Posts

What is Clomipramine?

Published on by Andrew Marshall11 Comments

Introduction

Clomipramine, sold under the brand name Anafranil among others, is a tricyclic antidepressant (TCA).

It is used for the treatment of obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), panic disorder, major depressive disorder (MDD), and chronic pain. It may increase the risk of suicide in those under the age of 25. It is taken by mouth. It has also been used to treat premature ejaculation.

Common side effects include dry mouth, constipation, loss of appetite, sleepiness, weight gain, sexual dysfunction, and trouble urinating. Serious side effects include an increased risk of suicidal behaviour in those under the age of 25, seizures, mania, and liver problems. If stopped suddenly a withdrawal syndrome may occur with headaches, sweating, and dizziness. It is unclear if it is safe for use in pregnancy. Its mechanism of action is not entirely clear but is believed to involve increased levels of serotonin.

Clomipramine was discovered in 1964 by the Swiss drug manufacturer Ciba-Geigy. It is on the World Health Organisation’s List of Essential Medicines. It is available as a generic medication.

Brief History

Clomipramine was developed by Geigy as a chlorinated derivative of Imipramine. It was first referenced in the literature in 1961 and was patented in 1963. The drug was first approved for medical use in Europe in the treatment of depression in 1970, and was the last of the major TCAs to be marketed. In fact, clomipramine was initially considered to be a “me-too drug” by the FDA, and in relation to this, was declined licensing for depression in the United States. As such, to this day, clomipramine remains the only TCA that is available in the United States that is not approved for the treatment of depression, in spite of the fact that it is a highly effective antidepressant. Clomipramine was eventually approved in the United States for the treatment of OCD in 1989 and became available in 1990. It was the first drug to be investigated and found effective in the treatment of OCD. The first reports of benefits in OCD were in 1967, and the first double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial of clomipramine for OCD was conducted in 1976, with more rigorous clinical studies that solidified its effectiveness conducted in the 1980s. It remained the “gold standard” for the treatment of OCD for many years until the introduction of the SSRIs, which have since largely superseded it due to greatly improved tolerability and safety (although notably not effectiveness). Clomipramine is the only TCA that has been shown to be effective in the treatment of OCD and that is approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the treatment of OCD; the other TCAs failed clinical trials for this indication, likely due to insufficient serotonergic activity.

Medical Uses

Clomipramine has a number of uses in medicine including in the treatment of:

  • OCD which is its only US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-labelled indication. Other regulatory agencies (such as the TGA of Australia and the MHRA of the UK) have also approved clomipramine for this indication.
  • MDD a popular off-label use in the US. It is approved by the Australian TGA and the United Kingdom MHRA for this indication. Some have suggested the possible superior efficacy of clomipramine compared to other antidepressants in the treatment of MDD, although at the current time the evidence is insufficient to adequately substantiate this claim.
  • Panic disorder with or without agoraphobia.
  • Body dysmorphic disorder.
  • Cataplexy associated with narcolepsy. Which is a TGA and MHRA-labelled indication for clomipramine.
  • Premature ejaculation.
  • Depersonalisation disorder.
  • Chronic pain with or without organic disease, particularly headache of the tension type.
  • Sleep paralysis, with or without narcolepsy.
  • Enuresis (involuntary urinating in sleep) in children. The effect may not be sustained following treatment, and alarm therapy may be more effective in both the short-term and the long-term. Combining a tricyclic (such as clomipramine) with anticholinergic medication, may be more effective for treating enuresis than the tricyclic alone.
  • Trichotillomania.

In a meta-analysis of various trials involving fluoxetine (Prozac), fluvoxamine (Luvox), and sertraline (Zoloft) to test their relative efficacies in treating OCD, clomipramine was found to be the most effective.

Contraindications

Contraindications include:

  • Known hypersensitivity to clomipramine, or any of the excipients or cross-sensitivity to tricyclic antidepressants of the dibenzazepine group.
  • Recent myocardial infarction.
  • Any degree of heart block or other cardiac arrhythmias.
  • Mania.
  • Severe liver disease.
  • Narrow angle glaucoma.
  • Urinary retention.
  • It must not be given in combination or within 3 weeks before or after treatment with a monoamine oxidase inhibitor (Moclobemide included, however clomipramine can be initiated sooner at 48 hours following discontinuation of moclobemide).

Pregnancy and Lactation

Clomipramine use during pregnancy is associated with congenital heart defects in the newborn. It is also associated with reversible withdrawal effects in the newborn. Clomipramine is also distributed in breast milk and hence nursing while taking clomipramine is advised against.

Side Effects

Clomipramine has been associated with the following side effects:

  • Very common (>10% frequency):
    • Accommodation defect.
    • Blurred vision.
    • Nausea.
    • Dry mouth (Xerostomia).
    • Constipation.
    • Fatigue.
    • Weight gain.
    • Increased appetite.
    • Dizziness.
    • Tremor.
    • Headache.
    • Myoclonus.
    • Drowsiness.
    • Somnolence.
    • Restlessness.
    • Micturition disorder.
    • Sexual dysfunction (erectile dysfunction and loss of libido).
    • Hyperhidrosis (profuse sweating).
  • Common (1-10% frequency):
    • Weight loss.
    • Orthostatic hypotension.
    • Sinus tachycardia.
    • Clinically irrelevant ECG changes (e.g. T- and ST-wave changes) in patients of normal cardiac status.
    • Palpitations.
    • Tinnitus (hearing ringing in one’s ears).
    • Mydriasis (dilated pupils).
    • Vomiting.
    • Abdominal disorders.
    • Diarrhoea.
    • Decreased appetite.
    • Increased transaminases.
    • Increased Alkaline phosphatase.
    • Speech disorders.
    • Paraesthesia.
    • Muscle hypertonia.
    • Dysgeusia.
    • Memory impairment.
    • Muscular weakness.
    • Disturbance in attention.
    • Confusional state.
    • Disorientation.
    • Hallucinations (particularly in elderly patients and patients with Parkinson’s disease).
    • Anxiety.
    • Agitation.
    • Sleep disorders.
    • Mania.
    • Hypomania.
    • Aggression.
    • Depersonalisation.
    • Insomnia.
    • Nightmares.
    • Aggravation of depression.
    • Delirium.
    • Galactorrhoea (lactation that is not associated with pregnancy or breastfeeding).
    • Breast enlargement.
    • Yawning.
    • Hot flush.
    • Dermatitis allergic (skin rash, urticaria).
    • Photosensitivity reaction.
    • Pruritus (itching).
  • Uncommon (0.1-1% frequency):
    • Convulsions.
    • Ataxia.
    • Arrhythmias.
    • Elevated blood pressure.
    • Activation of psychotic symptoms.
  • Very rare (<0.01% frequency):
    • Pancytopaenia: An abnormally low amount of all the different types of blood cells in the blood (including platelets, white blood cells and red blood cells).
    • Leukopenia: A low white blood cell count.
    • Agranulocytosis: A more severe form of leukopenia; a dangerously low neutrophil count which leaves one open to life-threatening infections due to the role of the white blood cells in defending the body from invaders.
    • Thrombocytopenia: An abnormally low amount of platelets in the blood which are essential to clotting and hence this leads to an increased tendency to bruise and bleed, including, potentially, internally.
    • Eosinophilia: An abnormally high number of eosinophils – the cells that fight off parasitic infections – in the blood.
    • Syndrome of inappropriate secretion of antidiuretic hormone (SIADH): A potentially fatal reaction to certain medications that is due to an excessive release of antidiuretic hormone – a hormone that prevents the production of urine by increasing the reabsorption of fluids in the kidney – this results in the development of various electrolyte abnormalities (e.g. hyponatraemia [low blood sodium], hypokalaemia [low blood potassium], hypocalcaemia [low blood calcium]).
    • Glaucoma.
    • Oedema (local or generalised).
    • Alopecia (hair loss).
    • Hyperpyrexia (a high fever that is above 41.5 °C).
    • Hepatitis (liver swelling) with or without jaundice: The yellowing of the eyes, the skin, and mucous membranes due to impaired liver function.
    • Abnormal ECG.
    • Anaphylactic and anaphylactoid reactions including hypotension.
    • Neuroleptic malignant syndrome (NMS): A potentially fatal side effect of antidopaminergic agents such as antipsychotics, tricyclic antidepressants and antiemetics (drugs that relieve nausea and vomiting). NMS develops over a period of days or weeks and is characterised by the following symptoms:
      • Tremor.
      • Muscle rigidity.
      • Mental status change (such as confusion, delirium, mania, hypomania, agitation, coma, etc.).
      • Hyperthermia (high body temperature).
      • Tachycardia (high heart rate).
      • Blood pressure changes.
      • Diaphoresis (sweating profusely).
      • Diarrhoea.
    • Alveolitis allergic (pneumonitis) with or without eosinophilia.
    • Purpura.
    • Conduction disorder (e.g. widening of QRS complex, prolonged QT interval, PR/PQ interval changes, bundle-branch block, torsade de pointes, particularly in patients with hypokalaemia).

Withdrawal

Withdrawal symptoms may occur during gradual or particularly abrupt withdrawal of tricyclic antidepressant drugs. Possible symptoms include: nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, diarrhoea, insomnia, headache, nervousness, anxiety, dizziness and worsening of psychiatric status. Differentiating between the return of the original psychiatric disorder and clomipramine withdrawal symptoms is important. Clomipramine withdrawal can be severe. Withdrawal symptoms can also occur in neonates when clomipramine is used during pregnancy. A major mechanism of withdrawal from tricyclic antidepressants is believed to be due to a rebound effect of excessive cholinergic activity due to neuroadaptations as a result of chronic inhibition of cholinergic receptors by tricyclic antidepressants. Restarting the antidepressant and slow tapering is the treatment of choice for tricyclic antidepressant withdrawal. Some withdrawal symptoms may respond to anticholinergics, such as atropine or benztropine mesylate.

Overdose

Refer to Tricyclic Antidepressant Overdose.

Clomipramine overdose usually presents with the following symptoms:

  • Signs of central nervous system depression such as:
    • Stupor.
    • Coma.
    • Drowsiness.
    • Restlessness.
    • Ataxia.
  • Mydriasis.
  • Convulsions.
  • Enhanced reflexes.
  • Muscle rigidity.
  • Athetoid and choreoathetoid movements.
  • Serotonin syndrome: A condition with many of the same symptoms as neuroleptic malignant syndrome but has a significantly more rapid onset.
  • Cardiovascular effects including:
    • Arrhythmias (including Torsades de pointes).
    • Tachycardia.
    • QTc interval prolongation.
    • Conduction disorders.
    • Hypotension.
    • Shock.
    • Heart failure.
    • Cardiac arrest.
  • Apnoea.
  • Cyanosis.
  • Respiratory depression.
  • Vomiting.
  • Fever.
  • Sweating.
  • Oliguria.
  • Anuria.

There is no specific antidote for overdose and all treatment is purely supportive and symptomatic. Treatment with activated charcoal may be used to limit absorption in cases of oral overdose. Anyone suspected of overdosing on clomipramine should be hospitalised and kept under close surveillance for at least 72 hours. Clomipramine has been reported as being less toxic in overdose than most other TCAs in one meta-analysis but this may well be due to the circumstances surrounding most overdoses as clomipramine is more frequently used to treat conditions for which the rate of suicide is not particularly high such as OCD. In another meta-analysis, however, clomipramine was associated with a significant degree of toxicity in overdose.

Interactions

Clomipramine may interact with a number of different medications, including the monoamine oxidase inhibitors which include isocarboxazid, moclobemide, phenelzine, selegiline and tranylcypromine, antiarrhythmic agents (due to the effects of TCAs like clomipramine on cardiac conduction. There is also a potential pharmacokinetic interaction with quinidine due to the fact that clomipramine is metabolised by CYP2D6 in vivo), diuretics (due to the potential for hypokalaemia (low blood potassium) to develop which increases the risk for QT interval prolongation and torsades de pointes), the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs; due to both potential additive serotonergic effects leading to serotonin syndrome and the potential for a pharmacokinetic interaction with the SSRIs that inhibit CYP2D6 [e.g. fluoxetine and paroxetine]) and serotonergic agents such as triptans, other tricyclic antidepressants, tramadol, etc. (due to the potential for serotonin syndrome). Its use is also advised against in those concurrently on CYP2D6 inhibitors due to the potential for increased plasma levels of clomipramine and the resulting potential for CNS and cardiotoxicity.

