Insite
This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove these template messages)
|
Supervised injection site | |
Founded | 2003 |
---|---|
Headquarters | , Canada |
Area served | Downtown Eastside neighbourhood |
Website | www |
Insite is a supervised drug injection site in the Downtown Eastside (DTES) neighbourhood of Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada[1] The DTES had 4,700 chronic drug users in 2000 and has been considered to be the centre of an "injection drug epidemic". The site provides a supervised and health-focused location for injection drug use, primarily heroin.[2][3] The clinic does not supply any drugs.[4] Medical staff are present to provide addiction treatment, mental health assistance, and first aid in the event of an overdose or wound. In 2017, the site recorded 175,464 visits (an average of 480 injection room visits per day) by 7,301 unique users; 2,151 overdoses occurred with no fatalities, due to intervention by medical staff.[5] The site also offers a free checking service so clients can check their substances for fentanyl and carfentanil. Health Canada has provided $500,000 per year to operate the site, and the BC Ministry of Health contributed $1,200,000 to renovate the site and cover operating costs. Insite also serves as a resource for those seeking to use a harm reduction approach for people who inject drugs around the world. In recent months and years, delegations from a number of countries are on record touring the facility, including various U.S. states, Colombia and Brazil.[6] 95% of drug users who use Insite also inject on the street according to a British Columbia health official.[7]
Operation
Insite is operated in tandem by
Research
When founded, Insite acquired legal exemption under the condition that its impacts be thoroughly evaluated.[14] According to the evaluation report, the site has been studied in over 30 studies,[15] published in 15 peer-reviewed journals.[16] The research indicates an array of benefits, including reductions in public injecting and syringe sharing and increases in the use of detoxification services and addiction treatment among patients. In addition, studies assessing the potential harms of the site have not observed any adverse effects.[15][17] Preliminary observations published in 2004 in the journal Harm Reduction indicate that the site successfully attracted injecting drug users and thus decreased public drug use. However, the researchers cautioned that a full assessment of the site would take several years.[14]
Additional research in the
A 2008 cost-benefit analysis of the site in the Canadian Medical Association Journal observed net-savings of $18 million and an increase of 1175 life-years over ten years.[23] Another cost-benefit analysis published in the International Journal of Drug Policy in 2010 determined that the site prevents 35 cases of HIV and about three deaths per year, indicating a yearly net-societal benefit of more than $6 million.[24]
An editorial in the Canadian Medical Association Journal noted that after three years of research "a remarkable consensus that the facility reduces harm to users and the public developed among scientists, criminologists, and even the Vancouver Police Department."[16]
In 2011, the Lancet published a study by a team of researchers from the University of British Columbia (UBC), claiming 35% decreases in overdose deaths around Insite due to its presence. In the next issue of the scientific journal, a response was published led by Gary Christian, the research director of Drug Free Australia, that claimed that any decreases in overdose mortality can be sufficiently explained by drug user displacement due to a police crackdown in the area. They claimed that an increase of 48-66 police in 2003 were the cause of any reductions in overdoes.[25] The original study's authors replied in the same issue, noting that the police crackdown cited actually ended a few weeks after the start of the Insite project and, therefore, decreases can't be accredited to increased policing.[26]
Reception
Letters of support and surveys show that health professionals, local police, the local community and the general public have positive or neutral views of INSITE services and the majority wish to see the service continue.
