Harm Minimization in Drug Policy: Three Pillars of Approach

This article discusses the concept of harm minimization in drug policy and explores the three pillars of approach: demand reduction, supply reduction, and harm reduction. It highlights the importance of addressing the social, economic, and health consequences of drug use and emphasizes the need for a multifaceted response to minimize harm. The article also examines various strategies and initiatives implemented in Australia to achieve harm minimization.

Mental Health Nursing

Table of Contents
Introduction......................................................................................................................................3
Main context....................................................................................................................................3
Conclusion.......................................................................................................................................8
References......................................................................................................................................10

Introduction
Harm minimization focus on addressing alcohol and other drug-related issues by minimizing the
harmful effect of drugs and alcohol on society and individuals. The aim of harm reduction is to
minimize the negative effects of heath performances without essentially quenching the
challenging health behaviors completely (BLASZCZYNSKI, 2010). It includes social, economic
and health consequences of AOD that is being used on both community and individuals as a
whole. It has been launched in 1985 by National Campaign against the subsequent National Drug
Strategy and Drug abuse. Since then it has become a key policy of the federal government and
Australian state. It has been an effective approach in reducing mortality and morbidity between
the adults of Australia. The approach of harm reduction can also address other risk behaviors that
are related to using of drugs and the principals of harm reduction are being applied for such
harms like, eating disorder, sex work, and tobacco use.
Main context
Three pillars of harm minimization
The development of the strategy for reducing drug abuse was informed in 2015 by a national
consultation process, which had included online survey feedback, informant interviews, and
stakeholder forums. The process of the constitution was vital in shaping the direction and
priorities for the strategy and also providing strong support to continuing of Australia and its
commitment to minimization of harm underpinning its approach of drug policy (Dickerson &
O'Connor, 2011). The long-standing commitment of Australia and international organizations for
harm minimization includes economic and social concerns for using drug in individuals, health,

families and communication as a whole and grounded on the considerations such as, the use of
drug arise a continuum, from occasional use to dependent use, range of harm related to different
patterns and types of drug use and these harms requires response of multifaceted. The policy of
harm minimization identifies the clear recognition of a clear risk that is being carried by drug
use. The drug users need support for reducing the harm associated with a drug not only for
themselves but also for the general community, including their families (Etter, 2018).
Drug use is not allowed according to this policy approach. The strategy includes implementation
of the approach and it covers programs, legislation, funding, and program that is considered to be
the responsibility of related agencies in Commonwealth, the jurisdiction of territory and state
(Gauvin, Zimmermann & Baird, 2016). This approach helps in reducing the harm of use by
coordinating, the response of multi-agencies that address harm minimization of three pillars.
Three pillars require demand reduction, harm reduction, and supply reduction. This strategy
helps in minimizing and preventing tobacco, alcohol and other problems related to drug and it
should be balanced across three pillars. There is a range of approaches that are being included in
harm minimization for preventing and reducing drug-related issues and also helps individuals
facing problems addressing these problems and also focuses on abstinence-oriented strategies
(Gauvin, Zimmermann & Baird, 2016). Three pillars of harm minimization are mentioned
below:
Demand reduction
This pillar focuses on preventing the approval and delays the start of use of tobacco, alcohol and
other drugs. It also focuses on the misuse of alcohol and the use of drugs and tobacco and also
supports individuals in getting recover from dependency and reintegrate with the community.

Tobacco, alcohol and other drug use are considered to be the multi-determined behavior which is
being influenced by environmental, psychological and biological factors consisting of
experimentation, socialization, coping with stress, peer pressure, excessive availability, intensify
feelings and trauma (Giesbrecht, 2010). The use of the illicit drug has been decreased in the year
2018 which is around 15.6%. The efforts of the government of Australia and international
organizations have assisted to achieve it. The prevention of taking drugs have decreased family,
community and personal harms as well as allows to live a better life. It assisted to increase
economic and social benefits and creating a healthier workforce. The reduction in demand
strategies prevents the use of a drug which more cost effective in comparison to treating drug-
related issues (McBride, Midford, Farringdon & Phillips, 2000). Delay in first use leads to
improved social and health outcomes. The greater use of drugs leads to an increase in physical
and mental health problems. The average age of young people in the smoking cigarette has
increased from 14.2 to 16.3 years, alcohol has increased from 14.8 to 16.1 years and drug use has
increased from 18.9 to 19.7 years.
Support services and treatment options have effectively assisted to decrease the risk of tobacco,
alcohol and other drug use. Community support, interventions in hospital services and primary
care through specialist treatment services are also beneficial. The strategy of Australia maintains
and enhances access to evidence-informed treatment (Brown, Eriksen, Gause, Brody & Sales,
2018). Strategies that affected demand are decreasing accessibility and availability, improving
the knowledge and understanding, decreasing stigma, restrictions on marketing, focusing on
social engagement and protective factors, treatment services and addressing economic, health
and social determinants of use.
Supply reduction