Pharmacology

Pharmacodynamics

Clomipramine is a reuptake inhibitor of serotonin and norepinephrine, or a serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (SNRI); that is, it blocks the reuptake of these neurotransmitters back into neurons by preventing them from interacting with their transporters, thereby increasing their extracellular concentrations in the synaptic cleft and resulting in increased serotonergic and noradrenergic neurotransmission. In addition, clomipramine also has antiadrenergic, antihistamine, antiserotonergic, antidopaminergic, and anticholinergic activities. It is specifically an antagonist of the α1-adrenergic receptor, the histamine H1 receptor, the serotonin 5-HT2A, 5-HT2C, 5-HT3, 5-HT6, and 5-HT7 receptors, the dopamine D1, D2, and D3 receptors, and the muscarinic acetylcholine receptors (M1-M5). Like other TCAs, clomipramine weakly blocks voltage-dependent sodium channels as well.

Although clomipramine shows around 100- to 200-fold preference in affinity for the serotonin transporter (SERT) over the norepinephrine transporter (NET), its major active metabolite, desmethylclomipramine (norclomipramine), binds to the NET with very high affinity (Ki = 0.32 nM) and with dramatically reduced affinity for the SERT (Ki = 31.6 nM). Moreover, desmethylclomipramine circulates at concentrations that are approximately twice those of clomipramine. In accordance, occupancy of both the SERT and the NET has been shown with clomipramine administration in positron emission tomography studies with humans and non-human primates. As such, clomipramine is in fact a fairly balanced SNRI rather than only a serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SRI).

The antidepressant effects of clomipramine are thought to be due to reuptake inhibition of serotonin and norepinephrine, while serotonin reuptake inhibition only is thought to be responsible for the effectiveness of clomipramine in the treatment of OCD. Conversely, antagonism of the H1, α1-adrenergic, and muscarinic acetylcholine receptors is thought to contribute to its side effects. Blockade of the H1 receptor is specifically responsible for the antihistamine effects of clomipramine and side effects like sedation and somnolence (sleepiness). Antagonism of the α1-adrenergic receptor is thought to cause orthostatic hypotension and dizziness. Inhibition of muscarinic acetylcholine receptors is responsible for the anticholinergic side effects of clomipramine like dry mouth, constipation, urinary retention, blurred vision, and cognitive/memory impairment. In overdose, sodium channel blockade in the brain is believed to cause the coma and seizures associated with TCAs while blockade of sodium channels in the heart is considered to cause cardiac arrhythmias, cardiac arrest, and death. On the other hand, sodium channel blockade is also thought to contribute to the analgesic effects of TCAs, for instance in the treatment of neuropathic pain.

The exceptionally strong serotonin reuptake inhibition of clomipramine likely precludes the possibility of its antagonism of serotonin receptors (which it binds to with more than 100-fold lower affinity than the SERT) resulting in a net decrease in signalling by these receptors. In accordance, while serotonin receptor antagonists like cyproheptadine and chlorpromazine are effective as antidotes against serotonin syndrome, clomipramine is nonetheless capable of inducing this syndrome. In fact, while all TCAs are SRIs and serotonin receptor antagonists to varying extents, the only TCAs that are associated with serotonin syndrome are clomipramine and to a lesser extent its dechlorinated analogue imipramine, which are the two most potent SRIs of the TCAs (and in relation to this have the highest ratios of serotonin reuptake inhibition to serotonin receptor antagonism). As such, whereas other TCAs can be combined with monoamine oxidase inhibitors (with caution due to the risk of hypertensive crisis from NET inhibition; sometimes done in treatment-resistant depressives), clomipramine cannot be due to the risk of serotonin syndrome and death. Unlike the case of its serotonin receptor antagonism, orthostatic hypotension is a common side effect of clomipramine, suggesting that its blockade of the α1-adrenergic receptor is strong enough to overcome the stimulatory effects on the α1-adrenergic receptor of its NET inhibition.

Serotonergic Activity

Clomipramine is a very strong SRI. Its affinity for the SERT was reported in one study using human tissues to be 0.14 nM, which is considerably higher than that of other TCAs. For example, the TCAs with the next highest affinities for the SERT in the study were imipramine, amitriptyline, and dosulepin (dothiepin), with Ki values of 1.4 nM, 4.3 nM, and 8.3 nM, respectively. In addition, clomipramine has a terminal half-life that is around twice as long as that of amitriptyline and imipramine. In spite of these differences however, clomipramine is used clinically at the same usual dosages as other serotonergic TCAs (100-200 mg/day). It achieves typical circulating concentrations that are similar in range to those of other TCAs but with an upper limit that is around twice that of amitriptyline and imipramine. For these reasons, clomipramine is the most potent SRI among the TCAs and is far stronger as an SRI than other TCAs at typical clinical dosages. In addition, clomipramine is more potent as an SRI than any SSRIs, it is more potent than paroxetine, which is the strongest SSRI.

A positron emission tomography study found that a single low dose of 10 mg clomipramine to healthy volunteers resulted in 81.1% occupancy of the SERT, which was comparable to the 84.9% SERT occupancy by 50 mg fluvoxamine. In the study, single doses of 5 to 50 mg clomipramine resulted in 67.2 to 94.0% SERT occupancy while single doses of 12.5 to 50 mg fluvoxamine resulted in 28.4 to 84.9% SERT occupancy. Chronic treatment with higher doses was able to achieve up to 100.0% SERT occupancy with clomipramine and up to 93.6% SERT occupancy with fluvoxamine. Other studies have found 83% SERT occupancy with 20 mg/day paroxetine and 77% SERT occupancy with 20 mg/day citalopram. These results indicate that very low doses of clomipramine are able to substantially occupy the SERT and that clomipramine achieves higher occupancy of the SERT than SSRIs at comparable doses. Moreover, clomipramine may be able to achieve more complete occupancy of the SERT at high doses, at least relative to fluvoxamine.

If the ratios of the 80% SERT occupancy dosage and the approved clinical dosage range are calculated and compared for SSRIs, SNRIs, and clomipramine, it can be deduced that clomipramine is by far the strongest SRI used medically. The lowest approved dosage of clomipramine can be estimated to be roughly comparable in SERT occupancy to the maximum approved dosages of the strongest SSRIs and SNRIs. Because their mechanism of action was originally not known and dose-ranging studies were never conducted, first-generation antipsychotics were dramatically overdosed in patients. It has been suggested that the same may have been true for clomipramine and other TCAs.

Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder

Clomipramine was the first drug that was investigated for and found to be effective in the treatment of OCD. In addition, it was the first drug to be approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in the United States for the treatment of OCD. The effectiveness of clomipramine in the treatment of OCD is far greater than that of other TCAs, which are comparatively weak SRIs; a meta-analysis found pre- versus post-treatment effect sizes of 1.55 for clomipramine relative to a range of 0.67 for imipramine and 0.11 for desipramine. In contrast to other TCAs, studies have found that clomipramine and SSRIs, which are more potent SRIs, have similar effectiveness in the treatment of OCD. However, multiple meta-analyses have found that clomipramine nonetheless retains a significant effectiveness advantage relative to SSRIs; in the same meta-analysis mentioned previously, the effect sizes of SSRIs in the treatment of OCD ranged from 0.81 for fluoxetine to 1.36 for sertraline (relative to 1.55 for clomipramine). However, the effectiveness advantage for clomipramine has not been apparent in head-to-head comparisons of clomipramine versus SSRIs for OCD. The differences in effectiveness findings could be due to differences in methodologies across non-head-to-head studies.

Relatively high doses of SSRIs are needed for effectiveness in the treatment of OCD. Studies have found that high dosages of SSRIs above the normally recommended maximums are significantly more effective in OCD treatment than lower dosages (e.g. 250 to 400 mg/day sertraline versus 200 mg/day sertraline). In addition, the combination of clomipramine and SSRIs has also been found to be significantly more effective in alleviating OCD symptoms, and clomipramine is commonly used to augment SSRIs for this reason. Studies have found that intravenous clomipramine, which is associated with very high circulating concentrations of the drug and a much higher ratio of clomipramine to its metabolite desmethylclomipramine, is more effective than oral clomipramine in the treatment of OCD. There is a case report of complete remission from OCD for approximately one month following a massive overdose of fluoxetine, an SSRI with a uniquely long duration of action. Taken together, stronger serotonin reuptake inhibition has consistently been associated with greater alleviation of OCD symptoms, and since clomipramine, at the clinical dosages in which it is employed, is effectively the strongest SRI used medically, this may underlie its unique effectiveness in the treatment of OCD.

In addition to serotonin reuptake inhibition, clomipramine is also a mild but clinically significant antagonist of the dopamine D1, D2, and D3 receptors at high concentrations. Addition of antipsychotics, which are potent dopamine receptor antagonists, to SSRIs, has been found to significantly augment their effectiveness in the treatment of OCD. As such, besides strong serotonin reuptake inhibition, clomipramine at high doses might also block dopamine receptors to treat OCD symptoms, and this could additionally or alternatively be involved in its possible effectiveness advantage over SSRIs.

Although clomipramine is probably more effective in the treatment of OCD compared to SSRIs, it is greatly inferior to them in terms of tolerability and safety due to its lack of selectivity for the SERT and promiscuous pharmacological activity. In addition, clomipramine has high toxicity in overdose and can potentially result in death, whereas death rarely, if ever, occurs with overdose of SSRIs. It is for these reasons that clomipramine, in spite of potentially superior effectiveness to SSRIs, is now rarely used as a first-line agent in the treatment of OCD, with SSRIs being used as first-line therapies instead and clomipramine generally being reserved for more severe cases and as a second-line agent.

Pharmacokinetics

The oral bioavailability of clomipramine is approximately 50%. Peak plasma concentrations occur around 2-6 hours (with an average of 4.7 hours) after taking clomipramine orally and are in the range of 56-154 ng/mL (178-489 nmol/L). Steady-state concentrations of clomipramine are around 134-532 ng/mL (426-1,690 nmol/L), with an average of 218 ng/mL (692 nmol/L), and are reached after 7 to 14 days of repeated dosing. Steady-state concentrations of the active metabolite, desmethylclomipramine, are around 230-550 ng/mL (730-1,750 nmol/L). The volume of distribution (Vd) of clomipramine is approximately 17 L/kg. It binds approximately 97-98% to plasma proteins, primarily to albumin. Clomipramine is metabolised in the liver mainly by CYP2D6. It has a terminal half-life of 32 hours, and its N-desmethyl metabolite, desmethylclomipramine, has a terminal half-life of approximately 69 hours. Clomipramine is mostly excreted in urine (60%) and faeces (32%).

Chemistry

Clomipramine is a tricyclic compound, specifically a dibenzazepine, and possesses three rings fused together with a side chain attached in its chemical structure. Other dibenzazepine TCAs include imipramine, desipramine, and trimipramine. Clomipramine is a derivative of imipramine with a chlorine atom added to one of its rings and is also known as 3-chloroimipramine. It is a tertiary amine TCA, with its side chain-demethylated metabolite desmethylclomipramine being a secondary amine. Other tertiary amine TCAs include amitriptyline, imipramine, dosulepin (dothiepin), doxepin, and trimipramine. The chemical name of clomipramine is 3-(3-chloro-10,11-dihydro-5H-dibenzo[b,f]azepin-5-yl)-N,N-dimethylpropan-1-amine and its free base form has a chemical formula of C19H23ClN2 with a molecular weight of 314.857 g/mol. The drug is used commercially almost exclusively as the hydrochloride salt; the free base has been used rarely. The CAS Registry Number of the free base is 303-49-1 and of the hydrochloride is 17321-77-6.

