Since it opened its safe and non-judgmental arms to intravenous drug users in 2003, an air of controversy continues to cloud Vancouver’s Insite facility and programs like it.
Boasting a status of being the first (and only) in North America, Insite describes itself as a health-focused place where individuals can safely inject drugs under the supervision of health care professionals in an effort to avoid death by overdose and the spread of infections, like HIV.
Insite operates under a harm-reduction model with a real-world view on abstinence. Insite is not unlike drug consumption rooms that operate around the world. Although the concept of safe injection and facilities like Insite have been a topic of heated debate in Canada recently, supervised injection sites have been around since the 1970s.
Europe is the front-runner when it comes to utilizing safe injection sites, with four countries currently allowing for such facilities. Outside of those European countries and Canada, Australia is the only other country that provides medically supervised injection sites.
The Netherlands
22 official drug consumption facilities are scattered throughout The Netherlands. Initial sites were established in the 1970s, when drug-use was no longer looked at as deviant, but became accepted as a personal lifestyle. Relaxed laws on drug possession allowed for facilities to open up earlier than most other countries. Facilities often incorporate both smoking and injecting rooms. They also offer services that include: drug-free treatment, medical care, counseling, food, laundry, and showers.
Switzerland
Switzerland’s first supervised injection centre was opened in 1986 when health workers noticed the congregation of injection drug users in public spaces. With 12 Swiss centres now in use, the facilities usually provide a sterile environment and access to medical care and counseling for individuals as well as needles, syringes, spoons, etc. Usually open for seven hours a day, five or six days a week, clients must be at least 16 years old and have a history of injecting before they are allowed to use the centre.
Germany
In 1994 Germany opened its first injecting centre, and currently operates 25 consumption facilities. Employees are mostly social workers, nurses, and medical officers. Clients must be at least 18 years old and adhere to the rules, which include: no violence, no drug-dealing, no sharing of drugs, no injecting of others, no staff assisted injecting, and a 30-minute time limit.
Spain
The most recent European country to incorporate supervised injecting rooms, Spain opened the doors to its first facility in 2000. Spain is home to the only injection facility that is open 24 hours a day.
Although research is limited, evidence suggests the benefits of safe injection sites lie in four important areas: reduced public nuisance, improved access and uptake of health and other welfare services, reduced opioid related overdose risk, and reduced risk of blood-borne virus transmission.
Vancouver’s Insite Program statistics reveal that, on average, the facility sees 491 safe injections daily. The program has had zero overdose fatalities, 2,492 clinical treatment interventions, and 411 admissions to Onsite detoxification. 6,242 referrals were given through Insite to other health and social service facilities, most of which were for detox and addiction treatment.
Resources:
1. Dolan K, Kimber J, Fry C, Fitzgerald J, McDonald D, Trautman F. Harm Reduction Digest 10: Drug consumption facilities in Europe and the establishment of supervised injecting centres in Australia. Drug and Alcohol Review (2000) 19, 337-346
2. Hedrich D. European report on drug consumption rooms. European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (Feb. 2004) p. 15-23.
3. Vancouver Insite Program, www.supervisedinjection.vch.ca/
This article was submitted by Jess Howat. Jess was a practicum student at AIDS Calgary in March. She is currently working towards a Communication Studies degree between SAIT and the University of Calgary. This blog was originally posted in June 2010 on AIDS Calgary's The A Word http://aidscalgary.blogspot.com/
Friday, June 24, 2011
Friday, June 17, 2011
AIDS Calgary Endorses Efforts to Decriminalize Prostitution
All Canadians are afforded the right to work in a safe environment with our general health and well-being protected by various governmental and social organizations. Our human rights as Canadians allow us to be treated equally and provide us with the opportunity to be protected equally. Unfortunately, due to the criminalization of prostitution under sections 210-213 of The Criminal Code of Canada, sex workers are not afforded these same rights. Their basic human rights are violated by the institution of these laws and therefore sex workers’ health and safety suffer.
Criminalization of Prostitution: Current Canadian Law
Section 210 – Prohibits anyone from working in and/or owning a “Bawdy House”, otherwise known as a Brothel. Under Criminal Code, a Bawdy House can constitute any place a person occupies for the purpose of prostitution. This includes sex worker and client houses, hotels, a car, and/or massage and body rub parlors.
Section 211 – It is illegal for a person to direct or take some one to a Bawdy House. This includes taxi drivers, hotel concierge and a chauffer.
