1

Research on The Harm Reduction Policy Implemented by The Canadian

Government and Its Contribution to The Reduction of The Opioid Crisis

Student's Name

Institutional Affiliation

Professor's Name

Course

Date
 2

Research on The Harm Reduction Policy Implemented by The Canadian

Government and Its Contribution to The Reduction of The Opioid Crisis

Harm reduction policies and programs are increasingly being used in Canada to promote

safe and healthy lifestyles among drug abusers. However, Hyshka et al. (2019, P. 143) argue that

these policies are applied inconsistently across the country and harbor little impact in addressing

the plight of addicts. In their research, the authors conducted interviews among seventy-five

policy actors to unearth the underpinning perceptions and effects of the harm reduction policies.

The research results corroborated numerous inconsistencies in the adopted policies. Therefore,

harm reduction policies do not promote healthy living among drug abusers since they are highly

generalized, politicized, and applied inconsistently.

At the outset, the authors claim that harm reduction policies are highly politicized. Their

assessment conducted an interview involving seventy-five policymakers, researchers, and service

providers (Hyshka et al., 2019, P. 144). Even though most participants underscored the existence

of gaps in the harm reduction policies, would their results be authentic, considering that the

interviewed individuals are the same people involved in enacting and implementing the assessed

policies? Despite involving a large sample size, the authors did not specify the age differences

among the interviewed participants (Hyshka et al., 2019, P. 144). If the participants were of a

relatively similar age group, would the obtained responses be generalizable for the whole

Canadian population? While the authors make a valid claim that harm reduction policies are

politicized, their evidence is vague. It cannot be relied upon to generalize the public's opinions

regarding the efficacy of the programs.

The authors also claim that harm reduction policies are applied inconsistently across

Canada. In confirming this claim, Hyshka et al. (2019, P. 144) focused on assessing the
 3

participants' knowledge of each territory's formal policies. Even though a majority of participants

reinforced the authors' argument, their responses were inconsistent and unreliable. For instance,

the authors admitted that some participants exhibited difficulties "identifying and describing

formal provincial/ territorial-level policies at all, even when prompted" (Hyshka et al., 2019, P.

145). If this is the case, how did the authors conclude that harm reduction policies are applied

inconsistently across Canada? Would their results be unreliable given that interviewed

participants exhibited a lack of knowledge on the assessed policies? If so, this research would be

disappointing since it was incepted to underscore a need for consistency in the adopted harm

reduction policies.

Furthermore, the authors claim that harm reduction policies are ineffective due to their

general features. Despite being formulated to enhance healthy living among drug users, these

policies are not specific (Hyshka et al., 2019 P. 145). As reinforced by participants, harm

reduction policies "were rarely a factor in determining the programs' availability" to the

population (Hyshka et al., 2019, P. 145). As such, what was the essence of having these policies

if their impact was negligible? Even though this concept reinforces the authors' claim that harm

reduction policies are infective, the utilized evidence harbors limitations. For instance, the

research data was collected within thirteen months (Hyshka et al., 2019 P. 148). Therefore, what

happened to the views regarding policy advancements realized after this period? If the research

was conducted in such a skewed timeframe, were other external factors such as economic

constraints considered when evaluating the impact of harm reduction policies in Canada?

In brief, the authors criticize Canada's harm reduction programs' efficacy, citing

inconsistencies, generalizations, and politics in the adopted policies. Even though the authors'

claims are valid, their evidence is vague and harbors numerous misgivings. These limitations
 4

underscore the need for further research on the topic. Perhaps future research should uncover

why harm reduction territorial policies are not implemented equally across the country. The

disparities in the implementation of harm reduction policies make one question why leaders have

overlooked such an important issue. As a result, this situation highlights a breakdown in

Canada's legislation structure and top leadership. Therefore, this article effectively unmasks the

mischief behind the adoption of harm reduction policies and programs across the country.
 5

Reference

Hyshka, E., Anderson-Baron, J., Pugh, A., Belle-Isle, L., Hathaway, A., Pauly, B., ... & Tupper,

K. (2019). Principles, practice, and policy vacuums: policy actor views on

provincial/territorial harm reduction policy in Canada. International Journal of Drug

Policy, 71, 142-149.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2018.12.014