Society and Culture

Generic Names

Clomipramine is the English and French generic name of the drug and its INN, BAN, and DCF, while clomipramine hydrochloride is its USAN, USP, BANM, and JAN. Clomipramina is its generic name in Spanish, Portuguese and Italian and its DCIT, while clomipramin is its generic name in German and clomipraminum is its generic name in Latin.

Brand Names

Clomipramine is marketed throughout the world mainly under the brand names Anafranil and Clomicalm for use in humans and animals, respectively.

Veterinary Uses

In the US, clomipramine is only licensed to treat separation anxiety in dogs for which it is sold under the brand name Clomicalm. It has proven effective in the treatment of OCD in cats and dogs. In dogs, it has also demonstrated similar efficacy to fluoxetine in treating tail chasing. In dogs some evidence suggests its efficacy in treating noise phobia.

Clomipramine has also demonstrated efficacy in treating urine spraying in cats. Various studies have been done on the effects of clomipramine on cats to reduce urine spraying/marking behaviour. It has been shown to be able to reduce this behaviour by up to 75% in a trial period of four weeks.

On This Day … 11 February

Published on by Andrew MarshallLeave a comment

People (Births)

  • 1925 – Virginia E. Johnson, American psychologist and academic (d. 2013).

Virginia E. Johnson

Virginia E. Johnson, born Mary Virginia Eshelman (11 February 1925 to 24 July 2013), was an American sexologist, best known as a member of the Masters and Johnson sexuality research team.

Along with her partner, William H. Masters, she pioneered research into the nature of human sexual response and the diagnosis and treatment of sexual dysfunctions and disorders from 1957 until the 1990s.

What is Parentification?

Published on by Andrew MarshallLeave a comment

Introduction

Parentification is the process of role reversal whereby a child is obliged to act as parent to their own parent or sibling. In extreme cases, the child is used to fill the void of the alienating parent’s emotional life.

Two distinct types of parentification have been identified technically: instrumental parentification and emotional parentification.

  • Instrumental parentification involves the child completing physical tasks for the family, such as looking after a sick relative, paying bills, interpreting foreign language, or providing assistance to younger siblings that would normally be provided by a parent.
  • Emotional parentification occurs when a child or adolescent must take on the role of a confidante or mediator for (or between) parents or family members.

Background

Melitta Schmideberg noted in 1948 how emotional deprivation could lead parents to treat their children (unconsciously) as substitute parent figures. “Spousification” and “parental child” (Minuchin) offered alternative concepts exploring the same phenomenon; while the theme of intergenerational continuity in such violations of personal boundaries was further examined. Eric Berne touched on the dangers of parents and children having a symmetrical, rather than asymmetrical relationship, as when an absent spouse is replaced by the eldest child; and Virginia Satir wrote of “the role-function discrepancy…where the son gets into a head-of-the-family role, commonly that of the father”.

Object relations theory highlighted how the child’s false self is called into being when it is forced prematurely to take excessive care of the parental object; and John Bowlby looked at what he called “compulsive caregiving” among the anxiously attached, as a result of a parent inverting the normal relationship and pressuring the child to be an attachment figure for them.

All such aspects of disturbed and inverted parenting patterns have been drawn under the umbrella of the wider phenomenon of parentification – with the result (critics suggest) that on occasion “ironically the concept of parentification has…been as over-burdened as the child it often describes”

Choice of Child

For practical reasons, elder children are generally chosen for the familial “parental” role – very often the first-born children who were put in the anomalous role. However, gender considerations mean that sometimes the eldest boy or eldest girl was selected, even if they are not the oldest child overall, for such reasons as the preference to match the sex of the missing parent.

Thus where there is a disabled child in the family to be cared for, “older siblings, especially girls, are at the greatest risk of parentification”; where a father-figure is missing, it may be the eldest son who is forced to take on his father’s responsibilities, without ever obtaining the autonomy that normally accompanies such adult roles.

Alternatively a widower may put a daughter into the social and emotional role of his deceased wife – “spousification”; or a mother can oblige her daughter to play the caring role, in a betrayal of the child’s normal expectation of love and care

Narcissistic

Narcissistic parentification occurs when a child is forced to take on the parent’s idealised projection, something which encourages a compulsive perfectionism in the child at the expense of their natural development. In a kind of pseudo-identification, the child is induced by any and all means to take on the characteristics of the parental ego ideal – a pattern that has been detected in western culture since Homer’s description of the character of Achilles.

Disadvantages

The almost inevitable byproduct of parentification is losing one’s own childhood. In destructive parentification, the child in question takes on excessive responsibility in the family, without their caretaking being acknowledged and supported by others: by adopting the role of parental care-giver, the child loses their real place in the family unit and is left lonely and unsure. In extreme instances, there may be what has been called a kind of disembodiment, a narcissistic wound that threatens one’s basic self-identity.

In later life, parentified children often experience anxiety over abandonment and loss, and demonstrate difficulty handling rejection and disappointment within interpersonal relationships.

Case Studies

  • Carl Jung in his late autobiography reports that his mother always spoke to him as an adult, confiding in him what she could not share with her husband. Laurens van der Post commented on the grown-up atmosphere surrounding the young Jung, and considered that “this activation of the pattern of the “old man” within himself…was all a consequence of the extent to which his father and mother failed each other”.
  • Patrick Casement reports on a patient – Mr T – whose mother was distressed at any and all his feelings, and who therefore protected her from them – mothering her himself.

Literary Examples

The Tale of Genji tells that for “Kaoru’s mother…her son’s visits were her chief pleasure. Sometimes he almost seemed more like a father than a son – a fact which he was aware of and thought rather sad”.

Charles Dickens’ “Angel in the house” characters, particularly Agnes Wickfield in David Copperfield, are parentified children. Agnes is forced to be the parent of her alcoholic father and seems to strive for perfection as a means of reaching the “ego ideal” of her deceased mother (who died upon child-birth). Agnes marries late, has relationship and intimacy problems (she has a hard time expressing her love for David until he reveals his own love for her), and has some self-defeating attitudes; in one scene she blames her own father’s misfortunes on herself. However, she proves to be resilient, resourceful, responsible and even potentially career-driven (she forms her own school). She also manages to marry the protagonist David and the two live happily together for 10 years with children by the end of the novel.

The theme of parentification has also been explored in the Twilight series, with particular but not exclusive reference to the character of Bella Swan.

Who was Martti Olavi Siirala?

Published on by Andrew MarshallLeave a comment

Introduction

Martti Olavi Siirala (24 November 1922 to 18 August 2008) was a Finnish psychiatrist, psychoanalyst and philosopher.

He was inspired by psychoanalysis, the anthropological medicine of Viktor von Weizsäcker and the existential philosophy of Martin Heidegger. The outcome was a unique synthesis theory that Siirala called social pathology.

Siirala studied psychoanalysis in Zürich under the guidance of Medard Boss and Gustav Bally. There he met also colleague and lifetime friend Gaetano Benedetti. Siirala was also the founding member of Finnish Therapeia-foundation, an alternative psychoanalytic training institute established 1958. Especially in the early years Siirala was actually the principal of the foundation, both at a theoretical and practical level.

Anthropological Basis

In the tradition of philosophical anthropology man is seen as a unity. No sharp distinction is to be seen between body and soul. Also man is seen as member of his society, believing that one needs contacts to others for his own welfare. Siirala accepted these theses, mostly under the influence of von Weiszäcker.

Siirala saw human illness as meaningful reactions to the patient’s life situations, both present and past. Also Siirala considered bodily and mental illnesses as alternative reactions. Mentally ill people he described as placeless, meaning that they have no real place among other men, their acceptance or respect. The origins of problems of this kind Siirala saw as mostly social.

Handling children with problems in speech development in Medicine in Metamorphosis, Siirala’s attitude comes clear. Here we can think about the symptom of stuttering. From traditional point of view there is child who tries to speak, but some, probably neurological problem disturbs this process. From Siirala’s point it is just that this child stutters, speak this way, and he does this as a total reaction of his whole life situation: ‘A child is born into a family and a national and human network that extends across the generations’.

Social Pathology

In modern psychiatry there is a tradition of returning patient’s illness back to one specific reason. Sometimes this cause is to be found in genetics, sometimes elsewhere. From Siirala’s point of view there is not a single cause but rather a net of causes: hence his opposition to what he called ‘the delusion that we have reduced diseases to mere object-things, entities that can be studied in isolation…the delusion of reductive reification’. Tracking these causes starts from man, but leads to his social environment, in the end to the whole society.

Freud thought psychological symptoms to be overdetermined. It can be said that Siirala took the idea but expanded it to social field. For some patient we may think maybe of genetic fault or traumatic childhood. But we must think also patients parents childhood, the phenomena of transgenerational transmission, the teachers and social workers who have ignored the problem and so on.

Siirala distinguishes two major factors in this collective pathology. The first is the delusional possession of reality. By that Siirala means an attitude where one’s own assumptions are considered the only one, a position where things are already known – so there seems to be no real need to orient towards the subject. Thus for Siirala ‘a central feature of the delusions of the healthy seems to be the unconscious assumption that they possess reality, the criteria of what is worth notice’.

The second is often latent despair, a hopelessness attitude. These factors can be seen for example in the history of psychiatry. Some decades ago it was already known that schizophrenia is an incurable state or condition. Therefore no real therapeutic actions were done, and patients stayed ill: a Self-fulfilling prophecy.

Siirala wrote here about transfer, a social pathological formation of non-articulated life. When there is no room to people to react to problems they encounter, it has effects that harm the whole society. However, these transfers or burdens are not delivered equally. On the contrary, they often fall on the shoulders of this or that particular person, who then becomes ill. Here, Siirala maintains, the mentally or physically ill one – the Identified patient – gets ill for his society. In Siirala’s view, then, ‘many symptoms of schizophrenia may be precipitated by…the people around him, in an attempt to overcome tendencies in him which disturb their view of reality. This, as with many of Siirala’s writings, is disturbing and provocative…[but] can never be healthily ignored’.[4] The corollary is that the real subject of illness is not therefore the particular individual who is driven into isolation – “placelessness” – but the society that has driven him there.

Siirala has accordingly been linked with figures like Harold Searles or Harry Stack Sullivan in his belief that the delusions of patients are ‘expressions that reflect what has been dissociated, hidden, and overlooked in life’. A similar link appears in ‘the psychological literature on Invisible Loyalties (Boszormenyi-Nagi & Spark 1973) and anonymous social burdens (Siirala, M. 1983)’.

Psychotherapy

Siirala calls therapy the new, sharing transfer of social burden. The so-called transference of psychoanalysis is seen not only as projecting feelings to the therapist, but also as the sharing of this burden. Thus ‘in order to be creative, the therapist must identify himself with the patient, share his sufferings so that he attains his goal’. This may also cause some pain to the therapist, but can at the same time make things happen that are at first sight impossible. Epistemologically Siirala stresses that therapist must keep all possibilities open, and not hang on to some preconceived theory like the oedipal theory of psychoanalysis.

In many points Siirala comes close to Ronald David Laing, a famous anti-psychiatrist from the 1960s. Indeed the work, ‘Medicine in Metamorphosis’ was published originally in a series edited by Laing. Both were interested in social origins of schizophrenia. On the other hand, Siirala never stops considering his patients as ill. Also he sees that they need the right kind of psychiatric treatment to gain again some kind of place among other men.

What is a Low-Threshold Treatment Programme?

Published on by Andrew MarshallLeave a comment

Introduction

Low-threshold treatment programmes are harm reduction-based health care centres targeted towards people who use substances.

“Low-threshold” programmes are programmes that make minimal demands on the patient, offering services without attempting to control their intake of drugs, and providing counselling only if requested. Low-threshold programmes may be contrasted with “high-threshold” programmes, which require the user to accept a certain level of control and which demand that the patient accept counselling and cease all drug use as a precondition of support.

