Transition of China's Drug Policy: Problems in Practice
Shuiyuan Xiao,Mei Yang,Liang Zhou,Wei Hao
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/add.12689
2015-01-01
Addiction
Abstract:China's drug policy has showed a shift from the penalty-orientated management to a health-orientated one. However, problems in practice jeopardize this shift. In this editorial, we highlight problems and recommendations to improve treatment of substance users in China. In the early 1950s, Mao's government carried out a nation-wide anti-drug campaign with harsh measures, including the death penalty. Although these practices ended one of the most severe drug use epidemics in Chinese and world history, it set the tone for establishing a philosophy towards substance-using populations 1. With economic reforms, drug abuse problems again became rampant in China in the early 1980s, and the Chinese government continued punishment measures towards drug users. First-time convicted substance users would either pay a fine and/or be detained for up to 15 days in local police stations. For the second offence, substance abusers would be sent to compulsory detoxification centres run by the Ministry of Public Security for 3–6 months. Repeated offenders, at the most severe level, would be detained in re-education-through-labour (REL) centres operated by the Ministry of Justice for 1–3 years 1-4. Unlike the 1950s, the harsh practices of Mao's era are no longer effective in minimizing drug use. As China expanded its market economy and opened to the outside world, drug abuse problems in the country have worsened. From 1990 to 2012, the numbers of drug users registered officially in China increased 30-fold from 70 000 to 2 098 000 5. HIV/AIDS infection fuelled by drug use has also reached an alarming level 4, 6. Developing effective drug policy is now a national priority. With the influence of the disease model of addiction and constructs of harm reduction, the Chinese government has recently changed its drug policy. A new Anti-Drug Law was promulgated in 2008 7. It abolished the REL modality, called for a boost in ‘community rehabilitation’, encouraged drug users to seek treatment voluntarily and set compulsory isolated rehabilitation (CIR) as the only government-ordered treatment modality 7, 8. Meanwhile, China also expanded methadone maintenance treatment (MMT) programmes rapidly 5, 9. These policies reflect a shift from a penalty-orientated management of drug use disorders to a health-orientated one. However, problems in practice have jeopardized this shift, as highlighted below. Although REL is no longer officially endorsed, the newly named CIR remains delivered by judicial staff, in the same settings of former REL camps, with an average stay of 2 years 10. Further, the notion of drug use as a criminal and moral issue is deeply rooted in the minds of many law enforcers 2. As a result, the CIR centres generally continue the old REL model, and punitive management is still dominating. According to Human Rights Watch, residents in these centres are forced to work and access to medical treatment is very limited 11. This punitive management without adequate medical or psychiatric care puts the residents at great risk, especially those with comorbidities, which is the norm. ‘Community rehabilitation’ in China is defined as living areas that are completely open environments but that provide treatment services for substance users. Although the law has specified an important role of community treatment, very few, if any, government employees or general practitioners are trained in caring for substance users in these settings, and professionals trained in addictions treatment work in these community programmes 12, 13. In most cases, a lay employee is appointed by the subdistrict officials to deal with the affairs of ‘community rehabilitation’; these people are generally entirely untrained and incapable of assisting with effective community-based treatment for substance users 13. Further, strong stigma and discrimination against drug users is common in the community, and applications for community programmes must be approved by local police departments 4. Because of these issues, substance users are often reluctant to attend ‘community treatments’, and few people with drug use disorders are actually receiving any community rehabilitation treatment. In China, conflicts between official policy and the legal system persist with regard to many socially marginalized populations such as drug users. Contradictory to its public health efforts, the government is also waging a ‘national war-on-drugs’ that seeks to limit drug use by confining users 14. In practice, MMT clients and people in community rehabilitation are often harassed by police enforcement; many are relocated to CIR upon submitting a drug-positive urine test 11, 15. Another concern is the quality of services provided. Without coordination with related services, most MMT sites do not offer comprehensive services and focus solely upon administering methadone. Due to a lack of staffing, training and standard operating procedures, appropriate assessment and individualized treatment for clients becomes impossible 9. Poor-quality services, together with police involvement in the treatment system, have negatively impacted access and effectiveness of MMT. China's Anti-Drug Law still notes CIR as an ‘administrative punishment’ 7, together with its name of ‘rehabilitation’, reflecting the paradox of the government's notion of drug use disorders. A crucial first step forward is changing these notions at all levels, including in the public and judicial sectors, that position individuals with substance use disorders as patients instead of law-breakers. Substance-using individuals must be allowed to access community rehabilitation or harm reduction services without police harassment, and CIR providers must stop punishing and humiliating patients. Secondly, it is urgent that the government adopts measures and allocates funding and training resources to expand and improve the availability, accessibility, acceptability, quality and efficacy of evidence-based treatment and rehabilitation services in communities as well as in government-ordered settings. Success will ultimately depend upon how well the public eliminates stigma and discrimination against individuals with substance use disorders, and supports them with essential welfare, insurance and job opportunities. This work was supported by CMB-Collaborating Program in Mental Health Policy (CMB-11-058), the China Postdoctoral Science Foundation (2013M540645) and the Central South University Postdoctoral Science Foundation (12671).