The Oberlin Review

Oberlin Community Should Push for Drug Harm Reduction Policies

Hang on for a minute...we're trying to find some more stories you might like.


Email This Story






As a progressive institution, Oberlin is uniquely poised to stand at the forefront of a new generation of harm reduction policies for drug usage. Overdose rates are up, current policy is failing, and it’s time for us to provide members of our community with ways to reduce harm while using substances.

It is essential that we recognize that people will engage in certain behaviors regardless of legality or social acceptance — substance use is one of these behaviors. Therefore, it makes more sense to provide resources for people to make educated decisions about safe drug usage rather than to enforce policy that punishes individuals for making decisions about their own bodies. This is what harm reduction is all about: working to minimize the potential harms that members of our community might incur.

Changing how people think about drugs and drug users requires first acknowledging that, from a societal standpoint, drugs are associated with poor morality in this country — and it’s not by accident. Campaigns like Just Say No and D.A.R.E. have willfully concealed the racial and political histories behind the stigmatization of drugs. The prison industrial complex is a major example of this phenomenon — it profits from continuous streams of inmates, and there is an enormous racial disparity in who is incarcerated for nonviolent drug offenses. Despite the federal government’s efforts to eradicate illegal substance use altogether through means such as laws and mass incarceration, high overdose rates and adulterated substances still dominate national headlines.

In 2017, more than 70,200 Americans died from drug overdoses, including overdoses from prescription opioids. Many of these cases also involved other drugs. Forty-four percent of benzodiazepine users are currently dependent because of inadequate education from healthcare professionals. Cartel violence and drug war-related deaths continue to rise despite stringent drug laws and excessively high amounts of law enforcement funding. Things are getting worse, and it’s abundantly clear that increasing our drug penalties has not stopped — or even slowed — our problems.

Still, we shy away from discussing the presence of drugs in our communities. Drugs are taboo, whispered about in middle school bathrooms or warned against by parents via blatant lies based in fear. Many users — especially inexperienced ones — have no idea what they’re doing, because no one is around to have a conversation with them that isn’t based in shaming or diversion.

And here we are in Lorain County — a community hit hard by opioids, in the middle of a state where cocaine cut with fentanyl has killed 3,000 people in the last year. There has never been a more critical point to start enacting substantial change, especially in the Midwest where the opioid epidemic continues to rage.

Drug-related issues will not go away overnight, nor will instant legalization solve the problems we currently face. Beginning to rectify our twisted lationship with substances requires a multipronged approach that involves fact-based drug education, trust, support for those struggling with addiction, withdrawal, or safe consumption, and — most importantly — transparency among community members about what is really going on with substance users. On a local scale, we are perfectly capable of holding workshops and syringe exchanges, as well as drug checking services. Both these measures would help to ensure that if someone is using, they are doing so as safely as they possibly can.

Injection sites and factual drug education are often denounced on the basis that they supposedly encourage use and therefore should not be implemented. However, if the number of complications and deaths from drug use goes down — which is what has happened at every safe injection site and drug education center in the U.S. — yet these places are still rejected, is the concern really about the users? Or is it about maintaining the deep-seated attitude that drugs are inherently evil? Are we so entrenched in moral arguments that we allow overdose rates to climb instead of implementing safety measures? And, if it so happens that a substance is safer than we tend to think, are we so determined to maintain our existing image of drug usage that we refuse to admit we might be wrong?

I ask you to consider whether Oberlin’s community is invested enough in those we love to consider that perhaps many Americans have actually been wrong about drugs all along. More importantly, I ask whether Oberlin students and townspeople are willing to take a step toward positive social change with drugs — both in Oberlin and in the surrounding communities — just as it has taken steps toward positive social change at so many other points in history.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
2 Comments

2 Responses to “Oberlin Community Should Push for Drug Harm Reduction Policies”

  1. Jimbo on March 31st, 2019 11:11 PM

    “if the number of complications and deaths from drug use goes down — which is what has happened at every safe injection site and drug education center in the U.S.”

    I do not believe there are ANY safe injection sites in the US so therefore it is not possible for this statement to be true.

  2. Rachel on April 15th, 2019 7:19 PM

    In response to Jimbo’s comment: Thank you for pointing this out! You’re absolutely right – in total transparency, this article was written in one go, and I mistakenly entangled two separate points. The first is that safe injection sites in other countries (Canada’s INSITE, for example) have remarkable track records for mortality prevention and bloodborne disease reduction. The second is that the U.S. does indeed have unofficial, unsanctioned safe injection locations/drug education programs, but I am referencing community efforts that have been spurned by locals who care. Unfortunately, statistical reports on this subject are limited (if available at all) in the U.S., due to the highly controversial subject matter and potential legal ramifications. This being said, it is possible to trace the development of certain harm reduction services in particular areas with the subsequent declines in both drug use and overdose/mortality rates.
    I apologize for not editing this article more effectively. If anyone has additional questions/comments about this, please feel free to contact me at rclark@oberlin.edu.

Please keep all comments respectful and relevant. The Review does not allow comments containing profanity, foul language, personal attacks, hate speech, or the use of language that might be interpreted as libelous. Comments are only published at the discretion of a moderator.




Established 1874.