Stretching the Limits of Drug Policies : An Uneasy Balancing Act

No abstract availabl

Nederländerna

Abstract not availabl

”En blombukett av chefen, inget mer” : En uppföljning av studenter som tagit en magister eller masterexamen vid Socialhögskolan, Lunds universitet under perioden HT07-HT13.

Titeln på rapporten är ett svar av en socionom på frågan om hon har haft något stöd från arbetsgivaren under studietiden. Jag har under min tid som studierektor för masterprogrammet vid Socialhögskolan, Lunds universitet under perioden 2007 till 2014 ofta fått frågor kring nyttan av en magister eller masterexamen när det gäller yrkeslivet. Frågor som har varit besvärliga att direkt besvara och som jag därför hoppas att föreliggande rapport kan ge svar på. Rapporten är dels en uppföljning av personer som har examinerats för en magistereller masterexamen under perioden, och dels avhandlas också i rapporten vilka möjligheter och hinder som de studerande har mött under och efter studietiden

A society With or Without Drugs : Continuity and change in Drug Policies in Sweden and the Netherlands

In debates about the Swedish and Dutch drug policies are usually positioned as opposites. The goal for the Swedish drug policy is to create a 'drug-free society'; while in the Netherlands a harm reduction approach prevails. In this study a drug policy is considered a practice of formal social control that can develop differently depending on the contexts in which it emerged. The period studied starts in mid 1960s and ends mid 1980s. This period can be said to be the formative years of the drug policies. The objective of the thesis is to investigate why the drug policies in Sweden and the Netherlands have taken such disparate courses. In order to analyse and explain the differences, two tracks will be followed: the way in which the problem was defined and the influence of institutional factors on both the problem definition and the action programme to counteract drug problems. In social problem theory, perceptions of the nature of the problem and its importance for society are perceived as the outcome of a collective process of problem definition. In addition it is important to identify the actors that were involved in this process and the problem definition that eventually gained master status. An underlying hypothesis for the study is that institutionalised traditions of formal social control are reproduced when a new social problem is established and they influence the problem definition as well as the action programme. These traditions will be examined in the three fields of the action programme, which in both countries have been singled out as crucial, namely judicial measures to control supply of illegal drugs, assistance to cure drug abusers and reduce demand and prevention to withhold people from using drugs. To understand the differences one has to comprehend their historical contexts. For a study of drug policies, three institutional factors are of particular interest: the role of the state in society, traditions of formal social control and the international context. If the right of the state to interfere in the private sphere of its citizens is fundamentally different than practices of formal social control will be different as well. By comparing formal control of another drug, 'alcohol', with control of illegal drugs, traditions in this field can be traced that have been of decisive importance for the elaboration of the drug policies in the 1960s up till today. This is the national context. The international context is constituted by the international control system that since the early twentieth century has been an increasingly constraining factor to national drug policies. The results of the study strengthen the hypothesis. The Swedish strong adherence to fundamentalist principles to the early policy on alcohol led by the central state, was preserved in the country's drug policy. The Dutch experimentalist approach is a prolongation of the country's tradition of pragmatism and a restrictive role of the central state

Sweden and Holland – two drug policy models

It is a well known fact that since the 1960s, Sweden and Holland have developed completely different types of drug policy. But there are a number of misconceptions as to what the differences consist in and how they have arisen. My contribution to this anthology involves elucidating these differences. In the context of international discussions of drug policy, the policies followed by Sweden and Holland are regarded as being completely antithetical. Swedish policy is described as restrictive, meaning that measures are directed at preventing the population coming into contact with illegal narcotic substances. The basic assumption is that all non-medical use of drugs constitutes abuse. The underlying motive is that this is done for the people’s best and that it is the job of the state to shield the population from danger. Dutch policy is described as liberal, i.e. the state should not interfere in people’s private lives as long as this does not cause injury to a third party. This also extends to behaviours regarded by the majority as undesirable, e.g. illegal drug use. In the following, I will be restricting myself to what I regard as the essential elements that distinguish the two countries’ drug policies from one another

The Drug Policies of The Netherlands and Sweden: How Do They Compare?

Abstract not availabl