Low-threshold treatment programmes are distinct from simple needle exchange programmes, and may include comprehensive healthcare and counselling services. The International Journal of Drug Policy in its volume 24 published an Editorial which endeavoured to define a service known to be “low-threshold”, based on some popular and known criteria. According to that Editorial, low-threshold services for drug users can be defined as those which offer services to drug users; do not impose abstinence from drug use as a condition of service access; and endeavour to reduce other documented barriers to service access. Beyond comprehensive needle exchange services, other examples of low-threshold, community-based programmes include those that support people who use alcohol or drugs to consider positive or health protective changes without a demand for “recovery,” such as those piloted in New York City in the 1990s as “recovery readiness” efforts to bolster HIV prevention.

Background

Injection drug users (IDUs) are at risk of a wide range of health problems arising from non-sterile injecting practices, complications of the drug itself or of the lifestyle associated with drug use and dependence. Furthermore, unrelated health problems, such as diabetes, may be neglected because of drug dependence. Sharing of health information with police, or requirements that patients abstain from all illegal drug use prior to receiving support are further impediments to health seeking, or require patients to lie about drug use in order to receive other lifesaving services. For all these reasons, despite their increased health care needs, IDUs do not have the required access to care or may be reluctant to use conventional services. Consequently, their health may deteriorate to a point at which emergency treatment is required, with considerable costs to both the IDUs and the health system. Accordingly, harm reduction based health care centres, also known as targeted health care outlet or low-threshold health care outlet for IDUs have been established across a range of settings utilising a variety of models. These targeted outlets provide integrated, low-threshold services within a harm-reduction framework targeting IDUs, and sometimes include social and/or other services. Where a particular service is not provided, referral and assistance with access is available. In 2007, for example, 33% of all US needle-syringe programmes (NSPs) provided on-site medical care, and 7% provided buprenorphine treatment. Similarly, in many European countries NSP outlets serve as low-threshold primary health care centres targeting primarily IDUs.

Health Care Models

These targeted outlets vary widely and may be either “distributive”, providing basic harm reduction services and simple healthcare with facilitated referrals to specialist services, or “one-stop-shops” where a range of services including specialist services are provided onsite. The services being offered by these outlets range from simple needle and syringe provision, to expanded services including basic and preventive primary healthcare, hepatitis B and A vaccinations, hepatitis C testing, counselling, tuberculosis screening and sometimes opioid maintenance therapy. Some centres offer hepatitis, HIV treatment and dental care. The goal of these outlets is to provide:

  • Opportunistic health care;
  • Increased temporal and spatial availability of health care;
  • Trustworthy services of health care;
  • Cost-effective mode of health care; and
  • Targeted and tailored services.

In the United States as of 2011, 211 NSPs were known to be operating in 32 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico and the Indian Nations. The bulk of funding has come from state and local governments, since for most of the last several decades, federal funding for needle exchange programs has been specifically banned.

Globally, as of 2008, at least 77 countries and territories offer NSPs with varying structures, aims, and goals. Some countries use needle exchange services as part of integrated programmes to contain drug use, while others aim simply to contain HIV infection as their top priority, considering a reduction in the incidence of drug use as a much lower priority. Acceptance of NSPs vary widely from country to country. On the one hand, in Australia and New Zealand, electronic dispensing machines are available at selected locations such as the Auckland needle exchange and the Christchurch needle exchange, allowing needle exchange service 24 hours to registered users. On the other hand, over half of the countries in Asia, the Middle East, and North Africa retain the death penalty for drug offenses, although some have not carried out executions in recent years.

Evaluation

Low-threshold programmes offering needle exchange have faced much opposition on political and moral grounds. Concerns are often expressed that NSPs may encourage drug use, or may actually increase the number of dirty needles in the community. Another fear is that NSPs may draw drug activity into the communities in which they operate. It has also been argued that in fighting disease, needle exchanges take attention away from bigger drug problems, and that, contrary to saving lives, they actually contribute to drug-related deaths. Even in Australia, which is considered a leading country in harm reduction, a survey showed that a third of the public believed that NSPs encouraged drug use, and 20% believed that NSPs dispensed drugs. In the United States, the ambivalent public attitude towards NSPs is often reflected in police interference, with 43% of NSP programme managers reporting frequent (at least monthly) client harassment, 31% reporting frequent confiscation of clients’ syringes, 12% reporting frequent client arrest, and 26% reporting uninvited police appearances at programme sites. A single 1997 study which showed a correlation between frequent programme use and elevated rates of HIV infection among IDUs in Vancouver, Canada, has become widely cited by opponents of NSPs as demonstrating their counter-productiveness.

Authors from the 1997 Vancouver study have, in multiple publications, issued disclaimers against the misuse of their work by opponents of NSPs. They point out that frequent attendees of the program tended to be young and often indulged in extreme high-risk behaviours. The 1997 results were hence of statistically biased sampling. They have emphasized that the correct message to be derived from their 1997 study can be read in the title of their work: “Needle exchange is not enough”. This is the same message presented by many other articles since.

Comprehensive, systematic surveys of the costs and effectiveness of low-threshold primary healthcare programmes are not available due to the heterogeneity of these programmes and the study designs. Narrower focus studies dealing solely with the needle exchange issue are abundant, however, and generally support the thesis that NSPs reduce the risk of prevalence of HIV, hepatitis and other blood-borne diseases. These studies suggest that such outlets improve the overall health status of IDUs and save on the health budget by reducing episodes in emergency departments and tertiary hospitals. In Australia, monitoring of drug users participating in NSPs showed the incidence of HIV among NSP clients to be essentially identical to that of the general population. Fears that NSPs may draw drug activity into the communities in which they operate are contradicted by a study that showed that by far the greatest number of clients of an NSP in Chicago came to the area to exchange needles (60%) rather than to buy drugs (3.8%).

Internationally, support for the effectiveness of low-threshold programmes including needle exchange have come from studies conducted in Afghanistan, China, Spain, Taiwan, Estonia, Canada, Iran, and many other countries. However, in many countries, there is strong opposition to such programmes.

Despite the lack of randomised clinical trials demonstrating the impact of low-threshold services, the available evidence, barriers to service access and the late presentation of seriously ill IDUs to hospital, suggests the ongoing need for targeted and low-threshold services. In addition, prevention of HIV and hepatitis C transmission is clearly possible for those unable or unwilling to stop injecting drug use, and a range of countries using low-threshold approach have achieved control or virtual elimination of HIV transmission among people who inject drugs. For these reasons, organisations ranging from the US National Institutes of Health, the Centres for Disease Control, the American Bar Association, the American Medical Association, the American Psychological Association, the World Health Organisation, the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction and many others have endorsed low-threshold programmes including needle exchange.

What is an Identified Patient?

Published on by Andrew MarshallLeave a comment

Introduction

Identified patient (IP) is a clinical term often heard in family therapy discussion.

It describes one family member in a dysfunctional family who expresses the family’s authentic inner conflicts. Usually, the “designated patient” expresses their physical symptoms unconsciously, unaware they are making overt dysfunctional family dynamics that have been covert and which no one can talk about at home. Occasionally, the identified patient is partly conscious of why and how they have become the focus of concern in the family system.

As a family systems dynamic, the overt symptoms of identified patient draw attention away from the “elephants in the living room no one can talk about” which need to be discussed, such as a pending separation or divorce. If covert abuse occurs between family members, the overt symptoms can draw attention away from the perpetrator(s).

The identified patient is a kind of diversion and a kind of scapegoat. Often a child, this is “the split-off false carrier of a breakdown in the entire family system,” which may be a transgenerational disturbance or trauma.

In Organisational Management

The term is also used in analysing dysfunction in businesses where an individual becomes the carrier of a group problem.

Origins and Characteristics

The term emerged from the work of the Bateson Project on family homeostasis, as a way of identifying a largely unconscious pattern of behaviour whereby an excess of painful feelings in a family lead to one member being identified as the cause of all the difficulties – a scapegoating of the IP.

The IP – also called the “symptom-bearer” or “presenting problem” – may display unexplainable emotional or physical symptoms, and is often the first person to seek help, perhaps at the request of the family. However, while family members will typically express concern over the IP’s problems, they may instinctively react to any improvement on the IP’s part by attempting to reinstate the status quo.

Virginia Satir the wellspring of family systems theory, who knew Bateson, viewed the identified patient as a way of both concealing and revealing a family’s secret agendas. Conjoint family therapy stressed accordingly the importance in group therapy of bringing not only the identified patient but the extended family in which their problems arose into the therapy – with the ultimate goal of relieving the IP of the broader family feelings he or she has been carrying. In such circumstances, not only the IP but their siblings as well may end up feeling the benefits.

R.D. Laing saw the IP as a function of the family nexus: “the person who gets diagnosed is part of a wider network of extremely disturbed and disturbing patterns of communication.” Later formulations suggest that the patient may be an “emissary” of sorts from the family to the wider world, in an implicit familial call for help, as with the reading of juvenile delinquency as a coded cry for help by a child on his parents’ behalf. There may then be an element of altruism in the IP’s behaviour – ‘playing’ sick to prevent worse things happening in the family, such as a total family breakdown.

Examples

  • In a family where the parents need to assert themselves as powerful figures and caretakers, often due to their own insecurities, they may designate one or more of their children as being inadequate, unconsciously assigning to the child the role of someone who cannot cope by themselves. For example, the child may exhibit some irrational problem requiring the constant care and attention of the parents.
  • In Dibs, an account of a child therapy, Virginia Axline considered that perhaps the parents, “quite unconsciously…chose to see Dibs as a mental defective rather than as an intensified personification of their own emotional and social inadequacy”.
  • Gregory Bateson considered sometimes “the identified patient sacrifices himself to maintain the sacred illusion that what the parent says makes sense”, and that “the identified patient exhibits behaviour which is almost a caricature of that loss of identity which is characteristic of all the family members.”

Criticism

Extending the original concept of the identified patient, the anti-psychiatry movement went on to argue it is the family who is chiefly mad, rather than the individual the family identifies as ‘sick’ – positing also that the latter might in fact be the least disturbed member of the family nexus.

Literary and Biographical

  • In the play The Family Reunion, T.S. Eliot writes of the protagonist: “It is possible You are the consciousness of your unhappy family, Its bird sent flying through the purgatorial flame”.
  • Carl Jung, who viewed individual neurosis as often deriving from whole family or social groups, considered himself a case in point: “I feel very strongly I am under the influence of things or questions left incomplete and unanswered by my parents and grandparents and more distant ancestors…an impersonal karma within a family, which is passed on from parents to children”.

What is Harm Reduction?

Published on by Andrew MarshallLeave a comment

Introduction

Harm reduction, or harm minimisation, refers to a range of public health policies designed to lessen the negative social and/or physical consequences associated with various human behaviours, both legal and illegal. Harm reduction is used to decrease negative consequences of recreational drug use and sexual activity without requiring abstinence, recognising that those unable or unwilling to stop can still make positive change to protect themselves and others.

Harm reduction is most commonly applied to approaches that reduce adverse consequences from illicit drug use, and harm reduction programmes now operate across a range of services and in different regions of the world. As of 2020, some 86 countries had one or more programs using a harm reduction approach to substance use, primarily aimed at reducing blood-borne infections resulting from use of contaminated injecting equipment.

Needle-exchange programmes reduce the likelihood of people who use heroin and other substances sharing the syringes and using them more than once. Syringe-sharing often leads to the spread of infections such as HIV or hepatitis C, which can easily spread from person to person through the reuse of syringes contaminated with infected blood. Needle and syringe programmes (NSP) and Opioid Agonist Therapy (OAT) outlets in some settings offer basic primary health care. Supervised injection sites are legally sanctioned, medically supervised facilities designed to provide a safe, hygienic, and stress-free environment for people who use substances. The facilities provide sterile injection equipment, information about substances and basic health care, treatment referrals, and access to medical staff.

Opioid agonist therapy (OAT) is the medical procedure of using a harm-reducing opioid that produces significantly less euphoria, such as methadone or buprenorphine to reduce opioid cravings in people who use illegal opioid, such as heroin; buprenorphine and methadone are taken under medical supervision. Another approach is Heroin assisted treatment, in which medical prescriptions for pharmaceutical heroin (diacetylmorphine) are provided to heroin-dependent people.