— Final Report of the Expert Advisory Committee for Tony Clement[27]
Insite enjoys strong local support.[28] While Insite is well liked throughout British Columbia, its popularity is highest inside Vancouver, where some 76% of residents expressed support for the facility.[27] Furthermore, according to a 2007 national survey by Mustel Group, some 63% of Canadians believe the federal government should renew the Insite's mandate while 27% oppose. Support is lowest among Conservatives, only half of whom believe the site should continue operating.[27]
The site drew criticism from the Bush administration; the director of the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy called Insite "state-sponsored suicide" on its opening.[29] In 2006, the Canadian Police Association voted unanimously to encourage the federal government to stop funding Insite and instead invest in a national drug strategy.[30] Moreover, Federal Health Minister Tony Clement branded Insite an "abomination," telling the Vancouver Sun that "allowing and/or encouraging people to inject heroin into their veins is not harm reduction... it is a form of harm addition."[28]
The
The most significant published criticism has been an article by Colin Mangham, the director of research for the Drug Prevention Network of Canada, in the online-only
Mangham's article has been questioned because it dismisses more than 20 peer-reviewed studies published in reputable medical journals such as
In answer to an op-ed in
Later in 2011 Drug Free Australia sent a complaint to the Vice President of UBC, raising concerns of the scientific integrity of the studies authors. In reviewing the matter, Mark Wainberg of McGill University found that "the allegations that have been made by ‘Drug Free Australia’ are without merit and are not based on scientific fact. In contrast, it is my view that the work that has been carried out by the team of Thomas Kerr et al is scientifically well-founded and has contributed to reducing the extent of mortality and morbidity in association with the existence of the safer injection facility."[41]
The campaign to launch Insite is profiled in Nettie Wild's documentary film FIX: The Story of an Addicted City.[42]
Government and legal controversy
While the
On September 1, 2006, Federal Health Minister Tony Clement deferred the decision of whether to extend the exemption for the site, citing a need for more research.[30] However, on the same day the government cut all funding for future research, amounting to $1.5 million in lost research money.[45] On August 13, 2007, the Portland Hotel Society and two clients of the facility filed suit in the BC Supreme Court to keep the centre open, arguing that its closure would be a violation of the Charter right of Insite users to "security of the person."[46] On October 4, 2007, during the announcement of its $64-million drug strategy, the Conservative government announced that Insite will be granted another six-month extension, allowing it to operate until June 30, 2008.[47] In 2008 Minister Clement explained his position during a House of Commons debate period:
. . . (t)he expert advisory committee was very clear. It found that only 3% of those who attend Insite actually get referred to treatment and that only 10% of those who use Insite use it for all their injections. The expert advisory committee insisted that Insite only saved one life, and that life is important but I want to save more than one life. I want to save hundreds of lives around the downtown eastside, which is why we are focused on treatment and on professionals. Not one life should be lost.
— [48]
Mr. Clement's stance is based in part upon findings in the Journal of Global Drug Policy and Practice, a fringe science journal.[49]
In May 2008, the B.C. Supreme Court struck down sections of the Canadian Criminal Code prohibiting drug trafficking and possession, ruling that they contravened the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. While this ruling does not take effect until next year, Justice Ian Pitfield also granted Insite an immediate exemption to federal drug laws, giving it legal grounds to continue operating.[50] Several days later the federal government announced plans to appeal the decision to the B.C. Court of Appeal.[51] On 15 January 2010, the B.C. Court of Appeal dismissed the federal government's appeal in a 2–1 ruling.[52] Three weeks later the federal government announced that it would appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada.[53] On February 10, some 150 people protested the federal government's decision to further appeal.[54] The protesters barred Prime Minister Harper from attending a dress rehearsal for the Vancouver Chinatown Spring Festival Celebration.[55] On February 12, The Canadian Union of Public Employees sent an open letter to Harper, urging him to accept the ruling of the lower courts and allow Insite to remain open.[56]
Of nine interveners in the Supreme Court case, one supported the Conservative government's case to close the injection site: REAL Women of Canada, a social conservative organization.[57] The other eight, including the Canadian Medical Association argued against the case for closure of the facility.[57] The REAL Woman of Canada group argued that the site would discourage drug users from ceasing their habit, and that they would get "worse and worse until they die" while their families and communities suffered.[57]
In May 2011 a lawyer for the Federal government told the Supreme Court that the government had not decided whether to continue or end support for Insite, contrary to previous statements by Minister of Health Tony Clement; that statement was derided in court as disingenuous by Joseph Arvay, a lawyer for PHS Community Services Society.[58]
On September 29, 2011, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled unanimously in Canada (AG) v PHS Community Services Society that Clement's decision to withdraw Insite's exemption under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act was "arbitrary, undermining the very purposes of the CDSA, which include public health and safety. It is also grossly disproportionate: the potential denial of health services and the correlative increase in the risk of death and disease to injection drug users outweigh any benefit that might be derived from maintaining an absolute prohibition on possession of illegal drugs on Insite’s premises." The Court ordered Clement to grant an exemption to Insite forthwith, allowing the facility to stay open indefinitely.[59][60]
After the Supreme Court decision in 2011, the ruling majority Conservative party tabled a bill titled "The Respect for Communities Act", which would create a federal regulatory framework for supervised injection sites such as Insite. Bill C-65 includes provision for certification and inspections. It gives the federal Minister of Health sole authority for exemptions to drug laws, but would require support letters from provincial health and public safety ministers before a site can be licensed.[61] Bill C-65 died with prorogation but its replacement, Bill C-2, was one of the first pieces of legislation tabled when the House resumed in Fall 2013. Bill C-2 is nearly identical to Bill C-65 but is slated to be considered by the Standing Committee on Public Safety, rather than the Standing Committee on Health.[62] Once this legislation passes, Insite will have to meet new requirements in order to continue operating, and it will have to report on how the facility has affected local crime rates, and both public and individual health.[63]
References
- ^ a b "Vancouver Insite drug-injection facility can stay open". BBC News. September 30, 2011. Retrieved September 30, 2011.
