Why Do Needle Exchanges Keep Getting Shut Down Despite Evidence of Their Effectiveness?
If you believe in a god, you probably also believe He works in mysterious ways. Along those same lines, it’s looking increasingly like human compassion can take many various forms throughout the world. Some of them are surprising — and maybe even a little concerning — at first glance.
But being surprised by a new idea doesn’t mean it’s not a good one, which is why the world needs to have an adult conversation about needle exchanges. Even though a mounting body of evidence indicates needle exchanges can literally save lives, conservative-minded governments throughout the developed and developing worlds are instead putting their foot down, effectively stifling conversation on the topic before it really began.
Let’s start at the beginning and explore what this idea actually entails and why it could turn into a humanitarian victory for everybody involved if we’d only give it a chance.
What Are Needle Exchanges?
At their simplest, needle exchanges are staffed locations in local communities where struggling drug addicts can exchange their drug paraphernalia for clean needles and syringes.
However outlandish it seems, the idea has straightforward and compassionate intentions — as we all work to elevate the conversations about drug abuse stigma, there has to be some interim relief for drug users who cannot kick the habit permanently. We also cannot, in good conscience, allow these individuals to pursue their habit using dirty or secondhand needles.
This is an imperfect measure to help curb some of the worst of the collateral damage associated with drug abuse and addiction. But it is a measure with a strong track record of success. And just as importantly, it could be a stepping stone to a more complete replacement of America’s failed drug “wars” and other antisocial policies in favor of something that works.
How Do We Know Needle Exchanges Work?
The idea would not have come this far unless there was compelling evidence to support it. Although civic leaders, including judges, in American communities frequently force the closure of clean needle exchanges, our own CDC actually hosts information about needle exchanges online, noting that they greatly reduce the number of needles that get discarded in public.
They also help cut down on the spread of hepatitis C, HIV and other infectious and potentially deadly diseases. They do not seem to contribute to additional future drug use. They have also been found successful in connecting people with counseling and other forms of professional addiction or medical treatment.
Academic researchers documented and published all of these successes, and many of their findings are available online. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the World Health Organization have both endorsed their findings. Moreover, clean needle exchanges are a vital part of our response to the ongoing opioid overdose epidemic, which has claimed the lives of over 300,000 Americans since 2000.
Who’s Fighting This?
California was the latest state to turn needle exchanges into a news story. In Orange County, a state judge named Joel Wohlfeil ordered that a program called Orange County Needle Exchange Program, or OCNEP, halt its operations. The program would have opened four syringe exchange locations in the county.
Reacting to the judge’s decision, Alex Smith, a resident of California, revealed that some of the benefits of needle exchanges are far less tangible than others. For many human beings whose lives have taken an unfortunate but unasked-for downturn, establishments such as the four proposed by OCNEP represent nothing less than hope. And if not hope, then at least deliverance from an especially poisonous bigotry.
When Smith went to a CVS in search of clean syringes, still deep in the grip of addiction but also suffering collateral medical complications like bacterial infections and MRSA, and open sores across her body, she described the reception she received like this:
“They took one look at me at CVS, and they turned me away. I felt so humiliated, disgusted. I didn’t know what to do … I heard there was a mobile needle exchange in town. So I went … and there was a girl there. The first thing she did was smile at me and ask me how I was. I don’t know why that had such an impact on me. But it was the first time someone had treated me with dignity and humanity in a very, very long time.”
What you see here, among other things, is the startling contrast between a “social” response to human suffering — and one that serves capital first. What we see too is the beginning of a new kind of optimism for communities that have been neglected and underserved in every possible definition of the terms.
The objections to expanding the availability of needle exchanges are, at the end of the day, understandable. But they’re also entirely off-base. Conservative-minded city officials usually seek the closure of needle exchanges because they’re worried about making “needle litter” worse. And who wouldn’t be? But as we noted briefly above, and which seems to have been confirmed by additional academic research, communities with clean needle programs usually see vastly less needle litter than communities without.