Media campaigns inform drivers of the dangers of driving drunk. Most people who recreationally consume alcohol are now aware of these dangers and safe ride techniques like ‘designated drivers’ and free taxicab programmes are reducing the number of drunk-driving accidents. Many schools now provide safer sex education to teen and pre-teen students, who may engage in sexual activity. Since some adolescents are going to have sex, a harm-reductionist approach supports a sexual education which emphasizes the use of protective devices like condoms and dental dams to protect against unwanted pregnancy and the transmission of STIs. Since 1999 some countries have legalised prostitution, such as Germany (2002) and New Zealand (2003).

Many street-level harm-reduction strategies have succeeded in reducing HIV transmission in people who inject substances and sex-workers. HIV education, HIV testing, condom use, and safer-sex negotiation greatly decreases the risk of acquiring and transmitting the HIV virus.

Substance Use

In the case of recreational substance use, harm reduction is put forward as a useful perspective alongside the more conventional approaches of demand and supply reduction. Many advocates argue that prohibitionist laws criminalise people for suffering from a disease and cause harm; for example, by obliging people who use substances to obtain substances of unknown purity from unreliable criminal sources at high prices, thereby increasing the risk of overdose and death. The website Erowid.org collects and publishes information and first-hand experience reports about all kinds of substances to educate people who use or may use substances.

While the vast majority of harm reduction initiatives are educational campaigns or facilities that aim to reduce substance-related harm, a unique social enterprise was launched in Denmark in September 2013 to reduce the financial burden of illicit substance use for people with a drug dependence. Michael Lodberg Olsen, who was previously involved with the establishment of a substance consumption facility in Denmark, announced the founding of the Illegal magazine that will be sold by people who use substances in Copenhagen and the district of Vesterbro, who will be able to direct the profits from sales towards drug procurement. Olsen explained: “No one has solved the problem of drug addiction, so is it not better that people find the money to buy their drugs this way than through crime and prostitution?”

Substances

Depressants (Alcohol)

Traditionally, homeless shelters ban alcohol. In 1997, as the result of an inquest into the deaths of two people experiencing homelessness who recreationally used alcohol two years earlier, Toronto’s Seaton House became the first homeless shelter in Canada to operate a “wet shelter” on a “managed alcohol” principle in which clients are served a glass of wine once an hour unless staff determine that they are too inebriated to continue. Previously, people experiencing homelessness who consumed excessive amounts of alcohol opted to stay on the streets often seeking alcohol from unsafe sources such as mouthwash, rubbing alcohol or industrial products which, in turn, resulted in frequent use of emergency medical facilities. The programme has been duplicated in other Canadian cities, and a study of Ottawa’s “wet shelter” found that emergency room visit and police encounters by clients were cut by half. The study, published in the Canadian Medical Association Journal in 2006, found that serving people experiencing long-term homelessness and who consume excessive amounts of alcohol controlled doses of alcohol also reduced their overall alcohol consumption. Researchers found that programme participants cut their alcohol use from an average of 46 drinks a day when they entered the programme to an average of 8 drinks and that their visits to emergency rooms dropped from 13.5 to an average of 8 per month, while encounters with the police fall from 18.1 to an average of 8.8.

Downtown Emergency Service Centre (DESC), in Seattle, Washington, operates several Housing First programmes which utilize the harm reduction model. University of Washington researchers, partnering with DESC, found that providing housing and support services for homeless alcoholics costs taxpayers less than leaving them on the street, where taxpayer money goes towards police and emergency health care. Results of the study funded by the Substance Abuse Policy Research Program (SAPRP) of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation appeared in the Journal of the American Medical Association in April 2009. This first controlled assessment in the US of the effectiveness of Housing First, specifically targeting chronically homeless alcoholics, showed that the programme saved taxpayers more than $4 million over the first year of operation. During the first six months, the study reported an average cost-savings of 53% (even after considering the cost of administering the housing’s 95 residents) – nearly $2,500 per month per person in health and social services, compared to the per month costs of a wait-list control group of 39 homeless people. Further, despite the fact residents are not required to be abstinent or in treatment for alcohol use, stable housing also results in reduced drinking among people experiencing homelessness who recreationally use alcohol.

A high amount of media coverage exists informing people of the dangers of driving drunk. Most people who recreationally consume alcohol are now aware of these dangers and safe ride techniques like ‘designated drivers’ and free taxicab programmes are reducing the number of drunk-driving accidents. Many cities have free-ride-home programmes during holidays involving high amounts of alcohol use, and some bars and clubs will provide a visibly drunk patron with a free cab ride.

In New South Wales groups of licensees have formed local liquor accords and collectively developed, implemented and promoted a range of harm minimisation programmes including the aforementioned ‘designated driver’ and ‘late night patron transport’ schemes. Many of the transport schemes are free of charge to patrons, to encourage them to avoid drink-driving and at the same time reduce the impact of noisy patrons loitering around late night venues.

Moderation Management is a programme which helps drinkers to cut back on their consumption of alcohol by encouraging safe drinking behaviour.

The HAMS Harm Reduction Network is a programme which encourages any positive change with regard to the use of alcohol or other mood altering substances. HAMS encourages goals of safer drinking, reduced drinking, moderate drinking, or abstinence. The choice of the goal is up to the individual.

Harm reduction in alcohol dependency could be instituted by use of naltrexone.

Opioids (Heroin Maintenance Programmes, HAT)

Providing medical prescriptions for pharmaceutical heroin (diacetylmorphine) to heroin-dependent people has been employed in some countries to address problems associated with the illicit use of the drug, as potential benefits exist for the individual and broader society. Evidence has indicated that this form of treatment can greatly improve the health and social circumstances of participants, while also reducing costs incurred by criminalisation, incarceration and health interventions.

In Switzerland, heroin assisted treatment is an established programme of the national health system. Several dozen centres exist throughout the country and heroin-dependent people can administer heroin in a controlled environment at these locations. The Swiss heroin maintenance programme is generally regarded as a successful and valuable component of the country’s overall approach to minimising the harms caused by illicit drug use. In a 2008 national referendum, a majority of 68% voted in favour of continuing the Swiss programme.

The Netherlands has studied medically supervised heroin maintenance. A German study of long-term heroin addicts demonstrated that diamorphine was significantly more effective than methadone in keeping patients in treatment and in improving their health and social situation. Many participants were able to find employment, some even started a family after years of homelessness and delinquency. Since then, treatment had continued in the cities that participated in the pilot study, until heroin maintenance was permanently included into the national health system in May 2009.

A heroin maintenance programme has existed in the United Kingdom (UK) since the 1920s, as drug addiction was seen as an individual health problem. Addiction to opiates was rare in the 1920s and was mostly limited to either middle-class people who had easy access due to their profession, or people who had become addicted as a side effect of medical treatment. In the 1950s and 1960s a small number of doctors contributed to an alarming increase in the number of drug-addicted people in the UK through excessive prescribing – the UK switched to more restrictive drug legislation as a result. However, the British government is again moving towards a consideration of heroin prescription as a legitimate component of the National Health Service (NHS). Evidence has clearly shown that methadone maintenance is not appropriate for all opioid-dependent people and that heroin is a viable maintenance drug that has shown equal or better rates of success.

A committee appointed by the Norwegian government completed an evaluation of research reports on heroin maintenance treatment that were available internationally. In 2011 the committee concluded that the presence of numerous uncertainties and knowledge gaps regarding the effects of heroin treatment meant that it could not recommend the introduction of heroin maintenance treatment in Norway.

The first, and only, North American heroin maintenance project is being run in Vancouver, B.C. and Montreal, Quebec. Currently, over 80 long-term heroin addicts who have not been helped by available treatment options are taking part in the North American Opiate Medication Initiative (NAOMI) trials. However, critics have alleged that the control group gets unsustainably low doses of methadone, making them prone to fail and thus rigging the results in favour of heroin maintenance.

Critics of heroin maintenance programmes object to the high costs of providing heroin to people who use it. The British heroin study cost the British government £15,000 per participant per year, roughly equivalent to average person who uses heroin’s expense of £15,600 per year. Drug Free Australia contrast these ongoing maintenance costs with Sweden’s investment in, and commitment to, a drug-free society where a policy of compulsory rehabilitation of drug addicts is integral, which has yielded the one of the lowest reported illicit drug use levels in the developed world, a model in which successfully rehabilitated people who use substances present no further maintenance costs to their community, as well as reduced ongoing health care costs.

A substantial part of the money for buying heroin is obtained through criminal activities, such as robbery or drug dealing. King’s Health Partners notes that the cost of providing free heroin for a year is about one-third of the cost of placing the person in prison for a year.

Opioids (Naloxone Distribution)

Naloxone is a drug used to counter an overdose from the effect of opioids; for example, a heroin or morphine overdose. Naloxone displaces the opioid molecules from the brain’s receptors and reverses the respiratory depression caused by an overdose within two to eight minutes. The World Health Organisation (WHO) includes naloxone on their “List of Essential Medicines”, and recommends its availability and utilisation for the reversal of opioid overdoses.

Formal programmes in which the opioid inverse agonist drug naloxone is distributed have been trialled and implemented. Established programmes distribute naloxone, as per WHO’s minimum standards, to people who use substances and their peers, family members, police, prisons, and others. These treatment programmes and harm reduction centres operate in Afghanistan, Australia, Canada, China, Germany, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Norway, Russia, Spain, Tajikistan, the United Kingdom (UK), the United States (US), Vietnam, India, Thailand, Kyrgyzstan, Denmark and Estonia.

Opioids (Opioid Agonist Therapy, OAT)

Opioid agonist therapy (OAT), or opioid substitution therapy (OST), uses prescription of legal, prescribed opioids, often long-acting, to diminish injection of illegal opioids and associated risk of infection or overdose. Methadone or buprenorphine are the most commonly used medicines, with methadone generally taken daily and buprenorphine available both in daily doses or long-acting implantable or injectable formulations used for a week, month or six-month period. Oral/sublingual formulations of buprenorphine incorporate the opioid antagonist naloxone to prevent people from crushing the tablets and injecting them.

In some countries, such as Switzerland, Austria, and Slovenia, patients are treated with slow-release morphine when methadone is deemed inappropriate due to the individual’s circumstances. In Germany, dihydrocodeine has been used off-label in OAT for many years, however it is no longer frequently prescribed for this purpose. Extended-release dihydrocodeine is again in current use in Austria for this reason. Research into the usefulness of piritramide, extended-release hydromorphone (including polymer implants lasting up to 90 days), dihydroetorphine and other substances for OAT is at various stages in a number of countries. In 2020 in Vancouver, Canada, health authorities began vending machine dispensing of hydromorphone tablets as a response to elevated rates of fatal overdose from street drugs contaminated with fentanyl and fentanyl analogues.

The driving principle behind OAT is the programme’s capacity to facilitate a resumption of stability in the person’s life, while they experience reduced symptoms of withdrawal symptoms and less intense drug cravings; however, a strong euphoric effect is not experienced as a result of the treatment drug. In some countries (not the US, UK, Canada, or Australia), regulations enforce a limited time period for people on OAT programmes that conclude when a stable economic and psychosocial situation is achieved. (Patients suffering from HIV/AIDS or Hepatitis C are usually excluded from this requirement.) In practice, 40-65% of patients maintain complete abstinence from opioids while receiving OAT, and 70-95% are able to reduce their use significantly, while experiencing a concurrent elimination or reduction in medical (improper diluents, non-sterile injecting equipment), psychosocial (mental health, relationships), and legal (arrest and imprisonment) issues that can arise from the use of illicit opioids.

Opioids (Opioid Substitution Therapy, OST)

NSP and opioid substitution therapy (OST) outlets in some settings also offer basic primary health care. These are known as ‘targeted primary health care outlet’- as these outlets primarily target people who inject drugs and/or ‘low-threshold health care outlet’- as these reduce common barriers clients often face when they try to access health care from the conventional health care outlets. For accessing sterile injecting equipment clients frequently visit NSP outlets, and for receiving pharmacotherapy (e.g. methadone, buprenorphine) they visit OST clinics; these frequent visits are used opportunistically to offer much needed health care. These targeted outlets have the potential to mitigate clients’ perceived barriers to access to healthcare delivered in traditional settings. The provision of accessible, acceptable and opportunistic services which are responsive to the needs of this population is valuable, facilitating a reduced reliance on inappropriate and cost-ineffective emergency department care.

