 100% a moral one could fit many aspects of the argument:

 “Illicit drug use or drug use that harms is immoral and should not occur”

or

“Society’s morals need to adjust to recognise that drug use is a part of life now and in some cases is actually desirable”

 

After nearly fifteen years in the AOD field, it seems that the same old conflicts within the field keep on popping up: harm minimisation versus zero tolerance and whether ex-users make the best or worst AOD workers are two that come to mind.

For me over the past decade, the lack of consensus is best portrayed by two individuals: Dr Alex Wodak and Major Brian Watters. Both men are highly educated and both are passionate about their beliefs in drug treatment. Yet the two couldn’t be further apart in approach. In that environment, what works best? If there were a comprehensive compromise made between such individuals, would the AOD sector be better for it? Or does the very existence of such opposing viewpoints provide the energy that creates breakthroughs? Has anyone met both men and willing to share a view?

First, about me. I’m a health professional who’s worked in the AOD field for coming up to fifteen years. Worked mostly in community-based AOD with some stints in mental health, youth health and men’s health. I’m a member of an AOD professional association, have some links with a couple of universities, knocked off a Masters degree in the area and remain a bit of a bleeding heart as far as wanting to help people. I’m staying fairly anonymous becase of my current employment.

Secondly, about this blog. I’m a member of the ADCA Update email list and I’ve been fascinated over the years by some of the debates that go on there and on the sister list, Drugtalk. The problem with an email list is that the thread of the debate gets lost over time. Hence this blog – I’m hoping to develop an archive of debate around the key AOD issues that Australia faces.

Thirdly, my bias. As far as this blog goes, I intend on being balanced and will take a very expansive approach to the debate as long as it’s not defamatory or full of expletives. My own biases will obviously play themselves out over time but to sum me up I’d say I’m a bit of a centrist e.g. believe harm minimisation philosophy on the whole works, but abstinence remains one option that should be put forward and there should be boundaries around when / where harm minimisation philosophies are promulgated. Of course, whether that’s a centrist view could cause a debate on its own. The point is – I’m not after a one-sided debate – it’s great to hear all sides and maybe even get some agreement on things.

Now it’s over to you!