‘Nonproblematic’ illicit drug use: a less known but not less important phenomenon

1. ‘Nonproblematic’ illicit drug use: a less known but not less important phenomenon Olga Souza Cruz - ISMAI, DHCII-UMolgasouzacruz@gmail.com

2. The author declare no potential conflicts of interest related to her presentation

3. Introduction The social and academic discussion of drug use… • Has focused on its negative aspects rather than on its positive ones (e.g., O'Malley & Valverde, 2004; San Julián & Valenzuela, 2009) • The pleasurable and hedonistic aspects of using psychoactive substances are meekly discussed (e.g., Galhardo, Cardoso, & Marques, 2006; Hunt, Evans, Moloney, & Bailey, 2009) • Increase in studies that focus on drug use experiences that do not fit the abundantly described problematic patterns (e.g., Carvalho, 2007; OEDT, 2009; Parker, Williams, & Aldridge, 2002; Soar, Turner, & Parrott, 2006) • Notion that drug use and users can be extremely diverse → allows for a more appropriate understanding of this phenomenon (e.g., Draus, Roddy, & Greenwald, 2010; Gourley, 2004; Hser, Longshore, & Anglin, 2007)

4. Objectives and Methods • Despite an increase in research, we still know very little about the dynamics that underlie the patterns of nonproblematic illegal drug use • To develop a conceptual framework focused on the individual’s experiential component to answer the following research question: How are certain users of illegal drugs able to keep their drug use nonproblematic? • Qualitative research design • In-depth interviews (common script) + Direct observation in natural context • Theoretical Sampling + Snowball • Data analysis based on grounded analysis procedures

5. Initial definition of ‘nonproblematic’ illicit drug user • Interviews with 9 ‘nonproblematic’ illegal drug users • New consultation with the ‘nonproblematic’ users (NP) • Triangulation of sources • In-depth interviews with two contrasting groups: 6 ‘ex-problematic’ users (EXP) + 6 ‘problematic’ users (P) • Triangulation of methodologies • Direct observation, in natural context, of the use of illegal drugs Initial conceptual framework Final definition of ‘nonproblematic’ illicit drug user Final conceptual framework

9. Results Empirical data - Interviews with 3 groups + Observation - Widely congruent

10. Results • New consultation with the 9 NP • contacted a second time to ensure suitability and grounding for our conceptual framework • document that presented participants with our underlying conceptual framework and a five-point Likert-type scale (totally agree to totally disagree) - indicate to what extent the conceptual framework reflected their own experience, and which aspects did not, and to explain why • → six "I agree" and three "I totally agree“ • Globally, they felt they were reflected in the conceptual framework → which demonstrates that it was grounded in and pertinent to our overall aims • Disagreements or suggestions expressed by the participants were integrated into our conceptual framework → able to preserve the main dimensions of the initial conceptual framework as well as its core category Constant self-regulation

11. Control drug use: Type of drugs; Regularity; Contexts, circumstances Preserve social image and avoid stigma: Occultation; Acquisition, Contexts, circumstances Achieve positive effects and avoid unpleasant experiences: Quantity; Type of drugs; Contexts, circumstances; Experiences with other users Curiosity + Experiences with other users Cannabis, Heroin Drug use initiation Cannabis Self characteristics Self-control Quality of drug use Positive Negative aspects Negative Experiences with other users Reflection on drugs’ costs and benefits Adoption of precautionary measures to manage drug use Absent Present Maintenance Maintenance Maintenance Changes Maintenance End Drug use stabilization Drug – cannabis (+ stimulants) – another life dimension Drug – heroin (+ cannabis) – the main life dimension Problematic use: drug hegemony Nonproblematic use: constant process of self-regulation of the drug use

12. Conclusions It is important to note that there are nonproblematic illicit drug uses and users (or nearly nonproblematic)and that NP use reflects a constant process of self-regulation • Relationship between maintaining NP drug use and the user’s self-control (Castel & Coppel, 1991; Cohen, 1999; Percy, 2008; Rovira & Hidalgo, 2003) • Most drug users never develop abusive or dependent use (e.g., Keene, 2001, Pallares 1996, Taylor, 2008) • The Portuguese legislation itself admits this possibility, by differentiating between users 'drug addicts' and 'non drug addicts' for the purpose of determining the appropriate sanction (Law no. 30/2000 of November 29th. Diário da República no. 276/2000 - I Series-A, Lisbon) NP drug use = the use of any illicit drug that does not make an overall conventional lifestyle impossible (it does not result in serious dysfunctions at the social, family, legal, occupational, physical, or psychological level)

13. It is crucial to view illegal drug use in all of its complexity and as a continuum, for one to have a more accurate vision of drug users’ experiences(e.g., Draus, Roddy, & Greenwald, 2010; Hser, Longshore, & Anglin, 2007) • Amplifying the acknowledgment of and adherence to these alternative narratives of drug use by professionals and researchers is still a challenge • Another challenge is promoting a less catastrophic outlook within the community on the issue of drug use and educating people on its variability and its many potentials • Learning from nonproblematic patterns to effectively minimize problematic use is yet another dare • Society can minimize the harm associated with drug use by promoting responsibility in drug use (Whiteacre & Pepinsky, 2002)

14. THANK YOU! Olga Souza Cruz - ISMAI, DHCII-UMolgasouzacruz@gmail.com