“Nothing About Us, Without Us”: the inclusion of people with lived experience in harm reduction decisions

The slogan “Nothing About Us, Without Us” has been a daily mantra and practice in harm-reduction work for some time now. It has become much more commonplace to include people with lived experience of drug use and harm-reduction services in decisions that affect their lives. Navigating the intricacies of their inclusion has been both awkward and rewarding. But why include people with lived experience? How is this done? And most importantly, what’s in it for them? In this blog, I address these questions and share the life-altering impacts I have witnessed and personally experienced.

So who are “people with lived experience”? In the context of harm-reduction work, they are people who use or have used illegal drugs or pharmaceutical drugs non-medically, usually by injection or smoking. But it’s not that simple. I am not talking about the Toronto Bay Street stock broker who enjoys a bit of cocaine on the weekend. I am referring to people who are marginalized because of a complex mix of drug use and other factors and life conditions. These may include factors related to their age, gender, sexual orientation, race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, housing and homelessness status, life experiences of trauma and violence, or health conditions such as HIV and hepatitis C.

Our current drug laws have greatly exacerbated their exclusion from society. We criminalize people who use drugs, which fosters an anti-drug-user attitude and drives people away from services and social supports they may need. It also makes it difficult for service providers to reach them. We undervalue services for people who use drugs and poorly fund their care, treatment and support. We are reluctant to educate people about safer drug-use practices and to provide sterile drug use equipment, especially in prison.

Engaging People with Lived ExperiencePolicy makers, service providers and researchers are experimenting with creative and innovative ways to include people with lived experience in decisions that affect their lives. The idea is that by bringing them into decision-making structures (committees, boards of directors, service delivery and research teams, etc.), we become allies by sharing the decision-making power, all the while striving to relate to each other in non-discriminatory, non-stigmatizing ways.

Research shows that including people with lived experiences has kept their priorities and needs in focus and resulted in better adapted services, the reduction of drug-use risk behaviours, and has played a role in improving life conditions, health and wellbeing. It has also provided people with lived experience with opportunities to reclaim their capacity to lead a self-determining life, something many of us more privileged people take for granted.

By working together, we learn about each other, bring our various strengths to the table, challenge our assumptions about each other, and reflect on how we interact, which leads to reduced stigma and improved rapport. People with lived experience come to view themselves more positively, inspire their peers, get meaning and a sense of purpose to help others and gain valuable life skills. The bottom line is we are all transformed by this experience.

Don’t get me wrong. Changing our societal ways and decision-making power structures is challenging. There are few models on how to include people with lived experience well and meaningfully. There are still barriers to their participation such as economic inequities, stigma and discrimination, limited resources and diverging agendas between various people at the table. People with lived experience often face health, financial and life priorities that make their participation challenging.

I am currently partnering with both the Drug Users Advocacy League and the Society of Living Illicit Drug Users for my PhD research to examine how decision-making power is shared in such committees. We aim to come up with some insights and helpful practice guidelines to assist all of us in better including people with lived experience.

People with lived experience are part of our communities. “Nothing About Us, Without Us” includes ALL of us.

head shot Lynne

Author: Lynne Belle-Isle is a PhD candidate in the Social Dimensions of Health Program at the Centre for Addictions Research of BC at the University of Victoria. She is a National Programs Consultant with the Canadian AIDS Society and the Chair of the Canadian Drug Policy Coalition.

**Please note that the material presented here does not necessarily imply endorsement or agreement by individuals at the Centre for Addictions Research of BC

Why give alcohol to alcoholics?

Three people sit around a kitchen table; they chat, share a meal and enjoy warmth from the stove on a cold Ontario winter day. As they visit, someone approaches the group to remind them: it’s time for their dose of alcohol.

A year ago these three people would have lived outside in sub-zero temperatures, moved in and out of emergency shelters, and repeatedly be picked up by the police or emergency medical services. They were homeless and dependent on alcohol, often drinking heavily over a short time and consuming “non-beverage” alcohol like mouthwash, rubbing alcohol and hair spray. Today they have a place to call home and alcohol harm reduction support as participants in the Kwae Kii Win Managed Alcohol Program.

Kwae Kii Win, Thunder Bay, CA
Kwae Kii Win, Thunder Bay, CA

For the last few years, I’ve been part of a team studying Canadian Managed Alcohol Programs and their impacts on participants and communities. Most discussions about harm reduction focus on health measures for people who inject or smoke illicit drugs, but we can use the same harm-reduction principles to help people addicted to alcohol. Many emergency shelters do not allow people to drink or have alcohol with them, so for those addicted to alcohol and without housing, the only option may be to stay outside. Managed Alcohol Programs provide housing and small regular doses of “beverage” alcohol (usually white wine). This is enough alcohol so that people do not go into withdrawal, but not so much that they are intoxicated. The wine also replaces more harmful kinds of alcohol like rubbing alcohol. The primary goal is to improve the welfare of participants, but some programs also try to reduce emergency health and policing costs by reducing need for these services among participants.

When I first heard about Managed Alcohol Programs, I wondered, “Why would anyone give alcohol to alcoholics?”

Actually, the idea is not to give people more alcohol, but to change how they consume alcohol so that it’s consumed in safer ways. The intention is to replace the existing unsafe drinking (in public, in the cold, large amounts at a time, unsafe kinds of alcohol) with safer drinking (inside in their own homes, under medical supervision, much smaller amounts at a time), and not to increase the overall amount of alcohol.

You may be wondering, “If drinking is so bad for you, why can’t people just stop drinking?”

People in Managed Alcohol Programs have all tried, repeatedly and without success, to stop drinking, sometimes undergoing many rounds of detox and treatment. Many times, it seems, people are drinking to cope with traumatic events in their lives, and while that pain remains, drinking seems like the best option. Also, anyone who drinks a lot cannot stop suddenly without suffering significant medical problems like seizures. Managed Alcohol Programs, like other harm-reduction measures, provide a link to health services and can be a first step towards drinking less or quitting altogether if the participant decides that’s what they want.

Most significantly, though, Managed Alcohol Programs provide a safer place for people who are otherwise left without protection from the often gendered and racialized violence and trauma that characterize many people’s experiences of homelessness. As one Managed Alcohol Program participant put it, her family members know where to find her now and don’t have to wonder, when they read of the death of an Aboriginal woman in the paper, if that is her.

For more information about Managed Alcohol Programs, take a look at these links:

This new report highlights significant reductions in hospital admissions and time in police custody for participants once they start the program, as well as other benefits.

MAP Shelter House – Thunder Bay “The Value of Harm Reduction” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=exaIP5TUZNw&feature=youtu.be

The Current interview: http://www.cbc.ca/thecurrent/episode/2014/01/06/harm-reduction-vs-abstinence-is-it-ok-to-give-an-alcoholic-a-drink/

Kathleen

Author: Kathleen Perkin, Research Manager, National Evaluation of Managed Alcohol Programs in Canada, Centre for Addictions Research of BC