Challenges, Skepticism, and Recommendations from Police about Working in Collaboration with Supervised Consumption Services.

BACKGROUND: The operation of supervised consumption services (SCS), programs that offer supervised locations for the consumption of drugs such as heroin, other opioids, cocaine, other stimulants, and other drugs, is contingent on cooperative relationships with police. In this manuscript, we focus on an under studied topic: how active duty police officers understand their role with respect to SCS, and their recommendations for improving relationships with these programs. Methods: During 2018, we audio-recorded and transcribed focus group discussions conducted in four police divisions with 26 police constables and 3 officers of other ranks in Toronto, Canada. Officers were asked about their roles relative to SCS, perceived training needs, and how to build cooperative relationships with SCS. We followed an iterative thematic approach to analyze the data. Results: Participants in three divisions were unclear about their roles, duties, and policy governing policing of SCS. Participants in the fourth division had received instructions from the division commander to observe a "distance and discretion policy". However, these participants believed that developing familiarity with the new SCS, instead of keeping a distance, would be a more effective approach to building working relationships with staff, clients, and the local community. There was nearly unanimous skepticism about the willingness of SCS workers to work cooperatively with the police. These perceptions were commonly linked to previous negative experiences with harm reduction workers and, in some cases, staff at the new SCS. Several participants also linked problems in communication to fundamental differences between the philosophies or worldviews of SCS staff versus those of police. Conclusions: Building collaborative SIS-police relationships can be assisted by demystifying the operation of SCS for police, articulating policies, and working toward mutual respect.

"That's a double-edged sword": Exploring the integration of supervised consumption services within community health centres in Toronto, Canada.

Supervised consumption services (SCS) have been integrated into community health centres in Toronto. We draw on qualitative interviews and ethnographic observations to examine the implementation contexts of these SCS. Participants' perspectives on the integration of SCS within CHCs were mixed. Some participants identified the benefits of integrated SCS such as convenience and access to other health and social services. However, others identified negative consequences of integration, including building design, lack of privacy and anonymity, and limited hours of operation. These perspectives highlight the ways in which contextual factors affect the experiences of clients in accessing SCS, and suggest that various factors need to be considered in order to improve service uptake.

Implementation contexts and the impact of policing on access to supervised consumption services in Toronto, Canada: a qualitative comparative analysis.

BACKGROUND: Supervised consumption services (SCS) are being implemented across Canada in response to a variety of drug-related harms. We explored the implementation context of newly established SCS in Toronto and the role of policing in shaping program access by people who inject drugs (PWID). METHODS: We conducted one-to-one qualitative semi-structured interviews with 24 PWID. Participants were purposively recruited. Ethnographic observations were conducted at each of the study sites as well as in their respective neighbourhoods. Relevant policy documents were also reviewed. RESULTS: Policing was overwhelmingly discussed by participants from both SCS sites. However, participant responses varied depending on the site in question. Subthemes from participant responses on policing at site #1 described neighbourhood police presence and fears of police harassment and drug arrests before, during, or after accessing SCS. Conversely, subthemes from participant responses on policing at site #2 described immunity and protection from police while using the SCS, as well as a lack of police presence or fears of police harassment and arrests. These differences in implementation contexts were largely shaped by differences in local neighbourhoods and drug scenes. Police policies highlighted federal laws protecting PWID within SCS, but also the exercise of discretion when applying the rule of law outside of these settings. CONCLUSIONS: Participants' perspectives on, and experiences with, policing as they relate to accessing SCS were shaped by the implementation contexts of each SCS site and how neighbourhoods, drug scenes, and differences in policing practices affected service use. Our findings also demonstrate the disconnect between the goals of policing and those of SCS. Until larger structural barriers are addressed (e.g. criminalization), future SCS programming should consider the impact of policing on the SCS implementation context to improve client experience with, and access to, SCS.

Reducing widespread pipe sharing and risky sex among crystal methamphetamine smokers in Toronto: do safer smoking kits have a potential role to play?

BACKGROUND: Crystal methamphetamine smoking is associated with many negative health consequences, including the potential for transmission of hepatitis. We examined whether or not a kit for crystal methamphetamine smoking might have some potential to reduce the negative health effects of crystal methamphetamine smoking. METHODS: Five focus groups were conducted with crystal methamphetamine smokers recruited by community health agencies and youth shelters in Toronto, Canada. Target groups included homeless/street-involved youth, sex workers, men who have sex with men, and youth in the party scene. Participants (n = 32) were asked questions about motivations for crystal methamphetamine use, the process of smoking, health problems experienced, sharing behaviour, risky sexual practices, and the ideal contents of a harm reduction kit. RESULTS: Pipe sharing was widespread among participants and was deemed integral to the social experience of smoking crystal methamphetamine. Heated pipes were unlikely to cause direct injuries, but participants mentioned having dry, cracked lips, which may be a vector for disease transmission. Many reported having sex with multiple partners and being less likely to use condoms while on the drug. Demand for harm reduction kits was mixed. CONCLUSIONS: Changing pipe sharing behaviours may be difficult because many participants considered sharing to be integral to the social experience of smoking crystal methamphetamine. Within the context of a broader health promotion and prevention program, pilot testing of safer smoking kits to initiate discussion and education on the risks associated with sharing pipes and unprotected sex for some communities (e.g., homeless/street-involved youth) is worth pursuing.