- ^ Vancouver site report for the Canadian Community Epidemiology Network on Drug Use (CCENDU), 2005 Archived 2006-05-14 at the Wayback Machine
- ^ Insite – Supervised injection site Archived March 10, 2013, at the Wayback Machine Official webpage
- ^ Vancouver's Insite drug injection clinic will stay open, CBC, 2011-09-30]
- ^ Vancouver Coastal Health: Insite.
- ^ "Safe-injection site draws interest from foreign health experts". The Globe and Mail. 25 June 2013. Retrieved 2014-02-28.
- ^ Freyer, Felice J. (May 12, 2019). "Seeking a safe place: Vancouver's story". BostonGlobe.com. Retrieved February 12, 2021.
- ^ "Timeline: Insite". CBC.ca. Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. March 13, 2009. Retrieved February 12, 2010.
- ^ "Safe injection site will continue, with or without Ottawa, supporters vow". CBC.ca. Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. August 11, 2006. Retrieved February 12, 2010.
- ^ "B.C. injection site to continue operating, for now". CBC.ca. Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. September 1, 2006. Retrieved February 12, 2010.
- ^ "Safe-injection site mounts constitutional challenge". CBC.ca. Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. April 28, 2008. Retrieved February 12, 2010.
- ^ "Drug laws unconstitutional: B.C. Supreme Court". CBC.ca. Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. May 27, 2008. Retrieved February 12, 2010.
- ^ "Legal status". Insite. Vancouver Coastal Health. January 15, 2010. Archived from the original on May 29, 2010. Retrieved February 12, 2010.
- ^ PMID 15535885.
- ^ a b British Columbia Centre for Excellence in HIV/AIDS (June 2009). Findings from the Evaluation of Vancouver’s Pilot Medically Supervised Safer Injection Facility – Insite. (PDF, p. 5).
- ^ PMID 17030931.
- PMID 17116909.
- PMID 15451834.
- PMID 17523986.
- ^ British Columbia Centre for Excellence in HIV/AIDS (June 2009). Findings from the Evaluation of Vancouver’s Pilot Medically Supervised Safer Injection Facility – Insite. (PDF, p26).
- ^ British Columbia Centre for Excellence in HIV/AIDS (June 2009). Findings from the Evaluation of Vancouver’s Pilot Medically Supervised Safer Injection Facility – Insite. (PDF, p37).
- PMID 18462491.
- PMID 19015565.
- S2CID 24653633.
- S2CID 45277634.
- S2CID 54265091.
- ^ a b c Ogborne, Alan; Bryce Larke; Darryl Plecas; Irvin Waller; Jürgen Rehm (March 31, 2008). "Final report of the Expert Advisory Committee". Health Canada. Retrieved February 15, 2010.
- ^ a b c d Power, Matthew (February 1, 2010). "The Vancouver Experiment". Slate. Retrieved February 15, 2010.
- Canadian Press. July 18, 2006.
- ^ a b c "B.C. injection site to continue operating, for now." CBC. September 1, 2006.
- ^ Geddes, John (August 20, 2010). "RCMP and the truth about safe injection sites". Maclean's Magazine. Retrieved February 9, 2011.
- ^ a b c Solomon, Sam (September 15, 2007). "Doctors, get tough on drugs': Tony Clement : Minister's mind made up on safe injection site, warn experts". National Review of Medicine. Parkhurst Publishing Ltd. Archived from the original on July 1, 2010. Retrieved February 16, 2010.
