I'm sure many people will have noticed the 2008-18 drugs strategy is out
http://drugs.homeoffice.gov.uk/publication-search/drug-...008-2018?view=Binary

I would be interested to know what people think of the ideas in it.

Hi Susi

I suspect that if the threat of losing limbs, liberty, and lives will not deter some people from accessing treatment, taking their benefits off them won't either.
They will merely be more marginalsed and source other avenues of income anyway.

I haven't had time to digest the strategy yet. This is merely one intial 'headline' negative response of mine.
I've heard there's some good direction around harm minimsiation though, yes?

Regards
Simon

er...that should have read "not accessing".
Simon

I read the new strategy as attempting a balanced system. A balanced system is a twin track. One track is able to maintain, contain and control via substitute meds and delivers up the crime reduction yield and the community safety gain. The other track concentrates on abstinence, recovery and regeneration (of people) and delivers the personal and social gains in terms of employment and child care etc. The system has very clear intersections from one track to the other. People on maintenance can go across to abstinence and people who have tried abstinence but find "taking life neat" a bit too much can go back on their script to reflect for a while.

OK, I've looked at it now and heard a fair bit of commentary on it.
It seems like a mixed bag.

There's the usual New Labour re-branding of existing intiatives. I'm not entirely sure what 're-prioristising' offenders and families is supposed to mean other than 'must do better and must do more'.
Sure, the idea of personalised payments for extended famliy carers seems new but the concept of using non-parental family carers is an age-old social work method, and I would have thought that Children and Family social workers already do whatever they can already to facilitate this sort of response (an an alternative to care) as a standrad response.

The focus on employmnent for the treatment system is radical though. Obviously this has always been a Blair/Brownite strategic priority. All new governmental initiatives seem to dovetail into it, and rightly so. The replacement of the Neighbourhood Renewal Funding stream with a new specifically employment-focussed Working Neighbourhoods Fund is an example.

Clearly, the name of the game (notwithstanding retention) is care planned discharge, with an emphasis on abstinence where desirable and possible. No change there then, as that has been the clarion call of the Effectiveness Strategy over the last 3 years or so. Again, it seems to be about 'more of it, and make it easier and better for the service users'. The 'Twin Track' appraoach as Regenerate says.
What's not to like?

Paul Hayes report to NTA Board is a helpful and illuminating interpretation of the strategy and an indication of where our lives are heading in the next few years.
See: http://www.nta.nhs.uk/about/board/board_meetings_and_pa...8_drugs_strategy.pdf

It's difficult to imagine what an integrated and assertive 'welfare to work' completion-focussed treatment system will look like in 3 or 5 years time.
I guess it's going to very differnent though.

Simon

However it does state that methadone maintenance has been proved to be effective and that they will roll out iv diamorphione if the RIOT trials are successful. Also shed loads of cash for research as this document makes it one of the 4 priority research areas for the NHS.

The benefits proposals are a bit of window dressing because in my expereince virtually all those who end up being signed off by their doctor with the diagnosis of drug dependency are either in treatment or have had the assessment they are talking about.

community reinforcement approach is recommended as is CM if the pilots are successful.