‘It’s good being part of the community and doing the right thing’: (Re)problematising ‘community’ in new recovery-oriented policy and consumer accounts

Fomiatti, Renae

doi:10.1016/j.drugpo.2019.04.007

Cited by 21 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Sofia, Anya, Erik, Andy and others all describe a rupture to their lives and life achievements (e.g., employment, education and family life) due to a change or reduction in their opioid medication. This adds to a growing criticism of abstinence‐focused recovery policies that fail to account for the role drugs play in people's lives (see, e.g., Fomiatti et al, 2019; Fomiatti, 2020; Harris & Rhodes, 2013). More specifically, then, the kind of ‘open’ treatment practice this article calls for is a way of responding to heroin users’ modes of knowing and doing despite what James calls these ‘cold’ and distancing policies and regulations (based on drug‐free recovery).…”

Section: Discussion: Improving Response‐ability Preventing Fatalism/itymentioning

confidence: 99%

Drug fatalities and treatment fatalism: Complicating the ageing cohort theory

Dennis

2021

Sociology Health & Illness

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Deaths related to drug ‘misuse’ remain at an all‐time high in the United Kingdom (UK). Older heroin consumers are particularly at risk, with the highest rates of deaths among people aged 40–49 and the steepest rises in the over‐fifty age bracket. Accordingly, a popular theory for the UK’s increase in drug‐related deaths, made by the government, and propelled in the media, is that there is an ageing cohort of heroin users with age‐related health complications predisposing them to an overdose. However, drawing on in‐depth interviews with those people deemed to be most at risk, this article works to complicate this theory, with participants citing a shift in (a) experience and responsibility, (b) route of administration, (c) desired effects, (d) acceptance of their drug use and ‘user’ status and (e) valuing health. Disrupting age as a given risk factor, this article turns attention away from the individual and these ‘natural’ processes to what participants describe as a singular, punitive, and inflexible treatment system and its intersecting structures. Approaching life and death as a matter of sociomaterial ‘mattering’, this article rethinks a reductionist, causal link between age and drug‐related death with a treatment despondency and fatalism that could prove fatal.

show abstract

Section: Discussion: Improving Response‐ability Preventing Fatalism/itymentioning

confidence: 99%

Drug fatalities and treatment fatalism: Complicating the ageing cohort theory

Dennis

2021

Sociology Health & Illness

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It also emphasises the unique diversity of individuals' housing needs, and the importance of thinking about housing as a means of supporting health and social capabilities. This approach also responds to consumer calls for an expanded definition of recovery that includes a greater emphasis on autonomy, choice over services, access to safe, secure and appropriate housing, employment opportunities and avenues for social and economic participation (see Deegan 1997;Fomiatti 2020;Frank 2018;O'Hagan 2004;Rose 2019).…”

Section: Insights From the Housing Mental Health And Substance Use Literature: Findings Gaps And Conceptual Problemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Leaving rehab: enhancing transitions into stable housing

Duff¹,

Hill²,

Blunden³

et al. 2021

AHURI Final Report

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Whereas the EpiPen V R is targeted towards the general public and is broadly available in various social and commercial settings, take-home naloxone is articulated as relevant only to people who inject drugs (and increasingly their family members) (Williams et al, 2014). This focus on illicit consumers as both the custodians and recipients of overdose prevention is striking because it calls upon them to mobilise mutual aid and community in a context where they experience systematic exclusion from these very resources (Fomiatti, 2019). On this point, several participants commented that take-home naloxone was not publicly promoted like other forms of healthcare.…”

Section: The Social Production Of Overdosementioning

confidence: 99%

Addiction stigma and the production of impediments to take-home naloxone uptake

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Opioid overdose deaths are a major health issue in Australia and around the world. Programmes to provide opioid consumers with ‘take-home’ naloxone to reverse overdose exist internationally, but uptake by mainstream health services and consumers remains inconsistent. Researchers have identified a range of important educational, training and logistical impediments to take-home naloxone uptake and distribution, yet they have focused less on the social dynamics that can enhance or limit access, such as stigma. In this article, we also explore impediments to uptake, drawing on qualitative interview data gathered for an Australian research project on take-home naloxone. Mobilising a performative approach to stigma, we argue that overdose and prevention are shaped by the social dynamics of stigma and, as such, responsibility for dealing with overdose, as with take-home naloxone, should also be considered social (i.e. shared among peers, the public, communities and governments). Our interview data illuminate the various ways in which addiction stigma limits the possibilities and capacities of take-home naloxone and overdose prevention. First, we focus on how stigma may impede professional information provision about take-home naloxone by limiting the extent to which it is presented as a matter of interest for all opioid consumers, not just those who consume opioids illicitly. Second, we explore how stigma may limit the scale-up and expansion of programmes and access points. From here, we focus on how stigma co-constitutes the politics of overdose and prevention, rendering take-home naloxone ill-suited to many social settings of overdose. In closing, we point out that stigma is not just a post hoc impediment to access to and use of take-home naloxone but is central to opioid overdose production itself, and to effective prevention. While take-home naloxone is an excellent life-saving initiative, uncritically valorising it may divert attention from broader goals, such as the de-stigmatisation of drug consumption through decriminalisation, and other ambitious attempts to reduce overdose.

show abstract

‘It’s good being part of the community and doing the right thing’: (Re)problematising ‘community’ in new recovery-oriented policy and consumer accounts

Cited by 21 publications

References 34 publications

Drug fatalities and treatment fatalism: Complicating the ageing cohort theory

Drug fatalities and treatment fatalism: Complicating the ageing cohort theory

Leaving rehab: enhancing transitions into stable housing

Addiction stigma and the production of impediments to take-home naloxone uptake

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About