This pillar works for preventing and stopping disrupt or otherwise decrease the production and
supply of illegal drugs and also manage, control and regulate the drugs that are legally available.
The supply reduction strategies focus on restriction on access and availability to tobacco, alcohol
and other drugs for preventing health problems. It is being found that more than 17.1 percent of
people in Australia consume alcohol that increases the risk of injury or diseases over their
lifetime. 25.5% of people in Australia are at the risk in short term harms like injuries (Jenkins,
Slemon& Haines-Saah, 2017). The supply has been regulated which ensures that the precursors,
volatiles, and pharmaceuticals are available for only legitimate users. The government of
Australia and international organizations have disrupted or prevented the supply of illicit drugs
in order to decrease use and harms. The drugs that are prevented consists of cannabis, cocaine,
methamphetamine, and heroin. The prevention of supply also includes disruption or dismantling
of distribution of manufacturing, networks and cultivation locations or facilities (Kinrys, K Gold
& Nierenberg, 2016). The strategies that have affected the supply includes regulating the
wholesale and retail sale, age restrictions, disrupting or regulating distribution and production,
border control and implementation of monitoring techniques for prescribing medications.
Harm reduction
This pillar works for reducing the adverse health, economic and social consequences of the use
of tobacco, other drugs, and alcohol. Harm reduction strategy determines the risk that arises from
the use of the drug. The harm reduction strategies decrease preventable factors, encourages safer
behaviors and contributes to the decrease in social and health inequalities among particular
population groups (Keene, 2013). The strategies that have been implemented for decreasing
harm are reducing the risks associated with the consumption of drugs and alcohol, protecting

children from drug use, safe transportation, projecting people from infectious diseases,
decreasing drunk and drive and availability of the opioid treatment.
The program of Victorian and Syrian helps drug users in accessing the sterile injection
equipment form different outlet across Victoria through community health service and
pharmacies (Paolini, 2016). The program of needle and Syringe also provide opportunities to
people for getting information about how to take care of their health and wellbeing and for
accessing appropriate treatment of drug and other health services. Pharmacotherapy is a term that
refers to the use of medication, like buprenorphine or methadone. It helps in the treatment of
opioid dependency such as heroin the most common addiction (Nutt, 2012). If these medications
will be taken on a regular basis then it can help in managing physical dependency on drug,
compulsive drug use behaviors and craving of the drug. Only community-based doctors who
provide clinical care and prescription can provide the Opioid pharmacotherapy treatment.
The programs of peer education are considered to be highly effective in regards to the
communicating health promotion and messaging related to harm reduction for the specific
groups of people, like an injection drug user, young drug edicts or cultural groups (Scherer,
2012). The community members of Peer education programs are highly trained and supportive
for educating their peer regarding the safer ways of using drugs or reducing the negative
consequences of their drug use. People often seem very respective towards receiving harm
reduction education from their peers and also more likely to take their advice on board. The
education program of the peer is also effective in getting harm reduction messages to those
people who are not generally involved in mainstream social and health services.

Harm minimization assists to decrease the economic impacts of drug use on individuals,
families, and communities (Weatherburn, 2009). The consumption of drugs is considered too
because of preventable illness and diseases in the country. The consumption of drugs have a
large number of economic impacts associated with household expenditure, law enforcement
expenses, increased production costs and decreased productivity.
Cocaine, cannabis, and heroin are the most frequently used drugs and individuals have to
undergo medical treatment. Harm minimization strategies focus on providing benefits to people.
The harm minimization initiatives consist of syringe and needle programs, peer education
programs, opioid pharmacotherapy treatment, and caution schemes and diversion programs
(Keene, 2013). The syringe and needle program create opportunities for people to gain
knowledge about how they look after their wellbeing and health. Opioid pharmacotherapy
treatment is being provided to the people who are dependent opioid. Education programs are also
considered to be highly effective to communicate health minimization and health promotion to
particular population groups. The burden of economic costs increases for both the drug users and
the health care system. The harm minimization initiatives are considered to very much effective
in order to decrease the economic costs (Abadinsky&Abadinsky, 2008).
Conclusion
The process of the constitution was vital in shaping the direction and priorities for the strategy
and also providing strong support to continuing of Australia and its commitment to minimization
of harm underpinning its approach of drug policy. The long-standing commitment of Australia
for harm minimization includes economic and social concerns for using drug in individuals,
health, families and communication as a whole and grounded on the considerations such as, the

