I am not about to explain harm minimization however:
Glasgow are about to have the first safe consumption room in the UK. This means that you can consume narcotics in an observed environment, where nurses are on hand to respond to overdoses should it be necessary, alongside access on site to basic amenities such as a food bank and showers. It is a community intervention scheme, water wings rather than swimming lessons.
They have been in operation across Europe for some time and the same arguments and concerns that arose around them initially are yet again resurfacing.
The argument is that it ‘encourages people to continue to harm themselves’. Because these individuals would decide to stop doing the exact same thing on the street or in public spaces? Because there are so many avenues for accessing treatment that creating a consumption room would reignite the internal ambivalent debate of the drug user now faced with an attractive proposition to keep using?
Creating a consumption room creates a visibility. Not one some people are that pleased with. Out of sight, out of mind.
If the criminal justice system and the current recovery pathways in place were effective enough would we have the problem we still have? Do we not have to recognize that people will require different interventions, at different stages of their experience and have the right to access a form of support regardless of their willingness to engage in what is deemed to be the ‘right pathway’?
The hope is that the humanity they experience, may well encourage them to have hope in a different way of life and hope has been extensively written about as a core indicator for recovery engagement and it’s outcomes.
The more diverse pathways we can create and sustain that allows complex populations to engage in and access support the better, it is the responsibility of us as a professional community to do so.