Opioids (Psychedelics)

The Zendo Project conducted by the Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies uses principles from psychedelic therapy to provide safe places and emotional support for people having difficult experiences on psychedelic drugs at select festivals such as Burning Man, Boom Festival, and Lightning in a Bottle without medical or law enforcement intervention.

Substances such as MDMA (commonly sold by the slang names “ecstasy” and “molly”) are often adulterated. One harm reduction approach is drug checking, where people intending to use drugs can have their substances tested for content and purity so that they can then make more informed decisions about safer consumption. European organisations have offered drug checking services since 1992 and these services now operate in over twenty countries. As an example, the non-profit organization DanceSafe offers on-site testing of the contents of pills and powders at various electronic music events around the US. They also sell kits for people who use substances to test the contents of the substances themselves. PillReports.com invites people who use ecstasy to send samples of substances for laboratory testing and publishes the results online.

Opioids (Cannabis)

Specific harms associated with cannabis include increased accident-rate while driving under intoxication, dependence, psychosis, detrimental psychosocial outcomes for adolescents who use substances, and respiratory disease. Some safer cannabis usage campaigns including the UKCIA (United Kingdom Cannabis Internet Activists) encourage methods of consumption shown to cause less physical damage to a person’s body, including oral (eating) consumption, vaporisation, the usage of bongs which cool and to some extent filters the smoke, and smoking the cannabis without mixing it with tobacco.

The fact that cannabis possession carries prison sentences in most developed countries is also pointed out as a problem by European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA), as the consequences of a conviction for otherwise law-abiding people who use substances arguably is more harmful than any harm from the substance itself. For example, by adversely affecting employment opportunities, impacting civil rights, and straining personal relationships. Some people like Ethan Nadelmann of the Drug Policy Alliance have suggested that organized marijuana legalisation would encourage safe use and reveal the factual adverse effects from exposure to this herb’s individual chemicals.

The way the laws concerning cannabis are enforced is also very selective, even discriminatory. Statistics show that the socially disadvantaged, immigrants and ethnic minorities have significantly higher arrest rates. Drug decriminalisation, such as allowing the possession of small amounts of cannabis and possibly its cultivation for personal use, would alleviate these harms. Where decriminalisation has been implemented, such as in several states in Australia and United States, as well as in Portugal and the Netherlands no, or only very small adverse effects have been shown on population cannabis usage rate. The lack of evidence of increased use indicates that such a policy shift does not have adverse effects on cannabis-related harm while, at the same time, decreasing enforcement costs.

In the last few years certain strains of the cannabis plant with higher concentrations of THC and drug tourism have challenged the former policy in the Netherlands and led to a more restrictive approach; for example, a ban on selling cannabis to tourists in coffeeshops suggested to start late 2011. Sale and possession of cannabis is still illegal in Portugal and possession of cannabis is a federal crime in the United States.

Stimulants (Tobacco)

Tobacco harm reduction describes actions taken to lower the health risks associated with using tobacco, especially combustible forms, without abstaining completely from tobacco and nicotine. Some of these measures include switching to safer (lower tar) cigarettes, switching to snus or dipping tobacco, or using a non-tobacco nicotine delivery systems. In recent years, the growing use of electronic cigarettes for smoking cessation, whose long-term safety remains uncertain, has sparked an ongoing controversy among medical and public health between those who seek to restrict and discourage all use until more is known and those who see them as a useful approach for harm reduction, whose risks are most unlikely to equal those of smoking tobacco. “Their usefulness in tobacco harm reduction as a substitute for tobacco products is unclear, but in an effort to decrease tobacco related death and disease, they have a potential to be part of the strategy.

It is widely acknowledged that discontinuation of all tobacco products confers the greatest lowering of risk. However, there is a considerable population of inveterate smokers who are unable or unwilling to achieve abstinence. Harm reduction may be of substantial benefit to these individuals.

Routes of Administration

Needle Exchange Programmes (NEP)

The use of some illicit drugs can involve hypodermic needles. In some areas (notably in many parts of the US), these are available solely by prescription. Where availability is limited, people who use heroin and other substances frequently share the syringes and use them more than once. As a result, infections such as HIV or hepatitis C can spread from person to person through the reuse of syringes contaminated with infected blood. The principles of harm reduction propose that syringes should be easily available or at least available through a needle and syringe programmes (NSP). Where syringes are provided in sufficient quantities, rates of HIV are much lower than in places where supply is restricted. In many countries people who use substances are supplied equipment free of charge, others require payment or an exchange of dirty needles for clean ones, hence the name.

A 2010 review found insufficient evidence that NSP prevents transmission of the hepatitis C virus, tentative evidence that it prevents transmission of HIV and sufficient evidence that it reduces self-reported injecting risk behaviour. It has been shown in the many evaluations of needle-exchange programmes that in areas where clean syringes are more available, illegal drug use is no higher than in other areas. Needle exchange programmes have reduced HIV incidence by 33% in New Haven and 70% in New York City.

The Melbourne, Australia inner-city suburbs of Richmond and Abbotsford are locations in which the use and dealing of heroin has been concentrated for a protracted time period. Research organisation the Burnet Institute completed the 2013 ‘North Richmond Public Injecting Impact Study’ in collaboration with the Yarra Drug and Health Forum, City of Yarra and North Richmond Community Health Centre and recommended 24-hour access to sterile injecting equipment due to the ongoing “widespread, frequent and highly visible” nature of illicit drug use in the areas. During the period between 2010 and 2012 a four-fold increase in the levels of inappropriately discarded injecting equipment was documented for the two suburbs. In the local government area the City of Yarra, of which Richmond and Abbotsford are parts of, 1550 syringes were collected each month from public syringe disposal bins in 2012. Furthermore, ambulance callouts for heroin overdoses were 1.5 times higher than for other Melbourne areas in the period between 2011 and 2012 (a total of 336 overdoses), and drug-related arrests in North Richmond were also three times higher than the state average. The Burnet Institute’s researchers interviewed health workers, residents and local traders, in addition to observing the drug scene in the most frequented North Richmond public injecting locations.

On 28 May 2013, the Burnet Institute stated in the media that it recommends 24-hour access to sterile injecting equipment in the Melbourne suburb of Footscray after the area’s drug culture continues to grow after more than ten years of intense law enforcement efforts. The institute’s research concluded that public injecting behaviour is frequent in the area and inappropriately discarding injecting paraphernalia has been found in carparks, parks, footpaths and drives. Furthermore, people who inject drugs have broken open syringe disposal bins to reuse discarded injecting equipment.

The British public body, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), introduced a new recommendation in early April 2014 due to an increase in the presentation of the number of young people who inject steroids at UK needle exchanges. NICE previously published needle exchange guidelines in 2009, in which needle and syringe services are not advised for people under the age of 18 years, but the organisation’s director Professor Mike Kelly explained that a “completely different group” of people were presenting at programmes. In the updated guidance, NICE recommended the provision of specialist services for “rapidly increasing numbers of steroid users”, and that needles should be provided to people under the age of 18 – a first for NICE – following reports of 15-year-old steroid injectors seeking to develop their muscles.

Supervised Injection Sites (SIS)

Supervised injection sites (SIS), or Drug consumption rooms (DCR), are legally sanctioned, medically supervised facilities designed to address public nuisance associated with drug use and provide a hygienic and stress-free environment for drug consumers.

The facilities provide sterile injection equipment, information about drugs and basic health care, treatment referrals, and access to medical staff. Some offer counselling, hygienic and other services of use to itinerant and impoverished individuals. Most programmes prohibit the sale or purchase of illegal drugs. Many require identification cards. Some restrict access to local residents and apply other admission criteria, such as they have to be people who inject substances, but generally in Europe they do not exclude people with substance use disorders who consume their substances through other means.

The Netherlands had the first staffed injection room, although they did not operate under explicit legal support until 1996. Instead, the first centre where it was legal to inject drug was in Berne, Switzerland, opened 1986. In 1994, Germany opened its first site. Although, as in the Netherlands they operated in a “gray area”, supported by the local authorities and with consent from the police until the Bundestag provided a legal exemption in 2000.

In Europe, Luxembourg, Spain and Norway have opened facilities after year 2000. As did the two existing facilities outside Europe, with Sydney’s Medically Supervised Injecting Centre (MSIC) established in May 2001 as a trial and Vancouver’s Insite, opened in September 2003. In 2010, after a nine-year trial, the Sydney site was confirmed as a permanent public health facility. As of late 2009 there were a total of 92 professionally supervised injection facilities in 61 cities.

The European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction’s latest systematic review from April 2010 did not find any evidence to support concerns that DCR might “encourage drug use, delay treatment entry or aggravate problems of local drug markets.” Jürgen Rehm and Benedikt Fischer explained that while evidence show that DCR are successful, that “interpretation is limited by the weak designs applied in many evaluations, often represented by the lack of adequate control groups.” Concluding that this “leaves the door open for alternative interpretations of data produced and subsequent ideological debate.”

The EMCDDA review noted that research into the effects of the facilities “faces methodological challenges in taking account of the effects of broader local policy or ecological changes”, still they concluded “that the facilities reach their target population and provide immediate improvements through better hygiene and safety conditions for injectors.” Further that “the availability of safer injecting facilities does not increase levels of drug use or risky patterns of consumption, nor does it result in higher rates of local drug acquisition crime.” While its usage is “associated with self-reported reductions in injecting risk behaviour such as syringe sharing, and in public drug use” and “with increased uptake of detoxification and treatment services.” However, “a lack of studies, as well as methodological problems such as isolating the effect from other interventions or low coverage of the risk population, evidence regarding DCRs – while encouraging – is insufficient for drawing conclusions with regard to their effectiveness in reducing HIV or hepatitis C virus (HCV) incidence.” Concluding with that “there is suggestive evidence from modelling studies that they may contribute to reducing drug-related deaths at a city level where coverage is adequate, the review-level evidence of this effect is still insufficient.”

Critics of this intervention, such as drug prevention advocacy organisations, Drug Free Australia and Real Women of Canada point to the most rigorous evaluations, those of Sydney and Vancouver. Two of the centres, in Sydney, Australia and Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada cost $2.7 million and $3 million per annum to operate respectively, yet Canadian mathematical modelling, where there was caution about validity, indicated just one life saved from fatal overdose per annum for Vancouver, while the Drug Free Australia analysis demonstrates the Sydney facility statistically takes more than a year to save one life. The Expert Advisory Committee of the Canadian Government studied claims by journal studies for reduced HIV transmission by Insite but “were not convinced that these assumptions were entirely valid.” The Sydney facility showed no improvement in public injecting and discarded needles beyond improvements caused by a coinciding heroin drought, while the Vancouver facility had an observable impact. Drug dealing and loitering around the facilities were evident in the Sydney evaluation, but not evident for the Vancouver facility.

Sex

Safer Sex Programmes

Many schools now provide safer sex education to teen and pre-teen students, who may engage in sexual activity. Since some adolescents are going to have sex, a harm-reductionist approach supports a sexual education which emphasizes the use of protective devices like condoms and dental dams to protect against unwanted pregnancy and the transmission of STIs. This runs contrary to abstinence-only sex education, which teaches that educating children about sex can encourage them to engage in it.

These programmes have been found to decrease risky sexual behaviour and prevent sexually transmitted diseases. They also reduce rates of unwanted pregnancies. Abstinence only programmes do not appear to affect HIV risks in developed countries with no evidence available for other areas.

Legalised Prostitution

Since 1999 some countries have legalised prostitution, such as Germany (2002) and New Zealand (2003). However, in most countries the practice is prohibited. Gathering accurate statistics on prostitution and human trafficking is extremely difficult. This has resulted in proponents of legalisation claiming that it reduces organised crime rates while opponents claim exactly the converse. The Dutch prostitution policy, which is one of the most liberal in the world, has gone back and forth on the issue several times. In the period leading up to 2015 up to a third of officially sanctioned work places had been closed down again after reports of human trafficking. Prostitutes themselves are generally opposed to what they see as “theft of their livelihood”.