America Lags in the Deployment of Needle Exchanges
According to reporting in The New York Times, there were 333 needle exchanges in operation in the U.S. in 2013. Australia has one-tenth the number of citizens, and the country has more than 3,000.
If you’re wondering what happened to Alex Smith, she works at a company that assists the intellectually disabled. She’s been sober for five years and wants to pursue graduate school.
Would we, now, somehow collectively be better off if she was still on the streets somewhere — or worse? Of course, we would not. The community would be diminished by losing a potential life. It’s a life that, now, shares a measure of the hope she received with another group of people whom society tries hard to forget about.
Few will say it out loud, but the resistance is because people still think junkies deserve their fate, and we shouldn’t be doing anything that makes their plight less desperate until they step into the rehab facility.
I wonder how successful the conversation would be if needle exchanges or safe injection sites were sold as a stop gap until we can get these folks the help they want?
Also, why are syringes only available via Rx?Report
I’m not sure a prescription is required; I think it is just one of those “kept behind the counter” things.Report
Neither Walgreens, CVS, nor Bartells would give me syringes unless I had my Rx with them (back when I had an Rx that needed needles, which was 3 months ago). So perhaps it’s not a legal requirement, but it’s certainly a store policy.Report
It differs by state (See Michael Cain’s post below). But I suspect store policy is the reason more often than not.Report
I have a prescription that uses needles, and the company handles this by having them sent directly to me, prefilled.Report
I’m not sure that it’s “they deserve it” as much as “is there honestly not something else we could spend this money on?”
Which would you rather spend money on: Needle exchanges for heroin addicts or the pothole on Main and 3rd?
Well, the pothole is still there.
Also, why are syringes only available via Rx?
When our sweet little Chumky got diabetes, we put her on insulin and were able to purchase needles and insulin from the Safeway pharmacy. After we ran out of the first box, I got asked to pick up some on the way home and I apologetically told the pharmacist that I didn’t have my prescription with me but I needed needles for the insulin that I had a prescription for in the computer. She told me “oh, you don’t need a prescription for needles.” I expressed surprise (because, seriously, we have to jump through so many dang hoops to get cold medicine that works) and she sadly said “nope, anybody can just buy them.”
So there’s that.Report
Read the comments section of any random needle exchange article (I know, comments sections…) and you will very clearly see the sentiment is “they deserve it”. Yes, it may be financial too… as in, “why are we wasting money on these junkies who chose to use drugs?” i.e., don’t waste money trying to save them because they brought it on themselves.Report
Except that, of course, needle exchanges free up money.
A heroin addict who doesn’t have Hep C isn’t spending about 40 potholes a year worth of ER time just for his Hep C. All for about 1/1000th a year worth of a pothole in needles.Report
Oh, I understand the ounce of prevention/pound of cure calculus.
There’s a lot of utilitarian calculi to be made that gets us to agree that needle exchanges are a good idea.
Only a couple that don’t.
It’s that the couple that don’t make a handful of deontological assumptions that seem to be common and pervasive that is the root of the problem.
And that particular problem is one hell of a gordian knot.Report
Oh, they’re not that quiet about it.
I mean, read any newspaper story where a conservative politician is dogwhistling “damn dirty junkies deserve to die of preventable diseases”, then read the comment section below it – half the comments will be angrily pointing out the dogwhistle, the other half will be enthusiastically and overtly agreeing with it. But nobody is really fooled by it.
I mean, maybe don’t actually read the comment section on any newspaper article about addiction unless your mental health is particularly robust right now. But you know what I mean.
(…) and we shouldn’t be doing anything that makes their plight less desperate until they step into the rehab facility.”
