Liverpool John Moores University, Public Health Institute, Exchange Station, Tithebarn Street, Liverpool. L2 2QP.
School of Health of Life Sciences, Glasgow Caledonian University, Cowcaddens Road, Glasgow G4 0BA, United Kingdom; Health Protection Scotland, NHS National Services Scotland, 5 Cadogan Street, Glasgow G2 6QE, United Kingdom.
Int J Drug Policy. 2019 Jun;68:62-74. doi: 10.1016/j.drugpo.2019.03.010. Epub 2019 Apr 16.
Drug consumptions rooms (DCRs) are a well-established and evidence-based harm reduction response to drug use. Recently, a consortium led by health services in Glasgow, United Kingdom (UK), proposed piloting a DCR. In this article, we examine how the proposals were represented in news media reporting, and the possible effects of such reporting.
A quantitative content and qualitative thematic analysis of UK news media (n = 174 articles) representations of the proposals to introduce DCRs in the city of Glasgow, UK, was conducted. Analysis was informed by Bacchi's (2009, 2012, 2017) approach to policy analysis, 'What's the problem represented to be?'
Competing representations of the 'problem' of injecting drug use (IDU) were contested by a range of actors with different political visions. The applicability of the 'evidence base', potential benefits of DCRs to both users and the public, and the associated economic costs, were presented in differing ways depending on the underlying assumptions and presumptions of the arguments constructed (e.g. harm reduction vs recovery). As a result, a number of conflicting subject positions were presented that may have implications for the way that people who inject drugs (PWID) see themselves, and how they are viewed and treated by society. Whilst proponents positioned DCRs within a discourse of public health, an underlying rhetoric of abstinence and recovery underpinned the arguments against DCRs. It was this latter discourse that underpinned the UK Government's rejection of the proposals, which the Scottish Government were prevented from overruling within the political constraints of their devolved powers, with the lived effect of people who use drugs (PWUD) being denied access to public health services that mitigate harm.
We conclude that attempts to introduce and gain public and political support for harm reduction responses such as DCRs through the news media face challenges within the historical and political context of prohibitionist UK drugs policy.
毒品使用室（DCR）是一种经过充分验证的、基于证据的减少毒品危害的措施。最近，由英国格拉斯哥卫生服务机构领导的一个联盟提议试点 DCR。在本文中，我们研究了这些提议在新闻媒体报道中的呈现方式，以及这种报道可能产生的影响。
对英国新闻媒体（n=174 篇文章）中关于在英国格拉斯哥市引入 DCR 的提议的报道进行了定量内容分析和定性主题分析。分析是基于 Bacchi（2009、2012、2017）的政策分析方法，即“问题被呈现为什么样的问题？”
不同政治愿景的各种利益相关者对注射吸毒（IDU）问题的“问题”提出了相互竞争的看法。DCR 的适用性、对使用者和公众的潜在好处以及相关的经济成本，取决于所构建论点的潜在假设和假定，呈现出不同的方式（例如，减少伤害与康复）。因此，提出了一些相互冲突的主体立场，这可能会影响到注射毒品者（PWID）对自身的看法，以及他们在社会中被看待和对待的方式。虽然支持者将 DCR 置于公共卫生话语中，但反对 DCR 的论点背后却隐含着一种禁欲和康复的修辞。正是这种后一种话语，为英国政府拒绝这些提议提供了依据，而苏格兰政府在其权力下放的政治限制内无法推翻这一提议，其实际后果是，吸毒者被剥夺了减轻伤害的公共卫生服务。
我们的结论是，通过新闻媒体引入和争取公众和政治支持减少伤害的措施，如 DCR，在英国禁毒政策的历史和政治背景下面临挑战。