Sex Work and HIV

Despite the depth of knowledge of HIV/AIDS, rapid transmission has occurred globally in sex workers. The relationship between these two variables greatly increases the risk of transmission among these populations, and also to anyone associated with them, such as their sexual partners, their children, and eventually the population at large.

Many street-level harm-reduction strategies have succeeded in reducing HIV transmission in injecting drug users and sex-workers. HIV education, HIV testing, condom use, and safer-sex negotiation greatly decreases the risk to the disease. Peer education as a harm reduction strategy has especially reduced the risk of HIV infection, such as in Chad, where this method was the most cost-effective per infection prevented.

The threat of criminal repercussions marginalises sex-workers and people who inject substances, often resulting in high-risk behaviour, increasing the rate of overdose, infectious disease transmission, and violence.

Decriminalisation as a harm-reduction strategy gives the ability to treat substance use disorder solely as a public health issue rather than a criminal activity. This enables other harm-reduction strategies to be employed, which results in a lower incidence of HIV infection.

One of the first harm reduction models was called the “Mersey Harm Reduction Model ” in 1980s Liverpool, and the success of utilising outreach workers, distribution of education, and providing clean equipment to drug users was shown in the fact that an HIV epidemic did not happen in Mersey. This catapulted the model into International conferences on drug related harm in the midst of the AIDS epidemic, making it an internationally recognized model of preventing HIV/AIDS specifically within injecting drug user populations. There was much connection between San Francisco (an epicentre of HIV/AIDS advocacy in the US) and Liverpool. Harm reduction slowly began to transform the action around drug use from an individualistic approach that mainstream US healthcare often relies on, towards a more holistic population-based approach.

The AIDS epidemic, which began in the 80s and peaked in 1995, further complicated the politicisation of drug users and drug use in the US. The implementation of harm reduction faced much resistance within the US due to the demonisation of particular drugs associated with stigmatised groups, such as sex workers and drug-injecting users.

Decriminalisation

Decriminalisation as a harm-reduction strategy gives the ability to treat substance use disorder solely as a public health issue rather than a criminal activity. This enables other harm-reduction strategies to be employed, which results in a lower incidence of HIV infection.

Psychiatric Medications

With the growing concern about psychiatric medication adverse effects and long-term dependency, peer-run mental health groups Freedom Centre and The Icarus Project published the Harm Reduction Guide to Coming Off Psychiatric Drugs. The self-help guide provides patients with information to help assess risks and benefits, and to prepare to come off, reduce, or continue medications when their physicians are unfamiliar with or unable to provide this guidance. The guide is in circulation among mental health consumer groups and has been translated into ten languages.

Criticism

Critics, such as Drug Free America Foundation and other members of network International Task Force on Strategic Drug Policy, state that a risk posed by harm reduction is by creating the perception that certain behaviours can be partaken of safely, such as illicit drug use, that it may lead to an increase in that behaviour by people who would otherwise be deterred. The signatories of the drug prohibitionist network International Task Force on Strategic Drug Policy stated that they oppose drug use harm reduction “…strategies as endpoints that promote the false notion that there are safe or responsible ways to use drugs. That is, strategies in which the primary goal is to enable drug users to maintain addictive, destructive, and compulsive behaviour by misleading users about some drug risks while ignoring others.”

In 2008, the World Federation Against Drugs stated that while “…some organisations and local governments actively advocate the legalisation of drugs and promote policies such as “harm reduction” that accept drug use and do not help people who use substances to become free from substance use. This undermines the international efforts to limit the supply of and demand for drugs.” The Federation states that harm reduction efforts often end up being “drug legalisation or other inappropriate relaxation efforts, a policy approach that violates the UN Conventions.”

Critics furthermore reject harm reduction measures for allegedly trying to establish certain forms of drug use as acceptable in society. The Drug Prevention Network of Canada states that harm reduction has “…come to represent a philosophy in which illicit substance use is seen as largely unpreventable, and increasingly, as a feasible and acceptable lifestyle as long as use is not ‘problematic'”, an approach which can increase “acceptance of drug use into the mainstream of society”. They say harm reduction “…sends the wrong message to…children and youth” about drug use. In 2008, the Declaration of World Forum Against Drugs criticized harm reduction policies that “…accept drug use and do not help drug users to become free from drug abuse”, which the group say undermines “…efforts to limit the supply of and demand for drugs.” They state that harm reduction should not lead to less efforts to reduce drug demand.

Pope Benedict XVI criticised harm reduction policies with regards to HIV/AIDS, saying that it was “a tragedy that cannot be overcome by money alone, that cannot be overcome through the distribution of condoms, which even aggravates the problems”. This position was in turn widely criticised for misrepresenting and oversimplifying the role of condoms in preventing infections.

Neil Hunt’s article entitled “A review of the evidence-base for harm reduction approaches to drug use” examines the criticisms of harm reduction, which include claims that it is not effective; that it prevents addicts from “hitting a rock bottom” thus trapping them in addiction; that it encourages drug use; that harm reduction is a Trojan horse strategy for “drug law reform”, such as drug legalisation.

What is the Age of Legal Capacity (Scotland) Act 1991?

Published on by Andrew Marshall1 Comment

Introduction

The Age of Legal Capacity (Scotland) Act 1991 (c.50) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom applicable only in Scotland which replaced the pre-existing rule of pupillage and minority with a simpler rule that a person has full legal capacity at the age of 16.

Refer to Gillick Competence.

Background

Under the previous Scots law (derived from Roman law), a child to the age of 12 if female, or 14 if male, had legal status of “pupil” and was under legal control of an adult (usually parent or parents) deemed “tutor”. From that age until the age of majority the child had legal status of a “minor”, and might have a responsible adult deemed “curator” or have no responsible adult (being referred to as “fors familiated”). The Scottish age of majority was originally 21 until reduced to 18 by the Age of Majority (Scotland) Act 1969. Pupils lacked any capacity to enter into legal contracts. Minors had capacity to enter into contracts, which included the capacity to make a will, but subject to rights to have these reduced by a court in certain circumstances, and sometimes requiring their curators consent. The rules as to when contracts did or did not require consent, and which were potentially reducible by court were complex. The age to enter into marriage was originally the age of minority, but this was raised to 16 years by the Age of Marriage Act 1929, and confirmed in the Marriage (Scotland) Act 1977.

Under the Age Legal Capacity Scotland Act 1991 the old rules and terms were replaced. The basic rule under the replacement regime is that under 16s have no legal capacity. This is qualified by section 2 which provides that under 16s can:

  1. Enter into a contract of a kind commonly entered into by persons of their age group, and on terms which are not unreasonable; and
  2. From age 12, make a Will, and are deemed to have capacity to instruct a lawyer to act on their behalf.
  3. The right to consent to an adoption was also subsequently inserted into this section by the Children (Scotland) Act 1995.

In all other cases the legal Guardian of the under 16 has legal right to deal with all contractual and consent matters on the child’s behalf.

From age 16 a person has full legal capacity to enter into any form of agreement. This subject to protection for younger persons by means of a right (under section 3) while under the age of 21, to have a contract made between the ages of 16 and 18 set aside as a “prejudicial transaction”. The test is whether a reasonably prudent adult would not have entered into such a contract, and the person has been prejudiced by entering into that contract. Under section 4 a contract may be approved in advance by a court, in which case it cannot later be reduced. Contracts entered into in the course of the young person’s business, or where they misrepresented their age also cannot be reduced.

There is also specific provision for persons having their birthday on 29 February; under section 6 they are treated as having their birthday on 01 March in every non-leap year for purposes of calculating their age.

What is Gillick Competence?

Published on by Andrew Marshall5 Comments

Introduction

Gillick competence is a term originating in England and Wales and is used in medical law to decide whether a child (under 16 years of age) is able to consent to their own medical treatment, without the need for parental permission or knowledge.

The standard is based on the 1985 judicial decision of the House of Lords with respect to a case of the contraception advice given by an NHS doctor in Gillick v West Norfolk and Wisbech Area Health Authority. The case is binding in England and Wales, and has been adopted to varying extents in Australia, Canada, and New Zealand. Similar provision is made in Scotland by the Age of Legal Capacity (Scotland) Act 1991. In Northern Ireland, although separate legislation applies, the then Department of Health and Social Services stated that there was no reason to suppose that the House of Lords’ decision would not be followed by the Northern Ireland courts.

The Gillick Decision

Gillick’s case involved a health departmental circular advising doctors on the contraception of minors (for this purpose, under 16s). The circular stated that the prescription of contraception was a matter for the doctor’s discretion and that they could be prescribed to under-16s without parental consent. This matter was litigated because an activist, Victoria Gillick, ran an active campaign against the policy. Gillick sought a declaration that prescribing contraception was illegal because the doctor would commit an offence of encouraging sex with a minor and that it would be treatment without consent as consent vested in the parent; she was unsuccessful before the High Court of Justice, but succeeded in the Court of Appeal.

The issue before the House of Lords was only whether the minor involved could give consent. “Consent” here was considered in the broad sense of consent to battery or assault: in the absence of patient consent to treatment, a doctor, even if well-intentioned, might be sued/charged.

The House of Lords focused on the issue of consent rather than a notion of ‘parental rights’ or parental power. In fact, the court held that ‘parental rights’ did not exist, other than to safeguard the best interests of a minor. The majority held that in some circumstances a minor could consent to treatment, and that in these circumstances a parent had no power to veto treatment.

Lord Scarman and Lord Fraser proposed slightly different tests (Lord Bridge agreed with both). Lord Scarman’s test is generally considered to be the test of ‘Gillick competency’. He required that a child could consent if he or she fully understood the medical treatment that is proposed:

As a matter of law the parental right to determine whether or not their minor child below the age of sixteen will have medical treatment terminates if and when the child achieves sufficient understanding and intelligence to understand fully what is proposed. Lord Scarman.

The ruling holds particularly significant implications for the legal rights of minor children in England in that it is broader in scope than merely medical consent. It lays down that the authority of parents to make decisions for their minor children is not absolute, but diminishes with the child’s evolving maturity. The result of Gillick is that in England today, except in situations that are regulated otherwise by law, the legal right to make a decision on any particular matter concerning the child shifts from the parent to the child when the child reaches sufficient maturity to be capable of making up his or her own mind on the matter requiring decision.

Subsequent Developments

A child who is deemed “Gillick competent” is able to prevent their parents viewing their medical records. As such, medical staff will not make a disclosure of medical records of a child who is deemed “Gillick competent” unless consent is manifest.

In most jurisdictions the parent of an emancipated minor does not have the ability to consent to therapy, regardless of the Gillick test. Typical positions of emancipation arise when the minor is married (R v D [1984] AC 778, 791) or in the military.

The nature of the standard remains uncertain. The courts have so far declined invitations to define rigidly “Gillick competence” and the individual doctor is free to make a decision, consulting peers if this may be helpful, as to whether that child is “Gillick competent”.

As of May 2016, it appeared to Funston and Howard that some recent legislation worked explicitly to restrict the ability of Gillick competent children to consent to medical treatment outside of clinical settings. For example, parental consent is required for the treatment of children with asthma using standby salbutamol inhalers in schools. These restrictions have yet to be tested in court.

R and W

The decisions In re R (1991) and Re W (1992) (especially Lord Donaldson) contradict the Gillick decision somewhat. From these, and subsequent cases, it is suggested that although the parental right to veto treatment ends, parental powers do not “terminate” as suggested by Lord Scarman in Gillick. However, these are only obiter statements and were made by a lower court; therefore, they are not legally binding. However, the parens patriae jurisdiction of the court remains available allowing a court order to force treatment against a child’s (and parent’s) wishes.

