Presentation ‘Developing positive working relationships between Health and Law Enforcement Agencies’

PresentationPresentation

‘Developing positive working relationships between Health and

Law Enforcement Agencies’

Police and Harm Reduction

The police role in supply and demand reduction is well defined.

The role of law enforcement in harm reduction is not as clear for many police.

What are the issues for law enforcement and harm reduction?


In many cases the attitudes of police towards injecting drug users may be influenced by:

• responding to many incidents where people’s lives are affected adversely by drug use.

• dealing with many people who are the victims of drug related crimes.

• enforcing laws that aim to prevent or deter drug use, yet despite their efforts many people continue to use drugs.

Consequently many police have developed negative attitudes about harm reduction services also:

.


• harm reduction approaches ‘increase drug use’;

• substitution therapies (methadone) are not appropriate drug treatment: ‘stop all drug use’;

• effective approaches are ‘too liberal’;

• services for drug users result in the ‘innocent’ not able to get medical treatment;

.


.

•harm reduction will conflict with law enforcement goals;

•program sites will attract users - discarding of needles in the streets: anger by community groups;

•programs will compromise prevention of drug use and treatment; and

•programs culturally and/or religiously inappropriate.

“NSPs are crucial to stop the spread of HIV.”

• However, scientific evaluations and research has established that needle and syringe programs:

• effectively reduce the transmission of HIV, Hepatitis B and C (including reducing the risks to police);

• reduce the sharing of injecting equipment;• do not increase drug use or increase the frequency of drug

injecting;• do not recruit new users or lower the age of first injecting;• do not increase the number of needles discarded in a

community;

.


• do address the issue of safer sex by providing condoms;• do provide and promote primary health care;• do spread health information;• do act as an effective bridge for those people wanting

detoxification, treatment and drug substitution therapy;• do promote voluntary counselling and testing for HIV,

Hepatitis B and C; and

• are cost effective.

.


When police are not supportive of harm reduction services their activities can severely disrupt the functions of these programs with the following consequences :

.


• police target the vicinity of harm reduction services to catch drug users;

• police search or detain outreach workers and peer educators;

• police search users and seize clean injecting equipment from users;

• users demonstrate harmful injecting practices due to concerns over police activity nearby;

.


• a sudden decline in the number of clients using harm reduction services due to harassment or arrest;

• harm reduction services in other sites report increased numbers of clients attending due to police activity near other sites;

• outreach workers report that clients are difficult to find – they may have moved on or are reluctant to meet in the usual places due to police activity.

.


• Police need to be provided with a range of practical ‘tools’ that will enable them ‘operationalise’ the concept of harm reduction and will assist them in creating a supportive environment.

Use of discretion – key concept

• The police use of discretion is not about disregarding the law – use examples e.g. minor assaults and theft – traffic laws.

• Accountability and reporting and recording processes can be built into the use of discretion by police.


•Police do not conduct unwarranted patrols or person checks in the vicinity of NSPs, MMT and DICs.

•Police do not target ORWs for arrest, search and seizure.

•Police do not take action against persons at the scene of non-fatal overdoses.

Police and Harm ReductionNon-arrest for possession of syringes alone.

Safety of drug affected persons in custody.

Gaining cooperation of IDUs if arresting.

do not detain sex workers for possessing condoms.

Training for police – HIV/AIDS – safe sex.

Issues:Police actions can be one of the strongest determinants

of whether a person uses harm reduction services or not.

Police support for harm reduction approaches is critical in facilitating ‘enabling environments’

Policing actions can be counter productive to harm reduction programs and increase the HIV risks to the community.

.

The Outcomes:

Police can fulfil their law enforcement role, be accountable, provide a service to and meet the expectations of the community and still support harm reduction approaches without compromising their role.

Police Support

Police support for Harm reduction approaches is critical in facilitating enabling environments.

Harm Reduction cannot work without police support.

Police Relationships

Locally you should work to develop good relationships with police at three levels:


1. Operational Police –police who are most likely to come into contact with ORWs, DICs, IDUs etc.

2. Supervisors – police who supervise the operational police. They are the ‘first line’ managers.

3. High Level Managers – police who are involved in policy making and strategic planning.


You may need to deal with each level in different ways as they each have different role and responsibilities.

However, some general points for developing positive relationships with police may include:


• explain how police use ‘discretion’• policies re patrolling near NSPs• reducing harms to police – OH&S• training for police – HIV/AIDS• visit police station – introduce

ORWs


• place IEC material in police station• explain why users dispose of syringes

quickly• police visit sites – at appropriate

times• use police in community forums – key

note speakers


• involve police in other activities – an open day at DIC or WAD

• meet formally and discuss issues• allow police to refer IDUs to DICs• provide feedback to police about

successful cases – e.g. IDUs who seek treatment


• local level agreements – commitment letter • have ORW/DIC policies and procedures to

ensure accountability• ensure ORWs carry ID at all times• Ensure IDUs carry NSP card• HR activities included in planing process• feedback about relationships with

supportive police supervisors

Core arguments

• Evidence basis – explain what works

• Public health and police can work together

• Immediate action required

• Cost-effectiveness for HR approaches

• Human rights issues with IDUs

OUTCOMES :

• Attitudinal change amongst police and community towards the drug users

• Human Rights honoured • Community policing • Police - Health partnership• The police are now viewed as protectors and advisors

rather than harsh aggressors• Sharing of resources• Effective community leadership - ‘one voice’• Police focus resource on traffickers and more harmful

aspects of drug use• Drop in the number of users resorting to crime


Thank You!

Presentation ‘Developing positive working relationships between Health and Law Enforcement Agencies’

Documents

harm reduction police

drug users police search

arrest harm reduction

police role

attitudes of police

police activity

demand reduction

users users