Should Cities Fund Needle Exchange Programs?

Should Cities Fund Needle Exchange Programs?

Nearly one-in-five new HIV cases are the result of drug users sharing dirty needles, an extrodinarily high number. Some cities have attempted to combat the epidemic by giving free clean needles to addicts in exchange for used ones. These programs are highly controversial in the U.S., with many insisting such programs encourage drug use and increase crime. Should your community be funding needle exchange programs?

Next question in Drug Law

  • “More Than Just ...”
  • No Objections Yet

William Martin PhD

The American Experience with Needle Exchange

William Martin, Ph.D.

Baker Institute, Rice University

By 1990, injecting drug users aware of the risks of their behavior, AIDS activists, and public health officials had begun needle exchange programs in several cities in the United States—Tacoma and Seattle, Washington; Portland, Oregon; San Francisco, New York City, and the best known and most carefully studied, New Haven, Connecticut.

The New Haven NEP, begun in 1990, cut HIV transmission by an estimated 33 percent in the first two years of the program, with a similar reduction in hepatitis infection. Like most NEPs, the New Haven program did more than simply distribute new syringes. Addicts were given instructions about safe injection practices, offered drug treatment if they wanted it, and provided with minimal health care such as flu shots and checkups. At the time of the 1993 assessment, almost 20 percent of participants in the program had begun drug treatment and hundreds of others, including many users who were not injectors, had come to the program for referral to an appropriate treatment facility.

A Johns Hopkins study of the Baltimore City Needle Exchange, launched in 1994 at the urging of Mayor Kurt Schmoke, concluded that, after six years in operation, the incidence of HIV in that city decreased by 35 percent overall and 70 percent among the approximately 10,000 participants in the program. In both cities, about 20 percent of participants voluntarily entered drug treatment, and in Baltimore the number of used needles collected in the trash fell by almost half, reducing the threat of injury or infection to children and others who might come in contact with them accidentally. Overall drug usage dropped by about 20 percent, 1500 clients had entered treatment—staffers told of having to tell at least 20-30 people every day that no slot was available for them—and the number of used needles collected in the trash fell by almost half. Unlike programs that must operate under the radar in some cities, the Baltimore City Needle Exchange has a website that lets users know when its vans will appear at various locations during the week. In winter, when heavy snow makes it impossible for the vans to travel, local radio and TV stations include the Exchange in their listings of school and government-agency closings.

Evidence

IcotextText
New Haven and Baltimore NEPs
Kaplan, E.H.; Khoshnood, K.; Heimer, R., “A Decline in HIV - Infected Needles Returned to New Haven's Needle Exchange Program: Client Shift or Needle Exchange?” American Journal of Public Health; Vol. 84, No. 12, Dec. 1994.
IcolinkLink
Needle Exchange Programs: Is Baltimore a Bust?
Post a Comment

Next Argument Previous Next

Needle Exchange Programs?

Loading
  • Yes
  • No
Vote
View Results

Ask Your Friends to Vote

Spotlight

Loading
  • William Martin PhD
    William Martin (Ph.D, Harvard, 1969), is the Harry and Hazel Chavanne Emeritus Professor of Religion and Public Policy in the Department of Sociology at Rice.... More

Subscribe to Opposing News

Biweekly updates on new debates and experts

Loading
Thank you for signing up

Please check your email to confirm your subscription.