Section 212 – Outlaws living on the avails of prostitution this includes family members or any person’s who would be supported by a sex worker. This law also prohibits procuring prostitution. More specifically, procuring prostitution means it is illegal to persuade some one into engaging in prostitution or making referrals to a sex worker.
Section 213 – Prohibits communication for the purpose of prostitution in public. This means it is illegal to negotiate services with a sex worker or for a sex worker to discuss services in a public place, which includes public phones and cell phones. It is also illegal to stop vehicles or people on the street for prostitution.
Breaking these laws can vary in terms of punishment; some include fines or jail time.
Arguments in favor of Criminalization
Deterrence
Many criminalization advocates believe it will deter those considering sex work as a possible career, and hinder potential clients. Those who agree with this argument assume that criminalization will deter veteran sex workers from continuing to engage in sex work.
Exploitation and Human Trafficking
Many criminalization advocates feel that sex work is not a chosen profession and that sex workers are persuaded or forced into it. Those who agree with this argument believe that criminalization will eliminate human trafficking and sexual exploitation.
Public Health Concern
Many criminalization advocates believe that sex worker’s do not practice safer sex and are responsible for high rates of sexually transmitted infections (STI’s). Those who agree with this argument believe that if prostitution is criminalized there will be a decrease in STI rates.
Moral Argument
Many criminalization advocates believe that sex work is morally wrong and therefore should be against the law. Those who agree with this argument believe that if we continue to criminalize prostitution that people will stop engaging in sex work and we will abolish sex work from our society.
Arguments in favor of Decriminalization
Deterrence
It is clear that although our Criminal Code prohibits sex work, still people engage in sex acts for money both as clients and as sex workers. The criminalization of prostitution often leads sex workers to be continuously processed through the legal system, sometimes resulting in their own incarceration and contributing to mounting legal fees. In actuality criminalization keeps people involved in the sex trade creating a cycle where often the only option to repay fines is to return to sex work.
Exploitation and Human Trafficking
Sex work and human trafficking are often assumed to be the same thing; assuming that becoming a sex worker is not a choice. Sex workers enter into this line of work for a variety of social and economic reasons. Decriminalizing prostitution would help create transparencies between who is a willful sex worker and who is not, and resources spent on prosecuting consenting adults involved in sex work could be better used to prosecute abuses and trafficking. There are already laws in place used to prosecute trafficking and other offences related to coercion and confinement, prostitution laws are not needed in these cases.
Public Health Concerns
There are many jobs that put their employees’ and patrons’ health at risk. Most of these careers offer protection and education against the risks of their profession. Sex workers are disallowed these same rights and decriminalization could instigate the creation of a standardized health care plan, as well as standardized harm reduction education. Also, there is always a risk of STI or HIV transmission when having unprotected sex, however, unprotected sex and infection transmission isn’t a direct result of paying for sex with money. By decriminalizing prostitution we may open the door to testing and health care that can be accessed by sex workers without fear of discrimination, judgment and criminalization. Sex workers will feel more empowered to protect themselves; they will have a voice and will be able to negotiate safer sex with their dates.
Stigma and Discrimination
Most sex workers want to have the ability to function in society without judgment or social barriers. The criminalization of prostitution generalizes that all sex workers are criminals and should be pushed to edges of our society. This legal barrier prevents sex workers the opportunity to speak openly about their profession only to perpetuate stereotypes and stigma. The law suggests that sex workers are second-class citizens, which is a violation of their human rights. We must remember that sex workers are our daughters, sons, mothers, fathers and brothers and they are entitled to be treated with dignity and respect.
Increased Harm
The criminal code contributes to the segregation of sex workers and society. As it is illegal for them to work in groups or public areas, sex workers find themselves in increasingly vulnerable situations and at risk to experience violence. When sex workers are forced to work in isolated areas for fear of criminalization they are more likely to experience violence because they do not have the time to screen dates or negotiate safer sex. Criminalization also creates a divide between sex workers and the police, and promotes the attitude that sex workers deserve whatever abuse they incur as they too are criminals. This means that many of the bad dates that sex workers experience go unreported for fear that they themselves will be criminalized during the reporting.
