One of our readers, Richard, mentioned a work activity he was involved in related to Inebriates and it reminded me of the old Inebriates legislation that existed in most states. Correct me if I’m wrong but the legislation is either non-existent or defunct acorss the board. I remember investigating using the NSW legislation in the early 1990’s and even then it was a long stretch as it was essentially impossible to get placement for a person under the ACt even if a magistrate was willing to use what was extremely old legislation from the 1920’s.

Has anyone had any experience with using such legislation and are there any valid arguments in regard to re-introducing similar laws to compel people to seek treament?

As promised, I’ve created a specific section to discuss the upcoming NSW State Election and any ATOD issues covered during the campaign. Apologies to all the readers not in NSW but I will create specific entries for other state elections as they come up as well as the Federal election. Also, it will give an opportunity for each state to learn from the others as far as policy goes.

A lot of readers work for the NSW Government so understandably there’ll be a reluctance to ‘get political’ – but I’m more interested in analysing the potentials behind each announcement during the campaign (which has essentially started).

To get things rolling, what are the predictable policy announcements likely to be made? Police numbers has been a story this week, and that obviously has both positive and negative implications for the AOD field. But what else is likely to be announced?

I’ve had some feedback on usability of site and have changed to the current look – my main aim was to give more prominence to everyone’s comments, which are the point of the site. Any other feedback welcome!

First to the inspiration for this post:

=====================

Families and Friends for Drug Law Reform

invites Updaters to a

PUBLIC MEETING

(sponsored by Mary Porter (MLA))
on

Tuesday 6

February, 2007 at 12.30 pm

in the Reception Room, ACT Legislative Assembly
Civic Square, London Circuit, Canberra City

Topic:

Evidence-based drug policy – myth or reality?
– the ways in which research evidence is used or not used in policy
making processes

Speaker:

Alison Ritter, Associate Professor, National Drug and Alcohol
Research Centre and Director, the Drug Policy Modelling Program (DPMP)

Alison will outline the “ideal model” – where evidence drives policy,
then describe some of the more realistic models about how drug policy
making happens,
and point out where evidence fits in.   She will use a number of
examples to illustrate.

(The DPMP is funded by the Colonial Foundation Trust.)

A cuppa and refreshments will be available.
Enquiries to: 02 6254 2961

This will be of interest to all people involved in the drug and
alcohol sector but will be of special interest to those involved in
drug policy.

A copy of the flyer to pin on your notice board can be downloaded
from ffdlr.org.au

Families and Friends for Drug Law Reform
http://www.ffdlr.org.au
mailto:mcconnell@ffdlr.org.au
61 (0)2 6254 2961
==========

This looks like an interesting afternoon’s discussion, and it got me to thinking about ‘evidenced-based’ – what is it about current research that prevents widespread acceptance of its findings? Lets use two hypothetical examples from different sides of the fence:

1. A widespread study is conducted on the impact of abstinence-based drug education in schools that shows the approach is superior to any other forms of drug education in terms of long term drug usage rates amongst 12-24 year olds.

2. Another study on operation of safe injecting rooms shows that there are lower death rates and no increase in usage rates in communities have such a centre.

In both these hypothetical cases they are evidence-based, but you can be fairly certain that both pieces of evidence are not going to be accepted as legitimate by sections of the AOD community. In such cases, how do you develop evidence-based drug policy except on an ad-hoc basis?

Yesterday a working party announced a raft of recommendations in relation to reducing road deaths amongst P-plate drivers, which has been widely reported.

An obvious question I’d have is related to the recommendation that P-platers not be able to carry more than one other passenger late at night until they have reached 21-years of age. How will this affect the promotions historically done around designated drivers? Now, any group of 18-21 year olds going out drinking have no personal transport option, which can be an only option in rural areas in particular.

Are the potential benefits of the new restrictions going to outweigh the potential risks the proposed legislation will create?

The next Federal election is 99% likely to occur this year, with a resurgent Labor party under the leadership of Kevin Rudd. Would anyone like to make predictions on any AOD policy issues that may arise?

One prediction from me: “The Ice Epidemic” will feature in health policy announcements from both sides 😉