The CDPC is in Washington D.C., for AIDS 2012 – a sprawling conference and gathering that attracts some 25,000 people from across the world. Yesterday we attended a day-long satellite meeting on the “Twin Epidemics of HIV and Drug Use”. It was an intriguing mix of solo speakers and panel presentations.
Gil Kerlikowske, U.S. Drug Czar, kicked off the day with a short talk about American drug policy. He talked about the U.S.’s new approach to drugs as a “third way”, though I’m not sure he spelled out the other two ways. Clearly he wanted his audience to appreciate that the U.S. War on Drugs was coming to an end. But the deployment of American law enforcement along the Mexican border, in Honduras and parts of Africa might suggest otherwise.
Kerlikowske took pains to talk about his support for a public health approach to drug use and praised his government’s support for the 2,600 drug courts already in existence in the U.S. However, he did not mention some of the issues inherent to the quasi-coercive methods used by these courts.
He also made clear his support for needle exchange, though was careful to note that Congress had tied his hands by banning federal funding for syringe distribution in 2011. He ended with a vague call for a “critical convergence” between public health and public safety. His definition of public health was clear from his earlier remarks, but his definition of public safety remained a small mystery, though he is likely referring to a continuation of the criminalization of some drugs.
Liz Evans from the Portland Hotel Society gave an impassioned presentation of the successes of Vancouver’s supervised injection site, Insite. Panel presentations ran the gamut. There was much discussion about the need to scale-up harm reduction interventions that can reduce HIV transmission. Speakers praised efforts to increase the availability of methadone, needle exchange, treatment, detox, and overdose prevention programs.
There was talk about the UNAIDS goal to reduce HIV infections by 50% among people who use drugs. Presentations examined the gap between what countries are willing to do and what’s needed. Over and over again, it was clear that civil society organizations with the support of the Global Fund and the Open Society Foundations carry the lion’s share of responsibility for harm reduction services around the world.
Funding for these groups is often precarious and time-sensitive. Speakers from the Global Fund advised audience members that the Fund is undergoing a review of its proposal processes and its approach to funding harm reduction. Clearly, audience members were worried that this might spell an end to the Fund’s support for harm reduction. We were advised to contact board members at the Fund to press our case for the continuation of harm reduction funding.
It likely won’t come as much of a surprise that U.S. concerns shaped the agenda for this meeting. Congress’s decision to withdraw funding for needle exchange underscored the stigma that shapes the lives of people who use illegal drugs. With this ban in place, it was difficult for some U.S. attendees to move beyond discussion of needle exchange to programs like supervised injection and heroin assisted treatment. Daniel Wolf from the Open Society Foundations pressed U.S. representatives to help audience members make sense of Congress’s decision and it was clear from their responses that promoting discrimination against people who use drugs is still politically useful in the U.S. There was also a curious sentiment among U.S. attendees: their hope for more meaningful drug reform measures in Obama’s second term (if he wins in November).
Some of the speakers spoke of their drug use histories and reminded audience members to focus on the whole person in their efforts to stem HIV infections. Representatives from civil society organizations including those in the U.S. talked about the needs of the people they serve and decried the deeply “resource scarce” environments in which they operate.
Over and over again some speakers spoke of the vulnerable groups who need harm reduction services, including men who have sex with men, people who use drugs and sex workers. So much so, that a speaker from New York’s Harm Reduction Coalition challenged some of these presenters to avoid re-marginalizing people with language that both fails to recognize the diversity within these groups and frames these groups as problems to be solved. As this critic noted, it was clear that politicians and world leaders were clearly the problem when it comes to meeting the needs of people who use drugs.
All in all, the day ended with a feel good sentiment but not much consensus on how to move forward. Speakers acknowledged that practical solutions exist, but are often politically unpopular. In the coming days, we look forward to deeper discussions at the conference about how to scale-up proven programs like needle exchange and supervised consumption.