Legal Contradictions
Although prostitution is legal in Canada the ambiguity of the laws create confusion and violates sex worker’s human rights. For example, it is legal to have sex on camera and get paid for the purpose of adult films, be an exotic dancer and work in an erotic massage parlor. The definition of sex worker then becomes blurred as in most of these professions the exchange of a sexual encounter for money is taking place. These laws are hierocracy and as Canadians we have a vested interest in ensuring our laws are not hypocritical.
Moral Argument
Regardless of whether or not sex work is immoral, sex workers are human beings who deserve the right to health and safety. We have a right to protect people and all individuals regardless of their job deserve the right to safety and to work free of violence. There are many things that people in our society believe are immoral and that we do not criminalize i.e. suicide attempts, infidelity, adult pornography, and homosexuality.
Conclusion
Criminalization of prostitution limits sex workers’ ability to take necessary security precautions by forcing them to work alone and in isolated areas. The fear of criminal charges prevents sex workers from properly screening dates, communicating to fellow sex workers information about dangerous clients or negotiating safer sex. These factors contribute to the cycle of sex workers’ increased vulnerability to health risks and experiencing violence.
Stigma and prejudice around sex work are also magnified by its criminalization. If these Canadian citizens are entitled to the same health, safety and tax benefits as other professions it would alleviate the idea that sex workers are lesser citizens. Their rights would become par to the rights of other Canadians.
AIDS Calgary endorses efforts to decriminalize prostitution in Canada for those adult individuals who engage in sex work.
These considerations are compiled from the following sources:
1. FIRST (www.firstadvocates.org). Out of the Shadows: Why Canada Must Decriminalize Consensual, Adult Sex Work. September 2010.
2. John Lowman’s Prostitution Research Page (http://mypage.uniserve.ca/~lowman/). Deadly Inertia: A History of Constitutional Challenges to Canada’s Criminal Code Sections on Prostitution. October 2009.
3. Pivot Legal Society (www.pivotlegal.org). Beyond Decriminalization: Sex Work, Human Rights and a New Framework for Law Reform. June 2006.
4. Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network (http://aidslaw.ca). Decriminalization of Prostitution to Reduce Sex Workers’ Vulnerability to HIV. September 2006.
Criminalization of Prostitution: Current Canadian Law
Section 210 – Prohibits anyone from working in and/or owning a “Bawdy House”, otherwise known as a Brothel. Under Criminal Code, a Bawdy House can constitute any place a person occupies for the purpose of prostitution. This includes sex worker and client houses, hotels, a car, and/or massage and body rub parlors.
Section 211 – It is illegal for a person to direct or take some one to a Bawdy House. This includes taxi drivers, hotel concierge and a chauffer.
Section 212 – Outlaws living on the avails of prostitution this includes family members or any person’s who would be supported by a sex worker. This law also prohibits procuring prostitution. More specifically, procuring prostitution means it is illegal to persuade some one into engaging in prostitution or making referrals to a sex worker.
Section 213 – Prohibits communication for the purpose of prostitution in public. This means it is illegal to negotiate services with a sex worker or for a sex worker to discuss services in a public place, which includes public phones and cell phones. It is also illegal to stop vehicles or people on the street for prostitution.
Breaking these laws can vary in terms of punishment; some include fines or jail time.
Arguments in favor of Criminalization
Deterrence
Many criminalization advocates believe it will deter those considering sex work as a possible career, and hinder potential clients. Those who agree with this argument assume that criminalization will deter veteran sex workers from continuing to engage in sex work.
Exploitation and Human Trafficking
Many criminalization advocates feel that sex work is not a chosen profession and that sex workers are persuaded or forced into it. Those who agree with this argument believe that criminalization will eliminate human trafficking and sexual exploitation.
Public Health Concern
Many criminalization advocates believe that sex worker’s do not practice safer sex and are responsible for high rates of sexually transmitted infections (STI’s). Those who agree with this argument believe that if prostitution is criminalized there will be a decrease in STI rates.
Moral Argument
Many criminalization advocates believe that sex work is morally wrong and therefore should be against the law. Those who agree with this argument believe that if we continue to criminalize prostitution that people will stop engaging in sex work and we will abolish sex work from our society.
Arguments in favor of Decriminalization
Deterrence
It is clear that although our Criminal Code prohibits sex work, still people engage in sex acts for money both as clients and as sex workers. The criminalization of prostitution often leads sex workers to be continuously processed through the legal system, sometimes resulting in their own incarceration and contributing to mounting legal fees. In actuality criminalization keeps people involved in the sex trade creating a cycle where often the only option to repay fines is to return to sex work.
