Drug Users as Stakeholders in Drug Policy: Questions of Legitimacy and the Silencing of the Happy Drug User

Ross, Anna

doi:10.1108/978-1-83982-882-920200033

Cited by 5 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While treatment can support individual well-being, programming more generally seeks to transform the "addict" into a responsible citizen (Keane, 2002), based on self-sufficiency, proper consumption, white middle-class conduct, and adherence to traditional gender roles (Daniels, 2012;Kaye, 2019). 3 Once recovered/recovering, the sober individual gains legitimacy in the public arena-their experiences subsequently reinforcing the negative portrayals of drug use (Ross, 2020). As Hart (2013, p. 211) puts it, popularized recovery stories tend to bury "the not particularly exciting nonaddiction story that never gets told."…”

Section: Critical Drug Studies and Autoethnographymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To be sure, people who use drugs-including researchers-do so in ways that are medical, therapeutic, recreational, experimental, and in ways that might be understood as problematic or non-problematic (Ross, 2020; see also Zampini et al, 2021). While my drug use exacerbated emotional difficulties, it may have also alleviated them at times-and I used several "harder" drugs without feeling a sense of addiction.…”

Section: Concluding Remarks-still Contemplatingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Figuring Things Out: Contemplating Drug Addiction and Disclosure In and Out of the Field

Revier

2022

Contemporary Drug Problems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

From 2017 to 2019, I conducted fieldwork on the opioid crisis in upstate New York. As part of my research, I interviewed people who use/d opioids. Interviewees discussed their beginning use, escalating use, and, for many, eventual sobriety. Throughout research, I reflected on my own drug consumption and attempts at moderation and abstinence—mostly regarding my heavy use of alcohol. I tracked my reflections in a field diary, writing over 200 entries. Yet, like many ethnographers, I extracted the notes out of my final research write-up. In part, my lack of disclosure was perhaps due to my being in what James Prochaska and Carlo DiClemente refer to as the contemplation stage of change: I was unsure how to identify myself as a person who uses/struggles with drugs and alcohol, and I was not ready to commit to long-term sobriety. Whether I disclosed or not, such contemplation did affect my fieldwork: it shaped my motivation to pursue drug research and advocacy; my relationships and interactions with participants; and ways I navigated harm reduction and sober support spaces. After over 2 years of being out of the field (and now in a state of long-term sobriety), I revisit my field diary through autoethnographic exploration. In doing so, I place contemplation within the growing conversation on reflexivity and disclosure in critical drug studies.

show abstract

Section: Critical Drug Studies and Autoethnographymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Concluding Remarks-still Contemplatingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Figuring Things Out: Contemplating Drug Addiction and Disclosure In and Out of the Field

Revier

2022

Contemporary Drug Problems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Further, the groups that drug researchers seek to influence, including law enforcement, politicians and policy makers, may discount the researcher who has disclosed their drug consumption as biased or unable to produce objective research (Ross, 2020). Drug researchers who "come out" risk the charge of "polluted motives" if calls for policy change are interpreted as self-interested or, at least, lacking in objectivity-not just as "drug activists" with suspect motives, but as researchers whose…”

Section: To Come Out or Not To Come Out?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…By widening the possible subject positions of "drug user" in policy and public discourse through disclosure of drug use, researchers may raise the profile of "nonproblematic" or "recreational" drug users within policy discussions, making this pattern of drug use more visible. Even though among those who use drugs, it is the norm to do so occasionally and without significant health or social or legal harms, the dominant discourse in policy and public discussion silences this reality (Ross, 2020). Is it possible that by widening the concept of who uses prohibited substances we can break down the othering that occurs in public discourse and in public policy?…”

Section: Policy and Politicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“Coming Out”: Stigma, Reflexivity and the Drug Researcher’s Drug Use

Ross

Potter

Barratt

et al. 2021

Open Qualitative Criminology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: To Come Out or Not To Come Out?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“Coming Out”: Stigma, Reflexivity and the Drug Researcher’s Drug Use

Ross¹,

Potter²,

Barratt³

et al. 2020

CrimRxiv

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Some personal experience of illicit drug use undoubtedly exists within the population of academic drug researchers. But it is rarely acknowledged, and even more rarely reflected upon, in their published work. This is understandable: criminal, professional and social sanctions may follow public admission of illicit activities. However, to not "come out" seems contrary to some core academic principles, such as transparency in data collection and reflexivity in the research process. Coming out may present researchers with an opportunity for improving knowledge of, and policies toward, drug use. In this article, we identify reasons for and against the public disclosure of drug use and the impact of such disclosure across a range of spheres, including research, teaching, policy influence and private lives. Reasons against coming out include the risks of undermining professional reputations and hence the ability to contribute to academic and policy debates, the threat of criminal justice sanctions, and impacts on loved ones. However, coming out can have academic benefit (i.e., improving our understanding of drugs, of people who use drugs, and of drug research) and contribute to activist goals (e.g., de-stigmatization of drug use and demarginalization of people who use drugs). Both the risks and benefits of public drug use disclosure have implications for how research and researchers may influence drug policy. Two key themes, stigma and reflexivity, underpin the discussion. We do not conclude with clear recommendations for drug-using drug researchers; to come out or to not come out is a personal decision. However, we argue that there is clear merit to further open discussion on the role of disclosure and reflection on personal drug use experience among those working in drug research and drug policy-where such reflection is relevant and where such researchers feel able to do so.

show abstract

Drug Users as Stakeholders in Drug Policy: Questions of Legitimacy and the Silencing of the Happy Drug User

Cited by 5 publications

References 0 publications

Figuring Things Out: Contemplating Drug Addiction and Disclosure In and Out of the Field

Figuring Things Out: Contemplating Drug Addiction and Disclosure In and Out of the Field

“Coming Out”: Stigma, Reflexivity and the Drug Researcher’s Drug Use

“Coming Out”: Stigma, Reflexivity and the Drug Researcher’s Drug Use

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About