Substitution treatment in the era of "recovery": An analysis of stakeholder roles and policy windows in Britain

Substance Use and Misuse

Volumn 48, Issue 11, 2013, Pages 966-976

  Duke, Karen ^a   Herring, Rachel ^a   Thickett, Anthony ^a   Thom, Betsy ^a  

^a MIDDLESEX UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Abstinence; Agenda setting; Drug policy; Harm reduction; Policy entrepreneurs; Policy windows; Recovery; Stakeholders; Substitution treatment

Indexed keywords

HEALTH CARE POLICY; HUMAN; MANAGEMENT; OPIATE SUBSTITUTION TREATMENT; OPIOID-RELATED DISORDERS; UNITED KINGDOM; ARTICLE; OPIATE ADDICTION;

GREAT BRITAIN; HEALTH POLICY; HUMANS; OPIATE SUBSTITUTION TREATMENT; OPIOID-RELATED DISORDERS; POLICY MAKING;

EID: 84882747834     PISSN: 10826084     EISSN: 15322491     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3109/10826084.2013.797727     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Ashton, M. (2008). The new abstentionists. London: Drugscope
2. Berridge, V. (1984). Drugs and social policy: The establishment of drug control in Britain 1900-1930. British Journal of Addiction, 79, 17-29
3. Berridge, V. (1993). AIDS and British drug policy: Continuity or change. In V. Berridge & P. Strong (Eds.), AIDS and contemporary history (pp. 135-152). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
4. Berridge, V. (2012). The rise, fall, and revival of recovery in drug policy. Lancet, 379(9810): 22-23
5. Best, D., & Laudet, A. B. (2010). The potential of recovery capital. London: Royal Society for the Arts
6. Best, D., Wood, K., Sweeting, R., Morgan, B., & Day, E. (2010). Fitting a quart into a black box: Keyworking in quasi-coercive drug treatment in England. Drugs: Education, Prevention and Policy, 17(4), 370-387
7. Brugha, R., & Varvasovszky, Z. (2000). Stakeholder analysis: A review. Health Policy and Planning, 15(3), 239-246
8. Centre for Social Justice. (2007). Addictions: Towards recovery. London: Centre for Social Justice
9. Cloud, W., & Granfield, R. (2008). A life course perspective in exiting addiction: The relevance of recovery capital in treatment. Helsinki: Nordic Centre on Alcohol and Drug Research
10. Department of Trade and Industry. (2002). Social Enterprise: A strategy for success. London: DTI
11. Drugscope. (2009). Drug treatment at the crossroads: What it's for, where it's at and how to make it even better. London: Drugscope
12. Drugscope. (2010). Response to the drug strategy consultation. London: Drugscope
13. Duke, K. (2006). Out of crime and into treatment'?: The criminalisation of contemporary drugs policy since Tackling Drugs Together. Drugs: Education, Prevention and Policy, 13(5), 409-415
14. Duke, K. (2013). From crime to recovery: The reframing of British drugs policy. Journal of Drug Issues, 43(1), 39-55
15. Glanz, A. (1994). The fall and rise of the general practitioner. In J. Strang andM. Gossop (Eds.), Heroin addiction and drug policy: The British system (pp. 151-166). Oxford: Oxford University Press
16. Gladwell, M. (2003). The tipping point: How little things can make a big difference. London: Time Warner Books
17. Hayes, P., & Perera, A. (2010). Not for turning?. Druglink, March/April 2010, 8-9
18. HM Government. (1995). Tackling drugs together: A strategy for England 1995-1998. CM 2846, London: HMSO
19. HM Government. (2008). Drugs: Protecting families and communities. London: Home Office
20. HM Government. (2010). Drug strategy 2010: Reducing demand, restricting supply, building recovery: Supporting people to live a drug free life. London: HM Government
21. HM Government. (2012). Putting full recovery first. London: HM Government
22. Home Office. (1987). Statistics of the misuse of drugs, United Kingdom, 1986. Issue 28/87. London: Home Office
23. Home Office. (2010). Drug strategy consultation paper. London: Home Office
24. Kingdon, J. (1984). Agendas, alternatives and public policies. (1st ed.). Boston: Little Brown
25. Kingdon, J. (1995). Agendas, alternatives and public policies (2nd ed.). Boston: Little Brown
26. Lenton, S. (2007). Beyond modelling and evidence: Bridging the gap between drug policy research and drug policy practice. Paper presented at the ISSDP conference March 2007. Retrieved December 3, 2012, from http://www.issdp.org/ conferences/2007/papers/Simon.Lenton.pdf
27. McKeganey, N. P., Morris, Z., Neale, J., & Robertson, M. (2004). What are drug users looking forwhen they contact drug services: Abstinence or harm reduction. Drugs: Education, prevention and policy, 11(5): 423-435
28. Mold, A. (2008). Heroin: The treatment of addiction in twentieth century Britain. Northern Illinois University Press
29. Mold,A.,&Berridge,V. (2010). Voluntary action and illegal drugs: Health and society in Britain since the 1960s. London: Palgrave Macmillan
30. National Treatment Agency. (2005). Treatment effectiveness strategy briefing 2005-08. London: NTA
31. National Treatment Agency. (2007). 2006 National prescribing audit: An assessment of prescribing practices for opioid substitution treatment in England 2004-5. London: NTA
32. National Treatment Agency. (2009). NTA annual report 2008/9. London: NTA
33. National Treatment Agency. (2011). Recovery-orientated drug treatment: An interim report by professor John Strang. London: NTA
34. National Treatment Agency. (2012a) Drug treatment 2012: Progress made, challenges ahead. London: NTA
35. National Treatment Agency. (2012b) Medications in Recovery: Reorientating drug dependence treatment. London: NTA
36. National Treatment Agency. (2013). Falling drug use: The impact of treatment. London: NTA
37. Pearson, G. (1987). The new heroin users. London: Blackwell
38. Power, R. (1994). Drug trends since 1968. In J. Strang & M. Gossop (Eds.), Heroin addiction and drug policy: The British system (pp. 29-41). Oxford: Oxford University Press
39. Release. (2010). Response to the 2010 drug strategy consultation paper. London: Release
40. Reuter, P., & Stevens, A. (2007). An analysis of UK drug policy: A monograph prepared for the UK drug policy commission. London: UKDPC
41. Roberston, R. (1994). The arrival of HIV. In J. Strang and M. Gossop (Eds.), Heroin addiction and drug policy: The British system (pp. 91-101). Oxford: Oxford University Press
42. Royal Society for the Arts. (2007). Drugs: Facing the facts. The report of the RSA commission on illegal drugs, communities and public policy. London: RSA
43. Scottish Government. (2008). The road to recovery: A new approach to tackling Scotland's drug problem. Edinburgh: Scottish Government
44. Shapiro, H. (2013). Interview with Paul Hayes. Druglink, January/ February 2013, 28(1): 8-11
45. UKDPC. (2008). The UK Drug Policy Commission Recovery Consensus Group: A vision of recovery. London: UKDPC
46. UKDPC. (2010a). A response to the 2010 Drug Strategy Consultation Paper. London: UKDPC
47. UKDPC. (2010b). Getting serious about stigma: The problem with stigmatising drug users: An overview. London: UKDPC