Exploitation and Human Trafficking
Sex work and human trafficking are often assumed to be the same thing; assuming that becoming a sex worker is not a choice. Sex workers enter into this line of work for a variety of social and economic reasons. Decriminalizing prostitution would help create transparencies between who is a willful sex worker and who is not, and resources spent on prosecuting consenting adults involved in sex work could be better used to prosecute abuses and trafficking. There are already laws in place used to prosecute trafficking and other offences related to coercion and confinement, prostitution laws are not needed in these cases.
Public Health Concerns
There are many jobs that put their employees’ and patrons’ health at risk. Most of these careers offer protection and education against the risks of their profession. Sex workers are disallowed these same rights and decriminalization could instigate the creation of a standardized health care plan, as well as standardized harm reduction education. Also, there is always a risk of STI or HIV transmission when having unprotected sex, however, unprotected sex and infection transmission isn’t a direct result of paying for sex with money. By decriminalizing prostitution we may open the door to testing and health care that can be accessed by sex workers without fear of discrimination, judgment and criminalization. Sex workers will feel more empowered to protect themselves; they will have a voice and will be able to negotiate safer sex with their dates.
Stigma and Discrimination
Most sex workers want to have the ability to function in society without judgment or social barriers. The criminalization of prostitution generalizes that all sex workers are criminals and should be pushed to edges of our society. This legal barrier prevents sex workers the opportunity to speak openly about their profession only to perpetuate stereotypes and stigma. The law suggests that sex workers are second-class citizens, which is a violation of their human rights. We must remember that sex workers are our daughters, sons, mothers, fathers and brothers and they are entitled to be treated with dignity and respect.
Increased Harm
The criminal code contributes to the segregation of sex workers and society. As it is illegal for them to work in groups or public areas, sex workers find themselves in increasingly vulnerable situations and at risk to experience violence. When sex workers are forced to work in isolated areas for fear of criminalization they are more likely to experience violence because they do not have the time to screen dates or negotiate safer sex. Criminalization also creates a divide between sex workers and the police, and promotes the attitude that sex workers deserve whatever abuse they incur as they too are criminals. This means that many of the bad dates that sex workers experience go unreported for fear that they themselves will be criminalized during the reporting.
Legal Contradictions
Although prostitution is legal in Canada the ambiguity of the laws create confusion and violates sex worker’s human rights. For example, it is legal to have sex on camera and get paid for the purpose of adult films, be an exotic dancer and work in an erotic massage parlor. The definition of sex worker then becomes blurred as in most of these professions the exchange of a sexual encounter for money is taking place. These laws are hierocracy and as Canadians we have a vested interest in ensuring our laws are not hypocritical.
Moral Argument
Regardless of whether or not sex work is immoral, sex workers are human beings who deserve the right to health and safety. We have a right to protect people and all individuals regardless of their job deserve the right to safety and to work free of violence. There are many things that people in our society believe are immoral and that we do not criminalize i.e. suicide attempts, infidelity, adult pornography, and homosexuality.
Conclusion
Criminalization of prostitution limits sex workers’ ability to take necessary security precautions by forcing them to work alone and in isolated areas. The fear of criminal charges prevents sex workers from properly screening dates, communicating to fellow sex workers information about dangerous clients or negotiating safer sex. These factors contribute to the cycle of sex workers’ increased vulnerability to health risks and experiencing violence.
Stigma and prejudice around sex work are also magnified by its criminalization. If these Canadian citizens are entitled to the same health, safety and tax benefits as other professions it would alleviate the idea that sex workers are lesser citizens. Their rights would become par to the rights of other Canadians.
AIDS Calgary endorses efforts to decriminalize prostitution in Canada for those adult individuals who engage in sex work.
These considerations are compiled from the following sources:
1. FIRST (www.firstadvocates.org). Out of the Shadows: Why Canada Must Decriminalize Consensual, Adult Sex Work. September 2010.
2. John Lowman’s Prostitution Research Page (http://mypage.uniserve.ca/~lowman/). Deadly Inertia: A History of Constitutional Challenges to Canada’s Criminal Code Sections on Prostitution. October 2009.
3. Pivot Legal Society (www.pivotlegal.org). Beyond Decriminalization: Sex Work, Human Rights and a New Framework for Law Reform. June 2006.
4. Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network (http://aidslaw.ca). Decriminalization of Prostitution to Reduce Sex Workers’ Vulnerability to HIV. September 2006.
Thursday, June 9, 2011
What’s in a Name?
There are many people who involve themselves in sex work in a variety of ways: dancing, working on the street, independent escort, webcam, or massage parlor to name a few. The term “sex worker” is commonly used to refer to all types of work an industry that provides sexual services. Sex worker is the most universally used and respected term in the sex work industry as it puts the focus on the work. Sex work is a job that takes skill, time, commitment, and, most importantly, is remunerated by payment.
The term prostitute is also regularly used. Prostitute, however, is frequently used in the context of the prostitution laws. This brings up the incorrect association that a prostitute is someone who breaks the law or is engaging in criminal activity. Due to this long association with defying the law, the word prostitute is now also associated with negative stigma and stereotypes that can be quite incorrect. As a result, many sex worker advocates and supporters stay away from using the term prostitute.
Some folks will use the word sex trade worker, and certainly that is accurate on some levels. A trade is, by definition, is an exchange of money or goods. A trade is also a specific market or business. However, some people argue that there are trades, such as the construction field, that hold legitimate status that may include special training and certification which are not available in sex work. The argument against the use of the title “sex trade worker”, is that until sex work gains a legitimate status, it should not be called a trade.
Still there are others out there that don’t use language like sex work, prostitution or sex trade at all, but speak only about sexual exploitation as a blanket term for all people involved in sex work. Sexual exploitation does exist within the sex industry; however it is not an accurate portrayal of all sex workers. Many sex workers have chosen to enter sex work and have choice and control over their occupation, the services they provide, their payment, work environment and dates. These sex workers have self-determination and do not consider themselves exploited.
There are of course, many other words that sex workers can and are called. Rude, impolite and degrading names that won’t be posted here. Take a moment to think of them, and when you do, ask yourself what those words reveal about how our society views sex workers? These words perpetrate stigma and discrimination. This brings up the most important name a sex worker has:his or her own personal name. There is a person behind the profession, a person with his or her own identity and value. As humans, sex workers deserve the same respect, safety and rights as any other person in any other profession. So whatever name or label you use to describe someone involved in the sex industry, remember; what’s in a name? A person.
The term prostitute is also regularly used. Prostitute, however, is frequently used in the context of the prostitution laws. This brings up the incorrect association that a prostitute is someone who breaks the law or is engaging in criminal activity. Due to this long association with defying the law, the word prostitute is now also associated with negative stigma and stereotypes that can be quite incorrect. As a result, many sex worker advocates and supporters stay away from using the term prostitute.
Some folks will use the word sex trade worker, and certainly that is accurate on some levels. A trade is, by definition, is an exchange of money or goods. A trade is also a specific market or business. However, some people argue that there are trades, such as the construction field, that hold legitimate status that may include special training and certification which are not available in sex work. The argument against the use of the title “sex trade worker”, is that until sex work gains a legitimate status, it should not be called a trade.
Still there are others out there that don’t use language like sex work, prostitution or sex trade at all, but speak only about sexual exploitation as a blanket term for all people involved in sex work. Sexual exploitation does exist within the sex industry; however it is not an accurate portrayal of all sex workers. Many sex workers have chosen to enter sex work and have choice and control over their occupation, the services they provide, their payment, work environment and dates. These sex workers have self-determination and do not consider themselves exploited.
There are of course, many other words that sex workers can and are called. Rude, impolite and degrading names that won’t be posted here. Take a moment to think of them, and when you do, ask yourself what those words reveal about how our society views sex workers? These words perpetrate stigma and discrimination. This brings up the most important name a sex worker has:his or her own personal name. There is a person behind the profession, a person with his or her own identity and value. As humans, sex workers deserve the same respect, safety and rights as any other person in any other profession. So whatever name or label you use to describe someone involved in the sex industry, remember; what’s in a name? A person.
Thursday, June 2, 2011
Intro to Harm Reduction
It seems today that outreach programs go hand in hand with the principles of harm reduction. Broadly speaking, harm reduction involves preventative practices to reduce the chance of harmful consequences resulting from high risk activities. Harm reduction is about meeting the needs of those it is trying to reach out to.
The World Health Organization strongly endorses harm reduction as an evidence-based approach to HIV prevention, and in the treatment and care of drug users. Safe injection sites for intravenous drug users are an example of harm reduction in action and clearly illustrate its main goal: it is not exclusively the elimination of risky behaviors, but rather reducing the risks and harms associated with such behaviors.
