THE CHEMICALLY CONTROLLED MANIAC AND OTHER EVERYDAY MYTHS

Many people have been troubled by the deafening silence that is the
hallmark of Swedish narcotics policy. The development of the LVM-system
(legally mandated compulsory treatment), the criminalisation of use itsel
f
and the constant escalation of penalties for narcotics offenses have take
n
place against a background of nearly total political unity and without th
e
slightest trace of rational argument and empirical knowledge that would
establish wether or not these harsh measures might be effective. Such
considerations should be present in the political process, even regarding
drugs. But instead the arguments used to justify these actions are
dominated by some old preconceived notions that need to be brought into t
he
light of day and discussed

Any given area in a countries political policy, wether it is educational
policy or narcotics policy, can be analyzed in many different ways. One w
ay
is to try to clarify which everyday myths are at work in the area. Can it
be claimed that a 'myth' is 'at work'? Yes, if it is considered in this
way: Schools, hospitals, government agencies or courts of law are
organisations that perform certain tasks, sometimes very firmly. Often th
e
result is good, sometimes it is bad. As citizens we have limited
possibilities to control this. But these institutions can continue to wor
k
without close examination because they have conditioned members of societ
y
and other organisations to expect them to work in particular ways that
suits their interests. They have taught us their everyday myths.

There are some official myths in narcotics policy and these have been use
d
to justify action. I shall name four of them. Some of these have their
origins with the late Nils Bejerots influential propaganda.

The Infection-Theory

Nils Bejerot assumed that "narcomania" spreads like an infectious disease.
The drug addict is the carrier who spreads the infection to others. In th
is
way drug addiction can spread in a way comparable with any other infectio
us
disease like the plague or influenza. If no action is taken the epidemic
will be as devastating as the Black Death. The measures to be taken again
st
this infection are isolation of the source, the drug, the addict or group
of addicts. The addict must be taken from his normal social contacts and
interned somewhere, for example on the isolated and inaccessible islands
that Bejerot proposed should be our new leper colonies

The infection-theory is still the working model of abuse development that
has the most influence over swedish narcotics policy.

There is, however, no factual support from either research or other
systematic documentation to assume that drug use or drug abuse spread lik
e
diseases caused by microbes or that drug abuse would be transferred to
large portions of the population if action was not taken against the
"infection carriers". Even in Bejerot's time, almost every tenth Swede ha
d
used cannabis or other illicit drugs but only very few became abusers.

The Abuser As A Chemically Controlled Maniac

In the classical Swedish doctrine drugs are given an almost magical power
to enslave their victims. There is a notion that once someone starts usin
g
an illegal intoxicant, they can never stop, that he or she is changed as
the chemicals take over the will and personality. That is why addicts are
supposedly not able to make informed decisions or to reason rationally
regarding their own situation. those who have started run a great risk of
never being able to escape from the clutches of drugs.

>From this premise there has developed a narcotics policy that strips all
>democratic rights from drug users. It becomes possible to defend forced
>treatment of adults and reformatory upbringing of juveniles in ways that
>are in conflict with the principles that apply to other citizens.

At the same time the official narcotics policy reserves the right to be
cynical and socially pessimistic: because it is the drug in itself that i
s
the driving force behind both abuse and remaining in abuse, neither
voluntary care or social welfare for abusers is necessary. The
criminalisation of actual abuse that was introduced with the argument tha
t
it made contact and influence with abusers possible and would open the
possibility motivating him or her to seek treatment has shown itself to b
e
repressive narcotics control.

Drug use and abuse is more like alcohol use and abuse than the authoritie
s
dare to admit. In both cases it is a question of social activities that a
re
learned and carried out in contexts where use is accepted and tolerated.
Heavy abuse is destructive and devastating in both cases, but can be
reversed when the social circumstances of the abuser changes. Of the
thousands and thousands of Vietnam veterans who came home as heroin
abusers, only a tiny minority continued as abusers in the USA. It is not
the drugs that are in control, it is rather social circumstances that
determine abuse.

The Need To Harass And Arrest The Individual Abuser

Swedish narcotics policy is, as in other countries, partly built upon
criminalisation of traffic and police and customs action against smuggler
s
and pushers. But since the time of Bejerot there has also been the
assumption that if the abuser as an individual can be harrased and
hindered, it will be possible to stop abuse. It is claimed that the
individual abuser is a precondition for the continuation of drug abuse as
an illegal business, that is, for it to be possible to profitably
distribute and sell drugs. To this can be added the previously mentioned
infection argument.