- PMID 18362390.
- ^ a b Mangham, Colin (January 17, 2007). "A Critique of Canada's INSITE Injection Site and its Parent Philosophy: Implications and Recommendations for Policy Planning". Journal of Global Drug Policy and Practice. Archived from the original on July 23, 2011. Retrieved February 9, 2011.
- ^ Toth, Christina (October 21, 2008). "Cops, PM shady on Insite". Abbotsford Mission Times. Canada.com. Archived from the original on November 5, 2012. Retrieved February 16, 2010.
- Open MedicineSeptember 7, 2007
- PMID 18551754.
- ^ Landolt, Gwendolyn "Insite not the answer for addicts" National Post June 8, 2011
- ^ Kerr, Thomas "Insite has science on its side Archived July 9, 2012, at archive.today" National Post May 30, 2011
- ^ Kendall, Perry "For many addicts, Insite is the answer" National Post June 9, 2011
- ^ Media Release "Allegations against UBC researchers’ study on Insite "without merit:" independent reviewer Archived 2013-12-06 at the Wayback Machine" UBC October 18, 2011
- Montreal Gazette, November 8, 2003.
- ^ a b c "No AIDS announcement during 'politicized' week: Ottawa." CBC. August 17, 2006.
- ^ a b Salinas, Eva. "Safe injection site's fate debated anew." The Globe and Mail. July 26, 2006.
- ^ Gohier, Philippe. "Unwelcome Insite." Macleans.ca. December 11, 2006.
- ^ "Advocates of B.C. safe-injection site go to court to keep it open". CBC News. August 17, 2007. Retrieved March 24, 2014.
- ^ Bailey, Ian. "Fate of safe-injection site remains up in the air." The Globe and Mail. October 3, 2007.
- ^ "Canadian Parliament Hansard". 2008. Retrieved October 23, 2010.
- PMID 19720698.
- ^ Drug laws unconstitutional: B.C. Supreme Court. CBC News (The Canadian Press), 27 May 2008.
- ^ Federal government to appeal B.C. court ruling on supervised injection sites. CBC News (The Canadian Press), 29 May 2008.
- ^ B.C. court affirms injection site's right to exist. CBC News (The Canadian Press), 15 January 2010.
- ^ Ottawa to appeal injection site ruling. CBC News (The Canadian Press), 9 February 2010.
- ^ Canadian Union of Public Employees (February 12, 2010). "Supporters rally to defend Insite from Feds". Canadaviews.ca. Archived from the original on July 19, 2011. Retrieved February 13, 2010.
- ^ "Harper protesters bar doors at Chinese cultural centre". Vancouver Sun. The Victoria Times Colonist. February 11, 2010. Retrieved February 13, 2010.[dead link]
- ^ "Federal government's Supreme Court Appeal to close Insite, Vancouver's supervised injection site" (PDF). Canadian Union of Public Employees. February 12, 2010. Retrieved February 13, 2010.
- ^ a b c Gyapong, Deborah (March 22, 2011). "REAL Women to intervene in Vancouver drug injection site case". The B.C. Catholic Paper. Archived from the original on April 1, 2011. Retrieved March 22, 2011.
- ^ The Canadian Press, "No federal decision on supervised injection site", CBC, 05/2011
- ^ Supreme Court of Canada: Canada (Attorney General) v. PHS Community Archived 2012-06-29 at the Wayback Machine September 30, 2011
- ^ O'Neil, Peter "Harper takes a hit: Supreme Court backs supervised-injection sites[permanent dead link]" The Monreal Gazette September 30, 2011
- ^ "Proposed legislation threatens supervised injection sites". September 14, 2013.
- ^ "Government Bill (House of Commons) C-65 (41-1) – First Reading – Respect for Communities Act – Parliament of Canada".
- ^ "CMA 'deeply concerned' about tighter rules for safe injection sites | CTV News". June 6, 2013.
Works cited
- "Findings from the Evaluation of Vancouver's Pilot Medically Supervised Safer Injection Facility – Insite". Urban Health Research Initiative. British Columbia Centre for Excellence in HIV/AIDS. June 2009. p. 54. Archived from the original on January 17, 2016. Retrieved February 14, 2010.