One could argue that harm reduction is only a band-aid solution and that the only way to address the social and personal costs of risky behaviors is to make abstinence the goal. In an ideal world, this certainly makes sense, however real life experience with abstinence programs has shown us that abstinence goals are often not realistic. On the other hand, studies have clearly shown that harm reduction programs have greatly reduced HIV transmission and death from overdoses. 1, 2
Since its inception, harm reduction has met with resistance. For many harm reduction opponents the idea of, say, facilitating drug use is illogical. These opponents know that what drug addicts need is to just stop using. The difference found in harm reduction lies in providing people with services they can, and will, access rather than what we think they need.
Harm reduction continues to be a controversial topic. What do you think? Is there a place for harm reduction in our service approaches? What do you see as the pros and cons?
Harm reduction programs available at AIDS Calgary:
1. AIDS Calgary provides safer sex supplies, such as condoms and lube, that help reduce the harm associated with sexual activity and to reduce the spread of HIV and other STI’s.
2. AIDS Calgary provides needle exchange equipment and safer inhalation equipment through our partnership with Safeworks.
3. AIDS Calgary’s street outreach connects with people where they are at.
4. AIDS Calgary counseling is non-judgmental and harm reduction based.
5. AIDS Calgary’s Shift program works from a harm reduction philosophy to provide support, outreach, education, advocacy, referrals, and counseling to individuals involved in, or those who have been involved in, the sex trade.
References:
1. Amundsen EJ. Measuring effectiveness of needle and syringe exchange programmes for prevention of HIV among injecting drug users. Addiction 2006;101:911-2.
2. Langendam MW, van Brussel GH, Coutinho RA, van Ameijden EJ. The impact of harm-reduction-based methadone treatment on mortality among heroin users. Am J Public Health 2001;91:774-80.
This article was submitted by guest blogger, Anna Lam . This blog was originally posted in February 2010 on AIDS Calgary's The A Word http://aidscalgary.blogspot.com/
The World Health Organization strongly endorses harm reduction as an evidence-based approach to HIV prevention, and in the treatment and care of drug users. Safe injection sites for intravenous drug users are an example of harm reduction in action and clearly illustrate its main goal: it is not exclusively the elimination of risky behaviors, but rather reducing the risks and harms associated with such behaviors.
One could argue that harm reduction is only a band-aid solution and that the only way to address the social and personal costs of risky behaviors is to make abstinence the goal. In an ideal world, this certainly makes sense, however real life experience with abstinence programs has shown us that abstinence goals are often not realistic. On the other hand, studies have clearly shown that harm reduction programs have greatly reduced HIV transmission and death from overdoses. 1, 2
Since its inception, harm reduction has met with resistance. For many harm reduction opponents the idea of, say, facilitating drug use is illogical. These opponents know that what drug addicts need is to just stop using. The difference found in harm reduction lies in providing people with services they can, and will, access rather than what we think they need.
Harm reduction continues to be a controversial topic. What do you think? Is there a place for harm reduction in our service approaches? What do you see as the pros and cons?
Harm reduction programs available at AIDS Calgary:
1. AIDS Calgary provides safer sex supplies, such as condoms and lube, that help reduce the harm associated with sexual activity and to reduce the spread of HIV and other STI’s.
2. AIDS Calgary provides needle exchange equipment and safer inhalation equipment through our partnership with Safeworks.
3. AIDS Calgary’s street outreach connects with people where they are at.
4. AIDS Calgary counseling is non-judgmental and harm reduction based.
5. AIDS Calgary’s Shift program works from a harm reduction philosophy to provide support, outreach, education, advocacy, referrals, and counseling to individuals involved in, or those who have been involved in, the sex trade.
References:
1. Amundsen EJ. Measuring effectiveness of needle and syringe exchange programmes for prevention of HIV among injecting drug users. Addiction 2006;101:911-2.
2. Langendam MW, van Brussel GH, Coutinho RA, van Ameijden EJ. The impact of harm-reduction-based methadone treatment on mortality among heroin users. Am J Public Health 2001;91:774-80.
This article was submitted by guest blogger, Anna Lam . This blog was originally posted in February 2010 on AIDS Calgary's The A Word http://aidscalgary.blogspot.com/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)