“Addiction remains one of the least understood and discussed public health issues” (Rethink Addiction)
Rodney Holmes Policy Submissions recently lodged a submission to the Australian government’s Inquiry into the health impacts of alcohol and other drugs in Australia.
Australians should be able to enjoy health, safety and wellbeing. Yet, despite what alcohol companies might claim, harms from alcohol in Australia are significant and continue to increase. Australians are using less alcohol overall, yet we are experiencing the highest rates of alcohol-induced deaths in over 20 years. Alcohol is a toxic, addictive, carcinogen and a highly profitable $1.5 trillion-a-year global commodity, costing Australia 4,700 lives plus $67 billion a year.
Why is alcohol still causing so much harm, when the population is using it less overall?
- Why are people with lived experience of alcohol harms rarely directly involved in alcohol policy and program development?
- Why do politicians and media centre alcohol use in Australian culture, while stigmatising alcohol harms to support punitive policies?
- Why do we use one-size-fits-all measures designed for the general population, intending to reduce alcohol harms for people experiencing dependence with impaired decision-making agency?
- Why do we focus almost exclusively on the different levels of alcohol use for understanding and responding to alcohol dependence, when the determinants and the diagnostic criteria, are psycho-social?
- Is it time to abandon contested models of alcohol use distribution that support deliberately deprioritising people with alcohol dependence who experience some of the greatest alcohol harms?
- Why should alcohol companies (that donate millions to major political parties) get to influence alcohol laws and regulate their own saturated marketing of their harmful products?
- Why do voluntary, abstinence-based approaches trigger such antagonism from some AOD professionals and researchers?
- Why don’t Australian governments properly fund AOD and mental health treatment services, despite a demonstrated return on investment? How can we better co-ordinate targeted policies and programs alongside population-level alcohol policies and programs?
Policymakers and decision-makers must value, accept, understand, prioritise and support people with lived and living experience of AOD use and harms. This will prevent AOD harms from being normalised, glorified, glamorised, stigmatised, marginalised and criminalised.
Rodney Holmes Policy Submissions made 13 recommendations in its submission to the inquiry.
Valuing lived experience – more than just illustrating & inspiring
1. Develop AOD lived experience frameworks in all jurisdictions.
2. Establish a network of AOD lived experience advisory groups across Australia, with the engaged participation of appropriately supported and compensated lived experience advocates, providing them with access to influence AOD policies and programs.
The culture of alcohol – normalise, glorify, glamorise, stigmatise & criminalise
3. Implement de-stigmatising language requirements for government, industry, research and media to prevent glamorising alcohol harms and to prevent stigmatising people experiencing alcohol dependence.
4. Discontinue alcohol policies and programs targeting people experiencing alcohol dependence, that are coercive and criminalising.
The psychology of alcohol – mental health & alcohol dependence
5. Implement harm reduction policy and program measures specifically addressing alcohol dependence, that consider its psycho-social domains.
Frameworks compared – guidelines, diagnostic tools & policies
6. Commission ongoing data collection that incorporates broader measures than just levels of alcohol use or AUDIT-C data, eg. full AUDIT with psycho-social domains.
7. Expand the National alcohol guidelines beyond levels of use for adults, children and people who are pregnant or breastfeeding, by incorporating an evidence-based recommendation for people experiencing alcohol dependence and other mental ill-health.
Reductionist models underpin alcohol policies & marginalise dependence
8. Commission research to build alternate psycho-social models of alcohol use and harms beyond an exclusive focus on levels of use, to replace contested, reductionist models that have diverted policy attention away from people at the highest risk of harms.
Neoliberal conflicts of interest, policy interference & ‘individual responsibility’
9. Prohibit political donations and lobbying from harmful industries, including alcohol companies.
10. Establish comprehensive and effective conflict of interest policies to prevent policy interference by alcohol companies.
Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) – misunderstood & misrepresented
11. Publish accurate information about AA, its principles and practices, (including research evidence of its success), to facilitate best practice research, policymaking, program design and co-ordination, for alcohol dependence.
Targeted & universal responses – resourced, co-ordinated & prioritised
12. Ensure adequate funding, co-ordination and governance for AOD and mental health sectors. Ensure people have equitable access to culturally responsive, trauma-informed and non-stigmatising treatment and support.
13. Implement alcohol policies and programs with a mix of both universal, population-based and targeted, individual approaches.