use of drug arise a continuum, from occasional use to dependent use, range of harm related to
different patterns and types of drug use and these harms requires response of multifaceted. The
policy of harm minimization identifies the clear recognition of a clear risk that is being carried
by drug use (Montvilo, 2013). Three pillars require demand reduction, harm reduction, and
supply reduction. This strategy helps in minimizing and preventing tobacco, alcohol and other
problems related to drug and it should be balanced across three pillars.

References
Blaszczynski, A. (2010). Harm Minimization Can Be Achieved By A Symbiosis Between
Government, Industry, and Individuals. Addiction, 106(1), 10-12. doi: 10.1111/j.1360-
0443.2010.03231.x
Brown, J., Eriksen, M., Gause, N., Brody, G., & Sales, J. (2018). Impact of Behavioral Drug
Abuse Treatment on Sexual Risk Behaviors: An Integrative Data Analysis of Eight Trials
Conducted Within the National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network. Prevention
Science, 19(6), 761-771. doi: 10.1007/s11121-018-0913-6
Dickerson, M., & O'Connor, J. (2011). Gambling as an addictive behaviour (3rd ed.).
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Etter, J. (2018). Comprehensive causal models and harm minimization principles should guide
regulations on vapourizers. Addiction, 113(10), 1788-1789. doi: 10.1111/add.14384
Gauvin, D., Zimmermann, Z., & Baird, T. (2016).The Lexicon of Drug Abuse. Journal Of Drug
Abuse, 02(01), 650. doi: 10.21767/2471-853x.100010
Gauvin, D., Zimmermann, Z., & Baird, T. (2016).The Lexicon of Drug Abuse. Journal Of Drug
Abuse, 02(01), 355-360. doi: 10.21767/2471-853x.100010
Giesbrecht, N. (2010). Alcohol and Society: A Population Health Perspective. Nordic Studies On
Alcohol And Drugs, 27(5), 377-381. doi: 10.1177/145507251002700510
Jenkins, E., Slemon, A., & Haines-Saah, R. (2017). Developing harm reduction in the context of
youth substance use: insights from a multi-site qualitative analysis of young people’s harm

minimization strategies. Harm Reduction Journal, 14(1), 552. doi: 10.1186/s12954-017-
0180-z
Keene, J. (2013). Drug Misuse (4th ed.). New York, NY: Springer.
Kinrys, G., K Gold, A., & Nierenberg, A. (2016). Proper Drug Disposal: Studying a Solution to
Household Prescription and Over-the- Counter Drug Abuse. Journal Of Drug
Abuse, 02(02), 452. doi: 10.21767/2471-853x.100027
McBride, N., Midford, R., Farringdon, F., & Phillips, M. (2000). Early results from a school
alcohol harm minimization study: the School Health and Alcohol Harm Reduction
Project. Addiction, 95(7), 1021-1042. doi: 10.1046/j.1360-0443.2000.95710215.x
Nutt, D. (2012). Drugs - without the hot air (3rd ed.). New York: UIT Cambridge Ltd.
Paolini, A. (2016). Heroin Usage: Impact on Student Performance and Truancy amongst High
School Students. Journal Of Drug Abuse, 02(01), 352. doi: 10.21767/2471-853x.100011
Scherer, L. (2012). Drug abuse (5th ed.). Detroit: Greenhaven Press.
Weatherburn, D. (2009). Dilemmas in harm minimization. Addiction, 104(3), 335-339. doi:
10.1111/j.1360-0443.2008.02336.x
Abadinsky, H., &Abadinsky, H. (2008). Drug use and abuse (4th ed.). Belmont, CA:
Thomson/Wadsworth.
Korsmeyer, P., &Kranzler, H. (2009). Encyclopedia of drugs, alcohol & addictive behavior(5th
ed.). Detroit, Mich.: Macmillan Reference USA.
Montvilo, R. (2013). Addictions and substance abuse (5th ed.). Ipswich, Mass.: Salem Press.