Search

A growing number of researchers are trying to provide explanations for continuity and change in drug policy in different contexts. Such research predominantly falls in the pluralist realm of public policy where various actors compete to have their policy proposals accepted. Using a critical framework called Policy Constellations (PC), developed by Stevens and Zampini, this paper attempts to explain reactions of the British Government to Novel Psychoactive Substances (NPS) between 2008 – 2016. Qualitative data comes from in-depth interviews with stakeholders (N = 15), including NGO workers, a former Home Secretary, drugs ministers, governmental advisors, a former senior police officer, former Deputy Drug Coordinator, and a former Advisory Council for the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) member. Two 'constellations' competed in British NPS policy setting. The PC framework illustrates power imbalances between these competing stakeholders. Abstinence orientated actors (the conservative constellation) enjoyed strategic advantages and media power which allowed them to create a favourable policy setting. These advantages were not enjoyed by the liberal constellation who struggled to access the policy setting and influence policy developments. The prohibitive nature of the policy used to counter NPS can be explained with the domination of actors whose values align with the conservative constellation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Depot buprenorphine can potentially address many limitations of other forms of opioid replacement therapy (ORT). This paper builds upon the concept of the 'informed patient' to explore individuals' decisions to initiate injectable depot buprenorphine. Data derive from a qualitative study of 26 people with opioid use disorder who were recruited from drug treatment services in England and Wales and interviewed within 72 hours of starting injectable depot buprenorphine treatment. Interviews were conducted by telephone, audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analysed via Iterative Categorization. Participants' decisions to initiate treatment were underpinned by receiving sufficient information to trust depot buprenorphine; current treatment not meeting their personal needs or goals; frequently uncritical perceptions of depot buprenorphine; and restricted access to depot buprenorphine making recipients feel grateful. Overall, participants said they had enough information and knowledge to decide they wanted depot buprenorphine. However, dissatisfaction with current ORT, desire for better treatment, and depot buprenorphine's limited availability seemed to hinder informed decision-making. Whilst pharmaceutical products cannot solve the complex life problems often associated with opioid use disorder, we need to increase access to all ORT forms so that patients do not feel they have to rush into any medication without adequate preparation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]