Post on 09-Feb-2016
description
ENGAGING WITH LAW ENFORCEMENT: PREVENTION, MONITORING AND RESPONSEBasha Silverman, Brandywine Counseling & Community Services
Background Law enforcement practices are a well-
known risk factor for IDUs Deter uptake of preventative services (e.g.
NEP) Deter summoning of emergency response
to OD Force injectors to locations poorly suited for
hygienic injection Increase improperly discarded syringes Deter uptake of health services
Background Typically, negative health impacts are
unintended Police are ‘just doing their job’ Police are often unaware of existing laws Police see drug use through the lens of
criminality, not health, trained to treat drug users as criminals, not people
Police are often unaware of evidence behind HR
Background Public health professionals typically fail to
identify and address the needs of law enforcement in planning and implementation of harm reduction programs
Syringe access is good for everyone in the community, including law enforcement
Efforts to reduce the health consequences of drug use need not conflict with the goals of reducing street crime and enhancing public order
Successful integration with law enforcement is an essential element of successful NEP operation
Law Enforcement/Public Heath• Same Objectives, different approach
– Same: Safety, security, and cost-effectiveness– Different: criminalization vs. treatment and
harm reduction• Cultural, political and language gap
– Mistrust and antagonism– Many HR organizations have no (or negative)
relationship with the police• Institutional competition for public
resources
Harm Reduction and Police?• Harm Reduction as applied to police:
– High level of job-related needle-stick injuries
– Very high levels of anxiety over NSI– Danger contributes to dislike of IDUs– Opportunity for HR orgs to reach out to
police
Prevention, Monitoring and Response Forging institutional communication Providing law enforcement training Establishment of several negative
feedback mechanisms that help check problems before they develop into dangerous
Prevention Interagency Communication: DE bill set
up oversight committee comprised of public health, law enforcement & community
Knowledge of and agreement on law Formulation of SOP around NEP
Police give needle vouchers to NEP clients! NEP handles disposal for confiscated sharps
Prevention Police info card
Info on NEP Guidelines on avoiding NSI # to call for info
IDU focus groups Experiences w/ law enforcement
Client KYR card, training and flyers
Police Info Card
Client KYR Card
Client KYR Card
Prevention – Police Training Occupational Safety
Basic infectious disease info NSI Prevention tips Glove and sharps containers distribution
(Site 2) Law relating to Harm Reduction Efforts
Explanation of regulations on syringes Value of Harm Reduction efforts to police
and community
Monitoring Incident reports Integration of questions into Public
Defender intake Lawyer training Phone hotline Police Liaison Intake/Exchange Survey
Arrest Confiscation Interaction en route to/from exchange
Response Bi-weekly meetings between police and
NEP Administrative response to adverse
events – open communication between NEP and police
Legal action Can be lengthy, costly, and victory unclear
Even if you win, difficult to get the police to change their behavior
Next Steps Build peer/peer training capacity Dissemination/refinement
Important Principles• Police willing to listen to information that
comes from other police: peer-to-peer• Police responsive to information that
affects them directly (ie NSI)• Police are generally pragmatic – many
think arresting for paraphernalia/simple possession is ‘a waste of time’
• Positive relationships are key: use official connections to establish credibility
Conclusion Harm Reduction is an effective, evidence
based framework If we continue to act as if we are ‘doing
something wrong’ state actors will continue to act as if we are ‘doing something wrong’!
Acknowledgments Drug Policy Alliance ACLU Foundation of Delaware Rhode Island Foundation Wilmington, DE Police Dept.