Heck, half the rehab programs seem designed to make their plight desperate after they step in – I can’t recall where I read it, but it was well put – addiction is the only disease where you are likely to be kicked out of treatment if you have symptoms that demonstrate that the diagnosis was accurate.Report
I had to look into it once and it varied by state. Some states require pharmacies to sell w/o a prescription; some states neither forbid nor require non-prescription sales; at that time one or two states still required a prescription. Some states still had syringes on the list of “drug paraphernalia”, more so that they could still charge people when the search for drugs proper came up empty than anything, I think. The prescription-only and drug-paraphernalia laws might get tossed if challenged on the right grounds: I know a guy who does restoration work on clockwork mechanisms who uses medical syringes with very fine needles to apply small amounts of solvents or lubricants in hard-to-reach places.Report
You’ve heard of talk radio? Lots will say it out loudReport
Charleston, WV had a needle exchange, and the mayor and the cops fought so hard against it that it was shut down. They insisted that the homeless were busing in to town on needle exchange day. They insisted that more needles, not fewer, were being found on the streets. They insisted the exchange wasn’t following “best practices”, though they failed to outline what those were. They did a sham investigation and report which was full of misrepresentation and outright falsehoods. They set up “stings” to catch the exchange workers violating the rules of the program (the program’s own self-imposed rules).
Now we have a Hep A outbreak.
I’m afraid Oscar is correct about the motivation- they think junkies deserve it. Take Narcan for example. Every time it’s discussed, they don’t even hide it. The overwhelming response is “why waste the money to save them, it is their choice!”Report
@em-carpenter Up here, we have a needle exchange, and a needle exchange bus, and we’ve had parts of this county insist that they don’t want the needle exchange bus setting up shop, because if it does, then people there will start using. The implication being that they are not currently using. It’s absolutely ridiculous and it is going to get people sick and dead.Report
Ridiculous.
As is the line of thinking that the exchange programs are the same as condoning and encouraging continued use. As if without the programs, the users would stop using, (rather than share dirty used needles and spread diseases.)Report
Eugh, horrible.
I don’t know about needle exchanges, but around here there are a couple of newly minted supervised consumption facilities – which have already reversed several overdoses, even in their first few months in action, and which are connecting people with addiction treatment opportunities.
And of course there are folks up in arms about them, and populist politicians are stoking those fires because there are both federal and provincial elections coming up next year.Report
Yes. Efforts to create supervised injections sites around here have failed. Folks simply cannot get past the idea of “enabling addicts to use”.Report
The easy answer is because some people believe – very wrongly – that things like needle exchanges create usage, mostly because these same people prefer to believe that problems which definitely do exist in their communities actually don’t.
The harder answer is because those same people are assholes.Report
There’s also a strong NIMBY element both literal and psychological to it. Creating or allowing needle exchange sites is feared as a draw for users and is viscerally disliked as a very visible sign that the problem exists. People very much prefer to pretend that it doesn’t exist in their communities. Even if money wasn’t a concern a lot of neighborhoods and communities would vehemently oppose needle exchanges.Report
People don’t think about alcohol abuse the same way they think about opiate abuse, and I think that stems from the fact that alcohol is very much a social drug. Consuming alcohol is socially accepted and expected. So people see the path from having a few drinks to being an alcoholic, and they can see themselves following that path under the right circumstances, and so the alcoholic gets a certain amount of public sympathy.
People don’t understand the path from normal person to opiate addict. They default to this idea of a person looking for the high, then getting addicted. And even though the news is busy with stories about how the current epidemic is the result of prescription opiates, I think people still have this idea that opiate abuse is all about the person wanting to get high, and using pain as an excuse to get drugs.
Hell, once upon a time, I thought that. Then I got hit by a car, and spent a week on Morphine. And ten years later I had my ACL repaired, and spent another week on Morphine. I enjoy an alcoholic beverage every now and again, but I’ve never enjoyed the feeling of being drunk, so I’ve never worried about becoming an alcoholic. Morphine… That shit scares the hell out of me, because I LOoOoOoOVED it. Loved it so much that after my ACL repair, I stopped taking it as soon as the Rx was done, and I never used a refill. I have a disturbingly high tolerance for pain, so I can live with pain. I know how to manage it without drugs. I’m also very much aware I’m on the right side of the bell curve in that regard, and I’m not going to think less of people to the left of me because they want release from the pain.
