F E S A T - An example of an effective network

1. F E S A T- An example of an effective network Hans Volker Happel FONDATION EUROPÈENE SERVICES D’AIDE EUROPEAN FOUNDATION TÈLEPHONIQUE DROGUES OF DRUG HELPLINES Integrative Drogenhilfe e. V. University of Applied sciences, Frankfurt Happel@idh-frankfurt.de

3. A skim overview on some historicaland conceptual backgrounds: • In some countries the whole installation of drug help services and drug counselling facilities started with a set up of drug help lines (DHL) in the early 60ies: • - in UK – London – Release • - in Germany – Munich – Drogenruf

4. A skim overview on some historical and conceptual background • In other countries a systematic telephone supply on drug questions was not established until mids of the 90ies following the tremendous boom in communication technologies. • As an example: The Netherlands argued we have a dense and differentiated net for all drug problems, now we need a DHL as a referral tool.

5. The development of the European network was accompaniedby scepticism, controversies, anxiety, obstacles and curiosity. • Harm reduction versus abstinence orientation • Cannabis: a soft or strong or even a drug? • Drug users: criminals, ill people, experimenters, people with a risky life style • Long term psychotherapeutic counselling or only transmission to face-to-face institutions • Staff characteristics: ex-user, volunteers, professionals

6. Organisational variety • Cost to the caller: • Calls are free, • Callers pay some/all cost • Not only phone but also counselling • Staff: • Volunteers • Paid staff • Ex-User

7. Organisational variety • Area: • National • Regional • Local • Funding: • Public • Private • Commercial

8. Organisational variety • Links: • Helpline stands alone • Helpline is part of a treatment centre • An ad hoc initiative for special event (e. g. Love Parade Berlin) • Opening: • During working day • During the evening • 24 hours

9. Structural and content aspects • Structural diversity, i. e. information-, emergency-, transmission-, counselling phone. • Different target groups, i. e. user, parents, disseminators, teachers etc. • Quality-standards, i. e. completeness of data base for referrals, confidentiality , methods and measures of telephone counselling.

10. Structural and content aspects • Monitoring, i. e. helpline as a seismographical tool to identity trends and new developments in the field of drugs (early warning parameters). • Aspects of content discussion: prevention; first aid; harm reduction; other addictions, like pathological gambling, eating disorders etc.

11. Common shared position about actual status of network development. • Drug Helplines: • Respect ethical principles, set out in the form of a Charter • Complement and link into other social and treatment services • Offer a safe and easy first contact with sources of information and with the treatment sector.

12. Interesting results of data collection: • The services of FESAT receive European wide more than 1.2 million calls a year • The number of hoax calls varies extremely in the different countries (France 70 %, UK 35 %, Finland 1 %). Start of a monitoring project 2000 to identify trends,new drugs, FAQs etc.

13. Outcomes of the monitoring project (HIBELL 2002, 2003) • 27 FESAT DHLs in 13 countries participated • In 2002 the total number of calls did not changed significantly • Categories with increasing trends in the number of calls: • Parents and guardians of drug users • Calls about cocaine • Relationship problems • Drug using 26 – 35 years old men

14. Outcomes of the monitoring project (HIBELL 2002, 2003) • Categories with decreasing trends: • Calls about heroin and magic mushrooms • Three DHLs informed about new types of drugs • Four DHLs informed about changes in the pattern of drug use

15. target groups in % Substance No of calls % of total Problem user Addicts Parents Relatives Cascaders Teachers Alcohol 885 12 % 38 % 35 % 13 % Nicotin 1865 26 % 70 % 7 % 17 % Cannabis 526 7 % 5 % 57 % 18 % Ecstasy 208 3 % 8 % 23 % 43 % Other drugs 460 6 % 24 % 41 % 25 % Other addictions 1463 21 % n.i. n.i. n.i. Primary Prevention 1732 24 % n. i. 21% 79 % Total 7144 100 % The German Monitoring Project of Bundeszentrale für gesundheitliche Aufklärung (BZgA), BRANDT 2002 n. i. = no information

16. The most relevant results: • 5 % of callers about Cannabis (7 % of total calls) wanted help for themselves, the rest - nearly 95 % - were relatives and teachers. • Only 3 % of all callers devote themselves on ecstasy – a disparity compared to media and public health concern. • Concern referring to Cannabis and other drugs (Heroin, Cocaine) parents are strongly concerned about their children. • Information about primary prevention is nearly exclusively asked by experts.

17. Interpretation of the monitoring results: • Participating services improved their quality standards of work • The European discussion about the variety of callers groups, questions on substances, diversity of problems and application of measures and methods forced the participating services to define quite precise their conceptual framework and ethics. • An increased sensibility on new trends and developments by easier access and exchange of relevant European information.

18. Technical options: • From telephone to telematic techniques including e-mail, internet, SMS, WAP etc. • Safe guard against bugging • Technical filter to reduce hoax calls • Interconnection to transfer calls to other services • Effective use of data base for information and transfer.

19. Actual status of discussion and outlook Advisory conceptions: • What is “objective” drug information? • Advise along the lines of rejecting drugs or how to use them with minimal risk? • Covering all substances (drugs, alcohol, pills) or specified lines? • Influence of the legal debate in each country to the counselling measures.