This means that the efforts of the police can be concentrated on well
established drug scenes like Plattan in Stockholm where down and out stre
et
addicts are to be found. This can easily be combined with modern tendenci
es
in policework like Holm82rs "get rid of the trash" or the New York 'zero
tolerance'model.

There is nothing, however, to show that efforts against the individual
abuser are of any practical benefit whatsoever when it comes to preventin
g
drug use or drug abuse as a social phenomena. People have feet and drug
scenes are mobile. It is the sickest and weakest who get left behind and
harrased.

The Myth Of The Effective Narcotic Policy

The claim that Swedish narcotics policy has been particularly effective a
nd
that the rest of Europe should learn from us is widespread. This self
righteousness has two sides to it.

The first is a historical myth regarding the emergence of the policy. The
advocates of the policy are more than willing to tell a success story in
which the true representatives of the people won a victory over the
hippies, drug liberals and false prophets who tried to lead Sweden along
the road to a narcotics catastrophe. The correctness of the current
doctrines is proved by the fact that the above mentioned methods are used
today after being formulated by Bejerot according to his impression of ho
w
an amphetamine epidemic was avoided in Japan and opiate abuse was
eliminated in China.

The other concerns the abuse situation in Sweden compared with that in
other countries. It is claimed that Swedish narcotics policy has
demonstrated its effectiveness because abuse problems are lower in Sweden
than elsewhere.

It is true there was a decline in new abusers during the 70's. This
however, happened before the drugs policy guidelines got harsher and beca
me
"the real thing". At the same time, many abusers still remained. Erroneou
s
calculations and wishful thinking have caused many to believe that Sweden
has had a more favourable abuse situation than is really the case.

The number of young persons who have tried drugs was at its lowest durin
g
1988 and 1989 when youth unemployment was also at its lowest (2%), a
European record. All things considered, this seems to be why we avoided t
he
worst of the heroin epidemic that befell countries where youth unemployme
nt
was accelerating. Since then, the levels of drug abuse have followed the
rising levels of youth unemployment, regardless of whatever measures that
have been taken in narcotics policy. Now we have as many heavy abusers as
other North European countries. Moreover, the death rate amongst heavy
abusers is higher in Sweden than in most other countries.

Nothing indicates that the narcotics policy in Sweden is better or more
effective than in other countries. When the general welfare policy loses
its effectiveness, the narcotics policy loses its protective value.

Creating A Drug Free Society

It has often been pointed out that the goal of creating a drug free socie
ty
is not only difficult to achieve, but also that the Swedish model has
produced unwanted consequences. This is just because of the four myths. I
f
the way to a drug free society is via fighting infection, denial of human
and democratic rights, harassing individual abusers and a total
unwillingness to discuss alternative methods, then it becomes totalitaria
n
and destructive. When drug addicts lives are attributed so little value
that they are allowed to die even though life saving treatment exists the
n
ever more people will come to think that every addicts death is just a st
ep
on the way to a drug free society.

This goal is also excludes rational analysis. This was shown in the
reaction to the Swiss heroin maintenance trials. This kind of experiment
shows an openness to the possibility that policies other than 'drug free
society' dogmas can be of benefit. The researchers in Zurich have, by
publishing their results on the internet, shown an openness and desire fo
r
insight and debate that is unique. The experiment is open to criticism an
d
even methodological weaknesses, like crossover between groups taking part
,
have been pointed out by international experts. But are the results not o
f
interest? Is it meaningless that participants show such low mortality and
that there has been a big decrease in other problems? We can ask how much
of the Swedish narcotics policy has been open to such criticism. Would we
in Sweden dare to publish what we know of the effects of compulsory
treatment on the internet?

But the reactions to the experiment among those who favour the status quo
seems to be: It's not the way we do it in Sweden! Behind that reasoning i
s
of course the urban myth of the Swedish, shortlived and uncontrolled
maintenance program that took place more than 30 years ago. It is seldom
pointed out that the evaluation made by Nils Bejerot after the experiment
was shut down shows no signs of acceptable research methods but is instea
d
built upon unverified anecdotes and tables over social deviances. Still,
it
is upon this that the experiment is judged.

No, let us instead discuss Swedish narcotics policy and reevaluate its
benefits and shortcomings. Otherwise we might within a short time find
ourselves without any other narcotics policy than the one carried out by
the police.