The public in general has no idea what chronic pain is*, nor what an opiate high feels like, and if they did, they’d be much more sympathetic.
*Many think they do, but they really don’t.Report
Yeah. The summer I was 16 I had a nasty case of pleurisy (infection of the lining of the lung cavity) and spent three days high on some sort of don’t-care drug. It didn’t do a whole lot for the pain, but I just didn’t care that breathing hurt. Scary, as we’ve all either been, or known people who have been, in situations where not having to care for a while is enormously attractive. Compounded by whatever it was they gave me being physically addictive after you took it long enough.Report
That’s the difference between alcohol and opiates. Alcohol lets you feel numb. The pain is still there, just muted. I can still feel a thousand knives jabbing into my knee, but it’s more like 500 fingers.
With opiates, the thousand knives are still there, I just don’t care. I can eat, I can relax, I can sleep, and I can otherwise function, because the part of my brain that cares about the pain has been shut off. It’s way more liberating that being drunk, where you still care about the pain, and you are utterly useless except for sleeping (and the sleep insn’t that great, and you have a hangover, etc…).Report
@oscar-gordon You’re right on about alcohol. You can see that both in the broader culture – we have alcohol advertising on television, and we still have politicians who melt all the way down about the availability of marijuana, which is by every imaginable measure a far safer substance – and here (don’t even think about asking a “Drugs are bad!!!” warrior if they drink alcohol). The absurdity of our cultural relationship to these things is on full display whenever anybody proposes extending the same decency to somebody else that has previously only been enjoyed by one group.
And it ends up both prolonging and worsening the problem itself without achieving anything beyond those recalcitrant individuals’ smug satisfaction at having resisted doing something better and more substantive. Em’s example about Charleston WV is a perfect one.Report
What we ought to be doing:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heroin-assisted_treatmentReport
Interesting. I’ve never heard of that.
I doubt such a thing would stand a chance where I live; there is currently a big anti-suboxone push in the works. If they disapprove of that, no chance they’d consider heroin.Report
Anti suboxone? Good grief.
This basically confirms my suspicion – needle exchanges and supervised consumption sites are not opposed despite their effectiveness in saving lives and reducing disease, addiction, and misery – they’re opposed BECAUSE of their effectiveness.Report
Yes, anti-suboxone. Judges and courts demand defendants stop taking it if they are on probation because it’s “just another drug”. And law enforecement says that wherever they find heroin/opiates they find suboxone so obviously that must mean its abused (as opposed to addicts having it in their possession because it eases their cravings and withdrawal). So they have gotten into the ears of law makers and word is there will be a big push to reclassify it as a higher schedule drug and put more restrictions on its use in treatment.
And a bigger reason? Vivitrol. It’s the “new” thing and it has a strong lobby working to make it the more favorable option.Report
Corrolary question: since sex education classes lower teenage pregnancy and abortion rates why do many favor abstinence education which does not change behavior.Report
A related question: Wouldn’t it be easiest to just build some places for homeless people to sleep?Report
The Parable of the Prodigal Son is surprisingly rich. Here (this is the RSV):
Anybody who sat through a sermon on this knows that the preacher has to spend a good five minutes on the older brother. Specifically on the question: “Does the older brother have a point?”
I submit to you: the older brother has enough of a point to get all of the people out there who always served their proverbial fathers, always did what their proverbial fathers commanded, and never got so much as a kid with which to make merry with their friends to nod their heads and say something like “What the hell?”
And without the ability to promise something similar to a proverbial inheritance, the proverbial father will find himself with a fairly pissed off elder son.
Which might not be a big deal in a paternalist authoritarian system but, in a democracy, you’re going to find yourself wondering why pointing at how good it is to provide “bunks for drunks” doesn’t resonate with a huge chunk of the electorate.Report