Department of Social Policy and Social Work, University of York, YO10 5DD, United Kingdom.
School of Law, University of Leeds, LS2 9JT, United Kingdom.
Int J Drug Policy. 2020 Jun;80:102525. doi: 10.1016/j.drugpo.2019.07.020. Epub 2019 Aug 5.
The concept of vulnerability is now deeply embedded in English drug policy, influential in governing practices such as prevention and treatment activity but yet to be subject to critical scrutiny. In this article, we offer an appraisal of the vulnerability zeitgeist in contemporary drug policy, drawing upon insights from similar endeavours across a range of policy areas to consider the underlying assumptions and various effects of this conceptual logic. Using an approach to policy analysis which supports the questioning of deep-seated assumptions and implications of particular representations of 'problems' in social policies (often referred to as the 'What's the Problem?' [WPR] approach, Bacchi & Goodwin, 2016), we analyse the 2017 Drug Strategy to facilitate a close perspective on the texture of governance in relation to people who use drugs in England. We explore how vulnerability and drug use are in Bacchi's (2018; 6) terms 'problematized' and 'made 'real'' as a specific kind of phenomenon, drawing attention to the presuppositions and potential effects of being labelled (or not) as vulnerable. We argue that alongside bolstering targeted support, the current problematisation of vulnerability in English drug policy supports the operation of subtle disciplinary mechanisms to regulate the behaviour of those deemed vulnerable, underplaying the role of material inequalities and social divisions in the unevenness of drug-related harms. We then use the WPR approach to guide a discussion of the burgeoning multi-disciplinary literature on vulnerability, exploring orientations and effects of alternative representations of the 'vulnerable' drug users. Producing the 'vulnerable' subject in these alternative ways creates a different and deeper understanding of the 'problem' and consequently its 'solutions', allowing more space for human agency to be considered and directing attention beyond drug policy towards tackling the diverse multiple social marginalisations which make some people more likely than others to experience drug-related harms.
易损性概念如今已深深扎根于英国毒品政策之中，对预防和治疗等治理实践产生了影响，但尚未受到批判性审查。本文借鉴了政策领域的类似研究成果，对当代毒品政策中的易损性思潮进行了评价，探讨了这一概念逻辑的潜在假设和各种影响。我们采用一种支持对社会政策中“问题”特定表现的深层次假设和影响提出质疑的政策分析方法（通常称为“问题是什么？”[WPR]方法，Bacchi & Goodwin，2016），对 2017 年毒品战略进行了分析，以便从密切关注英格兰吸毒者治理纹理的角度进行分析。我们探讨了易损性和吸毒如何用 Bacchi（2018；6）的术语“问题化”和“使‘真实’”，作为一种特定的现象，并提请注意被贴上（或不贴上）易损性标签的预设和潜在影响。我们认为，除了加强有针对性的支持外，当前英国毒品政策中对易损性的问题化支持了微妙的纪律机制的运作，以规范那些被认为易受伤害者的行为，淡化了物质不平等和社会分裂在毒品相关危害不平等中的作用。然后，我们使用 WPR 方法来指导对易损性的多学科文献的讨论，探讨了替代性的“易损”吸毒者表述的取向和影响。以这些替代方式产生“易损”主体，会对“问题”及其“解决方案”产生不同且更深入的理解，为更多地考虑人类能动性留出空间，并将注意力从毒品政策引向解决使某些人比其他人更有可能遭受毒品相关危害的多样化多重社会边缘化问题。