Axon

In a 2006 judicial review, R (on the application of Axon) v Secretary of State for Health, the High Court affirmed Gillick in allowing for medical confidentiality for teenagers seeking an abortion. The court rejected a claim that not granting parents a “right to know” whether their child had sought an abortion, birth control or contraception breached Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The Axon case set out a list of criteria that a doctor must meet when deciding whether to provide treatment to an under-16 child without informing their parents: they must be convinced that they can understand all aspects of the advice, that the patient’s physical or mental health is likely to suffer without medical advice, that it is in the best interests of the patient to provide medical advice, that (in provision of contraception) they are likely to have sex whether contraception is provided or not, and that they have made an effort to convince the young person to disclose the information to their parents.

2020s

In late 2020, Bell v Tavistock considered whether under-16s with gender dysphoria could be Gillick competent to consent to receiving puberty blockers. Due to the unique specifics of that treatment, the High Court concluded that in such cases the answer will almost always be ‘no’, a priori. In late 2021, the Court of Appeal overturned Bell v Tavistock, as the clinic’s policies and practices had not been found to be unlawful.

In early September 2021, guidance circulated to NHS trusts stated that most 12- to 15-year-olds should be deemed “Gillick competent to provide [their] own consent” to be vaccinated against COVID-19, despite the JCVI “fail[ing] to recommend Covid-19 vaccines for healthy 12- to 15-year-olds”. Campaigner Molly Kingsley, who had co-founded the campaign group UsForThem over the issue, warned that “Were vaccination of children to happen on school premises without fully respecting the need for parental consent it would really prejudice parents’ trust in schools.” Epidemiologist and SAGE member John Edmunds said that “if we allow infection just to run through the population, that’s a lot of children who will be infected and that will be a lot of disruption to schools in the coming months.

Australian Law

The Australian High Court gave specific and strong approval for the Gillick decision in “Marion’s Case”, Secretary of the Department of Health and Community Services v JWB and SMB (1992) 175 CLR 189. The Gillick competence doctrine is part of Australian case law (see, e.g., DoCS v Y [1999] NSWSC 644).

There is no express authority in Australia on In re R and Re W, so whether a parent’s right terminates is unclear. This lack of authority reflects that the reported cases have all involved minors who have been found to be incompetent, and that Australian courts will make decisions in the parens patriae jurisdiction regardless of Gillick competence.

In South Australia and New South Wales legislation clarifies the common law, establishing a Gillick-esque standard of competence but preserving concurrent consent between parent and child for the ages 14-16.

Confusion regarding Gillick Competence

On 21 May 2009, confusion arose between Gillick competence, which identifies under-16s with the capacity to consent to their own treatment, and the Fraser guidelines, which are concerned only with contraception and focus on the desirability of parental involvement and the risks of unprotected sex in that area.

A persistent rumour arose that Victoria Gillick disliked having her name associated with the assessment of children’s capacity, but an editorial in the BMJ from 2006 claimed that Gillick said that she “has never suggested to anyone, publicly or privately, that [she] disliked being associated with the term ‘Gillick competent'”.

Fraser Guidelines

It is lawful for doctors to provide contraceptive advice and treatment without parental consent providing certain criteria are met. These criteria, known as the Fraser guidelines, were laid down by Lord Fraser in the Gillick decision and require the professional to be satisfied that:

  • The young person will understand the professional’s advice;
  • The young person cannot be persuaded to inform their parents;
  • The young person is likely to begin, or to continue having, sexual intercourse with or without contraceptive treatment;
  • Unless the young person receives contraceptive treatment, their physical or mental health, or both, are likely to suffer; and
  • The young person’s best interests require them to receive contraceptive advice or treatment with or without parental consent.

Although these criteria specifically refer to contraception, the principles are deemed to apply to other treatments, including abortion. Although the judgment in the House of Lords referred specifically to doctors, it is considered by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG) to apply to other health professionals, “including general practitioners, gynaecologists, nurses, and practitioners in community contraceptive clinics, sexual health clinics and hospital services”. It may also be interpreted as covering youth workers and health promotion workers who may be giving contraceptive advice and condoms to young people under 16, but this has not been tested in court.

If a person under the age of 18 refuses to consent to treatment, it is possible in some cases for their parents or the courts to overrule their decision. However, this right can be exercised only on the basis that the welfare of the young person is paramount. In this context, welfare does not simply mean their physical health. The psychological effect of having the decision overruled would have to be taken into account and would normally be an option only when the young person was thought likely to suffer “grave and irreversible mental or physical harm”. Usually, when a parent wants to overrule a young person’s decision to refuse treatment, health professionals will apply to the courts for a final decision.

An interesting aside to the Fraser guidelines is that many[weasel words] regard Lord Scarman’s judgment as the leading judgement in the case, but because Lord Fraser’s judgement was shorter and set out in more specific terms – and in that sense more accessible to health and welfare professionals – it is his judgement that has been reproduced as containing the core principles, as for example cited in the RCOG circular.

What is Group Emotion?

Published on by Andrew MarshallLeave a comment

Introduction

Group emotion refers to the moods, emotions and dispositional affects of a group of people. It can be seen as either an emotional entity influencing individual members’ emotional states (top down) or the sum of the individuals’ emotional states (bottom up).

Top Down Approach

This view sees the group’s dynamic processes as responsible for an elusive feeling state which influences the members’ feelings and behaviour. This view, that groups have an existence as entities beyond the characters that comprise them, has several angles.

Effects on Individuals

One angle of this approach was depicted in early works such as Le Bon’s and Freud’s who reasoned that there is a general influence of a crowd or group which makes the members of the group “feel, think and act” differently than they would have as isolated individuals. The reassurance of belonging to a crowd makes people act more extremely. Also, the intense uniformity of feelings is overwhelming and causes people to be emotionally swept to join the group’s atmosphere. Thus, the effect of the group causes emotions to be exaggerated.

Norms

Another aspect of the group as a whole perspective sees the normative forces a group has on its members’ emotional behaviour such as norms for the amount of feelings’ expression and even which emotions it is best to feel. The group’s norms control which emotions would (or at least should) be displayed at a specific situation according to the group’s best interest and goals. The norms help differentiate felt emotions, what the individuals actually feel, from expressed emotions, what they display in the current situation. This perspective has practical implications as shown by researchers. Thus, according to this angle the group causes the emotions to be moderated and controlled.

Binding Force

Another perspective emphasizes the importance of emotional attraction in group settings. It defines group emotion as members’ desire to be together, and finds that emotional ties are a type of glue which holds groups together and influences the group’s cohesiveness and the commitment to the task. This perspective focuses on the positive emotions of liking the other group members and the task at hand.

Indicator

This perspective of the group as a whole approach studies the dynamic development of the group, from its establishment to its disassembly. Along the course the group changes in its interrelationships and interdependence amongst its members. These changes are accompanied by emotional processes which shape the outcome of the group. For instance, the midpoint in a group’s development is characterised by anxiety and anticipation about the capacity of the team to complete its goals, which drives teams to restructure their interaction patterns following the midpoint. Should the group harness these feelings and overcome the crisis stronger, its chances of completing the group’s goals are higher. In other cases, negative emotions towards members of the group or towards the task might jeopardise the group’s existence. This perspective sees the temporal changes of the emotions that govern the group.

Bottom Up

Contrary to the former approach, this approach views group-level emotion as the sum of its individuals’ affective compositions. These affective compositions are actually the emotional features each member brings with them to the group, such as: dispositional affect, mood, acute emotions, emotional intelligence, and sentiments (affective evaluations of the group). The team affective composition approach helps to understand the group emotion and its origins, and how these individual members’ affective predisposition combine to become one common entity. For the purpose of combining these individual characteristics, one can embrace several viewpoints:

Average Mood

Research has shown that by averaging the members’ dispositional affective tone it is possible to predict group-level behaviour such as absenteeism and prosocial behaviour. Also, when the average mood of employees was positive, it was positively related to the team’s performance.

Emotional Variance

Affective-homogenous groups are expected to behave differently from heterogeneous ones. The verdict is yet to be decided as to whether homogeneity is better than heterogeneity. In favour of affective homogeneity stand the notion that familiarity and similarity bring feelings of liking, comfort and positive emotions, and thus presumably better group outcomes and performances. It has long been found that people prefer to be in a group similar to them in many perspectives. A support for the positive effects of homogeneity can be found in a study that examined homogeneity in managers’ positive affectivity (PA) and its influence on several aspects of performance such as satisfaction, cooperation and financial outcome of the organisation. On the other hand, according to the view of opposites being beneficial, affective heterogeneity may lead to more emotional checks and balances which could then lead to better team performance. This was found to be true especially in groups where creativity is needed to complete the task appropriately. Homogeneity might lead to groupthink and hamper performance. It is necessary though for group members in heterogeneous groups to accept and allow one another to enact their different emotional roles.

Emotionally Extreme Members

Even if there is only one member in an otherwise averaged group which is extremely negative (or positive) in effect, that person might influence the affective state of the other members and cause the group to be much more negative (or positive) than would be expected from its mean-level dispositional affect. This mood shift might happen through emotional contagion, in which members are “infected” by others’ emotions, as well as through other processes. Emotional contagion has been observed even in absence of non-verbal cues, for example on online social networks like Facebook and Twitter.

Combining Approaches

The above approaches can be combined in a way that they maintain reciprocal relations. For instance, members bring dispositional affective states and norms for expressing them to the team. These components are then factors determining the creation of group norms, which may in turn alter the moods, feelings and their expression by the members. Thus, the top-down and bottom-up approaches coalesce along the dynamic formation and lifespan of teams.

Empirical Definition

One study compared the reports of team members to reports of outside-observers. It showed that team affect and emotions were observable by and agreed upon by outsiders as well as by members of the team interacting face to face. So, it is possible to identify the group’s affective tone by aggregating self-reports of members of the group, as well as by viewing the group from the outside and looking for emotional gestures, both verbal and nonverbal.

Affecting Group Emotion

Studies show that the leader of the team has an important part in determining the moods of their team’s members. Such that members of a team with a leader in a negative affective state tend to be more negative themselves than members of teams with a leader in a positive mood. However, any member of the group might influence the other members’ emotions. The leader may do so either by way of implicit, automatic, emotional contagion or by explicit, deliberate, emotional influence in order to promote his interests. Other factors that affect the forming of the group’s emotional state are its emotional history, its norms for expressing feelings and the broader organisational norms regarding emotions.

Influence on Performance

The emotional state of the group influences team processes and outcomes. For example, a group in a positive mood displays more coordination between members, yet sometimes the effort they apply is not as high as groups in a negative mood. Another role emotions play in group dynamics and performance is the relation between intra-group task-conflicts and relationship-conflicts. It is assumed that conflicts related to the task can be beneficial for achieving the goal, unless these task-conflicts lead to relationship-conflicts among the team members, in which case the performance is hindered. The traits that decouple task from relationship conflicts are emotional attributes such as emotional intelligence, intragroup relational ties, and norms for reducing or preventing negative emotionality. Hence aspects of group emotion affect the outcome. Other findings are that an increase in positive mood will lead to greater cooperativeness and less group conflict. Also, positive mood results in elevated perceptions of task performance.

Evolutionary-Psychological Perspective

According to the evolutionary psychology approach, group affect has a function of helping communication between members of the group. The emotional state of the group informs its members about factors in the environment. For instance, if everyone is in a bad mood it is necessary to change the conditions, or perhaps work harder to achieve the goal and improve the conditions. Also, shared affect in groups coordinates group activity through fostering group bonds and group loyalty.

Emotional Aperture

Emotional aperture has been defined as the ability or skill to perceive features of group emotions. Examples of features of group emotions include the level of variability of emotions among members (i.e. affective diversity), the proportion of positive or negative emotions, and the modal (i.e. most common) emotion present in a group. The term “emotional aperture” was first defined by the social psychologist, Jeffrey Sanchez-Burks and organisational theorist, Quy Huy. Analogous to adjusting a camera’s aperture setting to increase depth of field, emotional aperture involves adjusting one’s depth of field to bring into focus not solely the emotions of one person but also others scattered across a visual landscape. The difference between perceiving individual-level emotions versus group-level emotions is builds upon the distinction between analytic versus holistic perception.