Senior doctor suggests drug decriminalisation

Do you remember the Liberal Democrat Conference in 1994 when LDYS submitted a motion suggesting the decriminalisation of Cannabis? This is why we jokingly sing at the Glee Club (for the uninitiated a last-night-of-conference singalong) about the leadership "getting all hot at the thought of pot available sweetie counters".

In those days there were very few people calling for any drug to be decriminalised to help tackle addiction and they were pretty much all hippy liberal types. These days, there is increasing concern that prohibition just isn't working. Today a senior doctor, in fact, one of the most prominent in the country, the outgoing president of the Royal College of Physicians, Sir Ian Gilmore,  has suggested that decriminalising drugs would not only reduce crime but also improve health..

He said:

"There's a lot of evidence that the total prohibition of drugs, making them totally illicit and unavailable, has not been successful at reducing not only the health burden, but also the impact on crime. I'm trying to take a fresh look, as many people have done. There is a strong case for trying a different approach. I'm not saying we should make heroin available to everyone, but we should be treating it as a health issue rather than criminalising people."

He joins a growing list of lawyers, academics, police officers and fellow doctors, all of whom have seen the terrible consequences of our current failure to tackle addiction. Professor David Nutt lost his Government job but enhanced his professional credibility with comments last year that alcohol was more harmful than Ecstasy.

We really need to have a proper debate about drugs policy and make our decisions based on the evidence available, the experience of other countries, like Portugal, and not via the ill-informed opinions of the tabloid press.

Mephedrone kills kids - it should be banned, right?

It's always horrible to read of young people suddenly dying for any reason. As the mother of a girl who no doubt will at some point in the next decade go out clubbing with her friends, I read with horror accounts of how perfectly fit and well young people have gone out, taken some substance and died. I can only imagine what their parents are going through and feel so much for them.

The substance under the spotlight at the moment is Mephedrone, something I'd never heard of until yesterday. A "legal high", you don't have to look very far on Google before you find out how to buy some. It's apparently all the rage in the clubs.

The substance was implicated in the deaths of two young men from Scunthorpe as reported in the Guardian as well as that of a 14 year old girl last November.

So, obviously, it should be banned, shouldn't it as the Government advisers are likely to imminently suggest?

Well, maybe not.

Firstly, it's not absolutely certain that the Mephedrone actually caused the deaths. The young men over the weekend had apparently combined it with alcohol and methadone. We know that combining any drugs is something that should only be done with care and we also know that methadone on its own can be lethal. In the case of Gabrielle Price, the 14 year old who died last November, the cause of her death was determined to be Bronchial Pneumonia.

Secondly, is it a good idea to go round banning stuff as a panic reaction without any sound scientific basis? I've dealt with 3 potentially lethal substances already this morning - gas, water and electricity, but I've done it by being careful and minimising their risk. Should we maybe be saying to young people "Look, we don't know about this stuff, we do know that mixing it with any other substance could be dangerous, so if you're going to take it, please be aware of that." After all, banning it isn't exactly going to dry up the supply overnight. Banning it isn't going to make our young people safe or any less likely to be able to get hold of the stuff.

Thirdly, I am far from convinced that banning drugs is actually effective. Does it not just lead to really nasty drug dealer types using violence and intimidation to prey on their victims? If these characters were out of the supply chain, wouldn't that make it a lot easier for people to seek help, rather than be trapped in an appalling spiral of debt, addiction and crime?

Fourthly, why are so many people seeking solace in artificial substances to make them feel good? What is it that's wrong with the quality of the relationships around them and how can that be fixed? How can we make our kids naturally happy so that they don't feel the need for anything else? Should we not be doing more to encourage the feelings of energy and happiness you get from sport? Actually the range of things that need to be done to increase everyone's feeling of wellbeing is so vast - but just cos the mountain's huge doesn't mean we shouldn't try to climb it.

Enough of my rantings, however. Let's give the last word to someone who actually knows about drugs, a lot. Professor David Nutt was the cause of the worst hashtag in Twitter history (#nuttsack) when he was dismissed from his post as a Government adviser for disagreeing with Government policy and saying that Ecstasy and LSD were less harmful than alcohol. As someone who's seen the effects of long term alcohol abuse on family members, I can relate to that. Anyway, Professor Nutt is a man who knows what he's talking about and he doesn't think we should be rushing to ban Mephedrone.

If you want to know more about Professor Nutt, Mark Thomson, of the awesome Mark Reckons blog, interviewed him a couple of month ago.