The Insite decision could signal a fundamental change in the way Canadian society approaches and deals with addiction
The Supreme Court of Canada’s decision of September 30, 2011 regarding the continuation of the Insite supervised injection site has been seen as a victory for harm reduction policies and provincial and individual rights. It has also been portrayed as a repudiation of the Harper government’s focus on incarceration and punishment as an approach for dealing with drug-related social and health problems…a triumph of reason over ideology.
Now a larger question looms. What impacts might this decision have beyond the Vancouver supervised injection program—which is the only program of its kind in North America? It seems certain that ongoing ideological battles over harm reduction haven’t ended. But is it possible that the court’s decision reflects a fundamental change in the way Canadian society approaches and deals with addiction and its associated harms?
We look at the supervised injection program—and the court decision—with three guests.
Dr. Patricia Daly is s the chief medical health officer and the vice president for public health at Vancouver Coastal Health. She is also a clinical professor in the Faculty of Medicine at the University of British Columbia.
Bernard M. Dickens is a member of the English Bar and the Ontario Bar, and professor emeritus of health law and policy in the Faculty of Law, the Faculty of Medicine, and the Joint Centre for Bioethics at the University of Toronto. He also chairs the ethics advisory committee of the Public Health Agency of Canada.
James Boxshall is the acting executive director of AIDS Vancouver Island, a community-based AIDS service organization founded in 1986. AVI has offices in Greater Victoria, Nanaimo, the Comox Valley, and Campbell River.
Part One (Dr. Patricia Daly) 350_october_06_2011_sm
Part Two (Bernard M. Dickens) 351_october_06_2011_sm
Part Three (James Boxshall) 352_october_06_2011_sm
