Gendered drug policy: Motherisk and the regulation of mothering in Canada

Boyd, Susan

doi:10.1016/j.drugpo.2018.10.007

Cited by 28 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Invasive monitoring of those accessing public, disability, and social assistance services ( Eubanks, 2018 ; Maki, 2021 ; Monahan, 2008 ), as well as racial constructions of risk that pervade both criminal legal systems ( Hannah-Moffat, 2019 ) and medicine ( Dryden & Nnorom, 2021 ), structure the forms of surveillance experienced by PWUD across health care settings. For instance, receiving social assistance places individuals into a highly gendered and racialized network of bureaucratic surveillance, creating opportunities for greater scrutiny and intervention by enforcement agencies, as with child protection/apprehension ( Boyd, 2019 ). This is consistent with claims that policing and surveillance functions have been amplified among welfare and social services in the context of neoliberal economic restructuring and austerity ( Wacquant, 2001 ) and continuous with historic forms of colonial surveillance of substance use among Indigenous peoples ( Genosko & Thompson, 2006 ).…”

Section: Conceptualizing Harm Reduction Surveillancementioning

confidence: 99%

Between Care and Control: Examining Surveillance Practices in Harm Reduction

Michaud

Meulen

Guţă

2022

Contemporary Drug Problems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As harm reduction programs and services proliferate, people who use drugs (PWUD) are increasingly subjected to surveillance through the collection of their personal information, systematic observation, and other means. The data generated from these practices are frequently repurposed across various institutional sites for clinical, evaluative, epidemiological, and administrative uses. Rationales provided for increased surveillance include the more effective provision of care, service optimization, risk stratification, and efficiency in resource allocation. With this in mind, our reflective essay draws on empirical analysis of work within harm reduction services and movements to reflect critically on the impacts and implications of surveillance expansion. While we argue that many surveillance practices are not inherently problematic or harmful, the unchecked expansion of surveillance under a banner of health and harm reduction may contribute to decreased uptake of services, rationing and conditionalities tied to service access, the potential deepening of health disparities amongst some PWUD, and an overlay of health and criminal-legal systems. In this context, surveillance relies on the enlistment of a range of therapeutic actors and reflects the permeable boundary between care and control. We thus call for a broader critical dialogue within harm reduction on the problems and potential impacts posed by surveillance in service settings, the end to data sharing of health information with law enforcement and other criminal legal actors, and deference to the stated need among PWUD for meaningful anonymity when accessing harm reduction and health services.

show abstract

Section: Conceptualizing Harm Reduction Surveillancementioning

confidence: 99%

Between Care and Control: Examining Surveillance Practices in Harm Reduction

Michaud

Meulen

Guţă

2022

Contemporary Drug Problems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Youth care provides a good example, based as they are on one-sided observations and on empirically validated categories discriminating between 'good enough parenting' and 'poor parenting' (see, for example, Valentine et al, 2019). These provide the experts involved with knowledge and insights that are beyond the cognitive reach of parents (see, for example, Boyd, 2019). Professionals are by definition better informed and equipped than parents, so there is a power imbalance (Ney et al, 2013).…”

Section: Addressing Complexitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Into the swampy lowlands. Evaluating family group conferences

Schout¹

2020

European Journal of Social Work

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A recent debate in the UK on the merits of randomised controlled trials in evaluating Family Group Conferencing is a reason to bring this debate to a wider audience than the UK. Other countries are also struggling with accountability and the desire to know what works in the light of public spending. This paper explores, debunks and rethinks ways of evaluating FGCs and how it is connected to our desire to predict and control future circumstances. For the latter insights of the Dutch philosopher Kunneman are used to understand what is going on. The rise of personalised medicine, however, holds practical reasons to rethink the value of population-based randomised controlled trials in social work in general. Where the field of medicine is moving from 'one cure for all' and population-based RCTs to individually tailored therapy and N-of-1 studies in order to meet the complexity of particular cases, some fields in the social sciences seem to have difficulties in moving from reductionism towards a more integrated view of life.

show abstract

“…Women often experience harassment, physical violence, sexual exploitation, and victimization by peers at in-person substance use services, which can result in the avoidance of such services ( Boyd et al, 2018 ; Boyd et al, 2020 ; Boyd, 2019 ; Boyd, MacPherson, & Vancouver Area Network of Drug Users, 2018 /19). Trans and non-binary people also report being subjected to stigma, discrimination, and physical/sexual violence by both peers and service providers in substance use services ( Bauer & Scheim, 2015 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The potential to provide increased confidentiality through access to substance use services in private locations can address issues such as gendered violence and stigmatization. This may be particularly important for women and gender-diverse people who live in small communities and remote regions with stringent abstinence-based ideologies or policies ( Boyd et al, 2018 ; Boyd, 2019 ; Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network., 2020 ; Collins et al, 2019 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Women can experience stigma relating to child care on an individual (e.g., mistrust of child welfare laws and systems), interpersonal (e.g., losing relationships with children), institutional (e.g., stigmatizing ideologies embedded within institutions), and population levels (e.g., societal discrimination associated with child welfare engagement) ( Wolfson et al, 2021 ). Navigating child custody and welfare systems can be traumatic for women and gender-diverse people who use drugs given the constant “struggle and heartbreak” faced within these systems ( Boyd et al, 2018 ; Boyd et al, 2020 ; Boyd, 2019 ; Shirley-Beavan et al, 2020 ). This is particularly true for Indigenous people because child welfare and foster care replicate and extend experiences of colonialization ( Boyd et al, 2020 ; Wolfson, Schmidt, Stinson, & Poole, 2021 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation