Ottawa, ON | April 29, 2024 – On the eve of the tenth anniversary of her son Danny’s death from unregulated drugs, Petra Schulz, co-founder of Moms Stop the Harm (MSTH), will testify before the federal Standing Committee on Health (HESA) today on the “Opioid Epidemic and Toxic Drug Crisis.”
Since MSTH’s founding in 2016, drug toxicity deaths have skyrocketed and show no signs of abating. In a tragic reflection of the human toll of the crisis, MSTH has grown to almost 4,000 members in that time, emerging as a national leader advocating for evidence-based drug policy intervention. Danny Schulz’s story is one of too many painful losses, and an important point of reflection today.
Moms Stop the Harm urges the federal government to implement a full and equitable spectrum of harm reduction and recovery supports to save lives and give hope to families across the country. The HESA Committee has caught attention and news headlines in previous weeks as elected officials have heard from policy experts, healthcare workers, law enforcement, service providers, and more. MSTH, alongside the Canadian Drug Policy Coalition (CDPC) and the HIV Legal Network, has criticized the Committee’s exclusion of organizations representing people who use drugs, a decision seen as hindering a holistic understanding of the crisis. It is only through the experience and expertise of those with lived experience that we can truly end this lethal crisis.
“It is so upsetting and infuriating to see the deaths of our loved ones politicized with misinformation and outright lies,” says Schulz, “I urge members of Parliament to stop the angry, harmful and polarizing rhetoric and social media posts, and to listen to people who use drugs when developing drug policy. Like my son, people who use drugs are valuable and loved. I miss Danny every day, and I do this work to prevent families across Canada from feeling this same devastation.”
MSTH asserts that Canada’s criminal-legal approach to drugs and the significant gaps in available supports and services have created a flawed and dangerous system, driving the mounting death toll. “Tens of thousands of Canadian families are bereft, with empty seats at their tables,” says Schulz. “We are in this terrible situation because of policy choices. I am asking our elected officials to make different choices, choices that will save lives.”
“We tried everything in our power but, ultimately, the system failed my son,” says Traci Letts, also of Moms Stop the Harm, whose son died in February of this year. “Our loved ones need autonomy and choice in their lives and in their healthcare decisions. We need harm reduction, regulated alternatives to the toxic drug supply, and evidence-based, voluntary, and accountable treatment, as well as significant investment into healthcare, education, food security, and other social determinants of health.”
“All levels of government need to work together. The HESA study is an opportunity for Members of Parliament to better understand these issues and implement fundamental changes that are desperately needed,” says Nick Boyce of the Canadian Drug Policy Coalition.
“While some governments are moving backwards in their support of progressive drug policy, we need leadership grounded in science, evidence, and compassion to end these needless deaths,” says Sandra Ka Hon Chu of the HIV Legal Network.
Schulz will testify before the HESA Committee this afternoon. While this Committee is meeting, an estimated 22 people in Canada will die today from the toxic, unregulated drug supply in this country, underscoring the urgent need for sound policy decisions and political courage.
Moms Stop the Harm challenges laws and policies that cause harm, including those laws that continue to drive the unregulated drug poisoning emergency in Canada. We call for an end to the failed war on drugs through evidence-based prevention, treatment and policy change.
Dear Minister Jones and Associate Minister Tibollo,
RE: Supervised Consumption Services site closures due to lack of funding from Ministry of Health
We write to you with grave concern regarding the Ontario government’s inaction in ensuring the provision of urgently needed supervised consumption services (SCS) amidst a worsening public health emergency caused by the toxic unregulated drug supply. We are calling on you to immediately provide direct emergency funding on or before March 29 to SCS sites that have submitted their applications to the province and are under imminent threat of closure or have closed due to lack of funding, eliminate the Consumption and Treatment Services (CTS) approach to funding SCS and urgently provide, improve, and sustain uninterrupted provincial funding for SCS that includes inhalation services.
Unregulated drugs of unknown contents and potency are driving increased deaths, hospitalizations, injuries and trauma across Ontario, with an estimated 3,644 drug-related deaths in 2023. Several communities in Ontario have declared a state of emergency due to drug toxicity deaths. SCS, and particularly low-barrier overdose prevention sites, are a necessary emergency response to this crisis and must be immediately scaled up. In 2018, the Ontario government arbitrarily capped funding to only 21 CTS. Six years later, the government has still not delivered on funding 21 sites. Despite overwhelming need and local support, the Ontario government has approved and funded only 17 CTS locations across the entire province. Only one of these is located in northern Ontario (NorWest Community Health Centre in Thunder Bay). Meanwhile, the toxic unregulated drug crisis has taken far too many lives since 2018 – nearly 20,000 and rising, with many more family and friends left grieving.
In the context of this preventable public health emergency, urgent action is required. There are at least five submitted applications for CTS sites that have been inordinately delayed by the Ontario government in Sudbury (30 months since application was submitted), Barrie (28 months), Windsor (19 months), Timmins (13 months), and Hamilton, where the application was withdrawn in October 2023 after two years, in part due to the Ontario government’s delays and lack of transparency in providing the necessary approvals and funding to sustain the site. These delays are unacceptable and deadly.
The tragedy of an isolated instance of gun violence in Toronto must not prevent people in diverse locations across the province from accessing vital health services any longer. The Ontario government’s decision to stop processing applications altogether for more than seven months is punitive and irresponsible. After the significant years of work and investment in each community to prepare the onerous applications under the provincial CTS model, to secure a suitable location and community support, and – in the case of Sudbury, Windsor and Timmins where the sites have been established with municipal stopgap funding – to hire and train staff and build trust and service uptake amongst people who use drugs, these sites are at imminent risk of closure or have been forced to close due to a lack of provincial funding. It should not fall to municipalities to fund healthcare services, which are a provincial responsibility. Moreover, management of these sites is extremely challenged by the Ontario government’s lack of transparency and accountability regarding site funding and approval timelines. In the case of Windsor, lacking the much-needed provincial support, the site has been forced to close.
Of the regions with submitted, pending CTS applications, data released in 2024 from the Office of the Chief Coroner indicates that three of these regions have amongst the ten highest mortality rates in the province: Timmins, Windsor and Sudbury each have an opioid toxicity mortality rate that is nearly three times the provincial average. Further, inhalation now accounts for significantly more overdose deaths than injection in Ontario, according to data from the Office of the Chief Coroner, yet the current CTS model continues to prohibit inhalation services. Services must be designed and supported to reflect the magnitude of the crisis and the data regarding regional need and modalities of drug use.
Failure to equitably provide for lifesaving health services like SCS is discriminatory and violates the right to life and security of the person for people who use drugs. The inordinate delays in processing applications, onerous requirements and lack of inhalation services under the provincial CTS model are also fiscally irresponsible, unsustainable and ineffective for the provision of a service that is fundamentally necessary amidst the worsening public health emergency that is the toxic unregulated drug crisis.
SCS are evidence-based, highly effective, and must be recognized as an integral part of Ontario’s publicly funded healthcare system. As such, these services must be universally available wherever there is need. These sites relieve the burden from overtaxed emergency first responders and are not complex to implement; they require an accessible location, oxygen, naloxone, sterile medical and first aid supplies, and supervising staff. It is indefensible as a matter of public health and fiscal policy that we currently have a two-tiered healthcare system where SCS are available in some southern Ontario communities and not in northern Ontario. It is a violation of the fundamental rights to equality and security of the person.
We call for urgent action from the province, commensurate with the magnitude of the crisis our communities are facing. It is vital that the Ontario government embrace a harm reduction approach to substance use, which centres the dignity, health and safety of people who use drugs while providing pathways to care, services, and community.
We are calling on the Ontario government to:
Immediately provide direct emergency funding on or before March 29 to supervised consumption services (SCS) sites that have submitted their Consumption and Treatment Services (CTS) applications to the province and are under imminent threat of closure or have closed due to lack of funding.
Urgently provide, improve, and sustain uninterrupted provincial funding for SCS, including inhalation, and ensure equity in regional service availability, particularly in northern communities.
Phase out the Consumption and Treatment Services (CTS) approach to funding SCS, which requires additional and overly stringent conditions over and above Health Canada’s requirements.
In the interim, immediately remove the cap on the number of funded SCS sites and the prohibition on inhalation services under the provincial CTS model.
In the interim, introduce transparency and an expedited 30-day timeline for responding to applications under the provincial CTS model.
Introduce a low-barrier process by which community organizations can seek provincial funding for SCS.
Integrate SCS into Ontario’s core funded healthcare system with ongoing, integrated funding and resources.
Meet with us by March 13.
We look forward to hearing from you as soon as possible on this urgent matter.
Signed by,
DJ Larkin, Executive Director, Canadian Drug Policy Coalition
February 08, 2024: Belleville, Ontario is back in the news with another spike in overdoses. In November 2023, Belleville experienced a similar spike. At that time, Belleville police stated the spike was likely due to “opioids laced with GHB”. We were skeptical of this claim, but needed to wait for any lab-based analysis of the drugs involved. The results came back in January and we developed the following statement.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: BC Supreme Court rules in favour of Harm Reduction Nurses Association, pauses coming into force of BC’s public drug consumption law
xʷməθkʷəy̓əm, sḵwx̱wú7mesh & səlilwətaɬ lands |Vancouver, BC | December 29, 2023
This temporary injunction provides time for the Court to assess whether the law violates Charter rights and is outside of BC’s constitutional jurisdiction.
The province passed the Act in November, imposing sweeping restrictions on the decriminalization pilot that launched January 31, 2023, which removes criminal penalties for the possession of small amounts of some illegal drugs. The proposed Act would prohibit drug use in most public spaces. The Harm Reduction Nurses Association, represented by lawyers Caitlin Shane of Pivot Legal Society and DJ Larkin of the Canadian Drug Policy Coalition argued this would exacerbate many harms decriminalization aims to reduce through increased interactions with law enforcement, displacement, drug seizures, fines and arrests.
BC Supreme Court Chief Justice Hinkson agreed, concluding that, “It is apparent that public consumption and consuming drugs in the company of others is oftentimes the safest, healthiest, and/or only available option for an individual, given a dire lack of supervised consumption services, indoor locations to consume drugs, and housing.”
British Columbia initially launched the decriminalization pilot to reduce police and criminal justice involvement with substance use, in an effort to reduce harm, destigmatize drug use, and prevent fatal overdose in the context of a public health emergency that causes 7 unnecessary deaths each day. Evidence shows enforcement has not reduced drug availability or use, is costly, and is linked to an increased risk of overdose and cycles of homelessness.
The BC Supreme Court ruling determined that the province’s proposed ban on public drug consumption cannot come into force until at least March 31, 2024, due to the irreparable harm it could cause to people at risk of death or serious injury from the unregulated toxic drug crisis. In his judgement, the Honourable Chief Justice Hinkson concluded, “I am satisfied… that there are serious issues to be tried [and] that irreparable harm will be caused if the Act comes into force.”
The decision preserves the status quo of the law in BC. The province’s decriminalization pilot project remains in effect, allowing for the possession of small amounts of some drugs. The restrictions to the pilot also remain in effect, including that drug possession remains illegal on the premises of elementary and secondary schools, playgrounds, child-care facilities, around splash pads and skate parks, and for anyone under 18 years old.
HRNA is a non-profit national organization comprised of nurses who work alongside people at severe risk of overdose and death due to Canada’s toxic unregulated drug supply. “We’re concerned this proposed law would threaten the lives, health, and safety, and Charter rights of our clients, many of whom live in communities that lack safe, indoor locations where drug use is permitted,” said Corey Ranger, HRNA President. “This law would drive our clients into more remote and isolated locations away from services and emergency care.” The application was filed alongside a Charter challenge to the law, which is likely to be heard in the new year. A statement from HRNA regarding its decision to take legal action is available online.
Since BC’s decriminalization policy took effect, there has been no documented increase in public drug consumption. Instead, concerns highlighted in government documents released through access to information requests mention recent “media frenzy” driving anti-poverty/anti-homeless sentiment, the spread of misinformation about the decriminalization pilot, and the province’s continued treatment of drug use as a criminal rather than a health matter.
If brought into force, BC’s law would have authorized displacement, fines, arrest and imprisonment for people who use drugs in public, regardless of the availability of safe, legal spaces to use drugs or people’s housing status.
“This law cannot be compared to laws restricting alcohol, nicotine or cannabis consumption in public. Because our governments have refused to regulate the drug supply itself, the contents and potency of the drugs are unknown. That is at the core of why so many people are at risk of overdose,” says DJ Larkin, one of HRNA’s lawyers and Executive Director of the Canadian Drug Policy Coalition. Chief Justice Hinkson’s judgement states, “I accept that the unregulated nature of the illegal drug supply is the predominant cause of increasing death rates in British Columbia.
“Ultimately, legislation outlining where people can and can’t ingest drugs of any kind likely makes sense,” says Larkin. “But we must start from regulating what is in the drugs, how they are packaged, and who, where and how they are purchased. That would provide the safety that people need.”
Michael Nurse: Andre, I want to thank you for being here. For agreeing to share your perspective on some of the findings from the Imagine Safe Supply research. Could you talk briefly about your background, like your pursuits, your work, and how you came to be experienced and interested in the concept of safe supply?
Andre Hermanstyne: I am a former substance user. I’ve tried every substance at least once from fentanyl to crystal meth; f. I have held many different positions on the frontlines of the Social Work field, including for Black CAP, creating Canada’s first harm reduction program focusing on the needs of African, Caribbean, and Black (ACB) people. I’ve worked also for the Jewish response to homelessness. and for public health as a counsellor at the primary injection site located at Dundas Square in the heart of Toronto. I believe in and access safe supply programs. I’m really interested in commenting on this research because change only occurs once there is suitable data to support necessary changes. I feel like as somebody who is a racialized person, that we are often left out of the discussion while harmful effects impact us at higher rates than many other cultural groups.
Michael Nurse: As you are speaking of safe supply, what is your understanding of the purpose of safe supply. Why safe supply?
Andre Hermanstyne: So right now, there is a poisoned drug supply. So, for instance when a person purchases fentanyl there is a reasonable expectation that fentanyl is what they will receive. Often this is not the case as its often adulterated and mixed with different agents. Some of these agents are supposed to create an additive effect in order to produce a better high. But the result is lowering the respiration of the user to the point where they stop breathing and eventually die. Safe supply provides a pharmaceutical equivalent of street drugs. So, like the hydromorphone or, Dilaudid, many people are also being prescribed morphine in a slow-release form called Kadian. Many users like the pills so that they can inject them and use them in a safe way. Now these are manufactured pharmaceuticals, and we know exactly what is in it. How much the dosage is and that they are not adulterated. So as a result, my understanding is that it has resulted in a lot less death.
We know that people who use drugs struggle with a lot of complex issues. And some of those issues can be addressed when they come in weekly to access their safe supply through an appointment with their Doctor.– dental care and health care and things of that sort can also be addressed just by virtue of them coming in to access safe supply.
Michael Nurse: OK, that’s a very significant point, thank you for sharing that. And thank you for such an articulate response to that question. I would like us to focus on some selected findings from the Imagine Safe Supply research related to safe supply for African, Caribbean, and Black (ACB) people and their communities. Findings from the research indicate that some of the challenges to effective safe supply services for ACB communities include a lack of culturally specific harm reduction spaces for ACB people, a need for harm reduction services developed for ACB people, and significant absence of ACB people in leadership and decision-making for frontline services. Considering these expressed concerns and challenges, how prepared would you say the ACB community are for delivering safe supply services that are accessible and relevant for ACB people who use drugs?
Andre Hermanstyne: We are ready for it because if you look at some of the stats around incarceration rates and when I think of my own personal experience of being incarcerated, it was as a direct result of an era of problematic substance use. Selling drugs just to support my habit. Stealing things, committing robberies and stuff like that. Now I don’t have to engage in those type of behaviours. I know I can go to my doctor and get what I need. Such a relief, I haven’t had a criminal charge in over a decade.
Michael Nurse: But reflecting on the challenges that were mentioned from the findings, do you think that these are things that need to be addressed for safe supply to be effective?
Andre Hermanstyne: Yes. How they are addressed, I don’t know. I don’t have the answer for that but yes, they do definitely need to be addressed.
Michael Nurse: OK yea so, some of the findings from the research suggest that effective and sustainable safe supply for ACB people and their communities require an approach and understanding that is uniquely ACB. And by uniquely ACB I’m talking about services that are developed to respond to aspects of culture, language, nationality, class difference, between and within ACB communities. So we are looking at challenges and aspects of the ACB community that need to be considered to develop safe supply. How does the idea of ACB specific safe supply correspond to your vision of safe supply services for ACB people?
Andre Hermanstyne: I think that it is needed. A culturally specific approach is needed.
Michael Nurse: Another key finding indicated that for safe supply to be successful in ACB communities an involvement of ACB women at all levels, particularly in leadership roles, is essential. And considering that many ACB homes are led by women, what are your thoughts about the importance of Black women in the development and practice of safe supply for ACB people?
Andre Hermanstyne: I had some time to really think about this question and how I want to respond to this. So, my wife and I had a friend, whom was pregnant and gave birth to twins. Now the twins decided to come early, and the woman gave birth at 23 weeks which was just a little over half of the full 40-week process and extremely premature. They were girls. Both parents were ACB people. The girls ended up surviving. What the doctor said, which I found to be very interesting, was the reason that they survived was because they are Black females. And out of every child that is born with any type of challenges around the birthing process, the Black female has the highest chance of survival. So that speaks to the strength of Black women and the need to heal a lot of the trauma that we as Black men have inflicted on Black women and that was experienced by the transatlantic slave trade. So, I think it is important that we heal, we spend some time healing our Black women and they are in my estimation a critical piece to the development and success of any program especially this one.
Michael Nurse: You are talking about in general as well?
Andre Hermanstyne: Yes, and specifically to this program of safe supply.
Michael Nurse: What is the uniqueness that you see for Black women in the development of ACB services? I know some people say that Black women do most of the caring in the community, that Black women are involved in organizing support for people. Do you see this as a significant factor?
Andre Hermanstyne: Absolutely. Not only from those viewpoints but just the strength that a Black woman possesses just by her presence alone. Her knowledge and her insights are needed. We can’t move forward without the Black woman.
Michael Nurse: That’s a very deep answer, thank you for that. Another question, the research heard that religion and faith influences stigma about drug use in ACB communities. And that it would be important to find ways to engage religious leaders in addressing stigma or harm reduction or even safe supply. What are your thoughts on this issue?
Andre Hermanstyne: I totally agree that we need to address the stigma that is associated with religion because from a religious aspect these are sins. Drug use is sinful behaviour. So, it’s an all-or-nothing kind of abstinence-based approach. But a harm reduction approach, we meet people where they are. I think engaging those ministers who have more of a progressive stance and encouraging them to then bring that message, or package that message to deliver it to ministers who hold more conservative values.
Michael Nurse: And you know, I’m going to say I always learn from talking with you. And even that comment that you made about reaching out to the more progressive ministers to get that connection is a distinction that I really didn’t consider. Is there anything that you would like to say about safe supply for ACB people that we haven’t covered here?
Andre Hermanstyne: No, but it just seems that you guys are on the right path and like I said earlier we can’t have anything without the necessary research. And you know the challenges that we’ve had working together at Black CAP, just to get funding for ACB programming. And even after I left, I heard that the drop-in had been cancelled because the building management didn’t want people who are using substances attending any program held in that building So, I mean we need to start knocking over some of these barriers and having a space for people who are Black who are choosing to use drugs, that they can feel safe. And live.
Michael Nurse: Andre, I want to thank you for being here. And for being open to sharing your experience and expertise on this topic.
Andre Hermanstyne: Thank you so much Michael and if at any point you have any more questions or whatever feel free to just give me a call.
Michael Nurse: Thanks Andre.
Andre Hermanstyne: Thank you very much, I appreciate you Michael man.
Michael Nurse: I appreciate you too my brother.
Imagine Safe Supply is a community-based research project that explored participation in safe supply in Canada for people who use drugs and frontline workers. For more information on this research please visit here.
Michael Nurse is a harm reduction practitioner, activist, and advocate. He resides in the city of Toronto where he has worked for the past 20 years delivering harm reduction-based street outreach from a lived experience perspective.
Frank Crichlow is the Board President of the Canadian Association of People Who Use Drugs and President of the Toronto Drug Users Union. He works at the South Riverdale Community Health Centre in Toronto as a Community Health Worker and is a community advocate with multiple organizations for people who are unhoused and who use drugs within African, Caribbean, Black, and racialized communities.
Frank Crichlow: The Imagine Safe Supply research looked at the meaning of drug user participation in safe supply. It found that the community values of people who use drugs would be central to the development and role out of effective safe supply. What is safe supply to you? And what kind of value-based considerations are there for safe supply within the African, Caribbean, and Black (ACB) community?
Michael Nurse: I see safe supply as a concept that offers transformation, that reshapes the way that people access drugs which are now deemed illicit or that are not regulated. But for me it’s problematic. At this time safe supply doesn’t really address all illicit drugs in use. It’s a particular focus on opioids. If you look at people who use crack cocaine, which in my home city of Toronto is predominantly people of African descent, even with crack cocaine people are experiencing overdoses from opiates which they never intended to use. So, to just have a focus on people who use opiates, to me it’s a very narrow focus. And it doesn’t really address the whole idea for me of safe supply, which is to transform the way that people access drugs which are currently illicit or not regulated. Yes, ACB people do use opiates intentionally, but I find we mostly use stimulants. And safe supply doesn’t address that use.
What I would like to see is a focus on safer supply. For me that would be saying OK we are intending quality assurance when people access drugs that are now deemed illicit. Until I see that approach, I don’t really see safe supply as a concept that is working in a broad and meaningful way for people of African descent.
Frank Crichlow: It’s important that those drugs should be included. Crack is a drug that Black people use, and we only have 2 or 3 safe consumption sites in Canada where people could go and smoke these drugs. Personally, as an ACB person, I would feel a lot better knowing that we have a safe place to go, and we feel safe in do
Michael Nurse: I agree.
Frank Crichlow: The research found that while there is a broad need for more representative leadership from the Black community within frontline care, there may be specific considerations around the leadership of Black women in safe supply. Black families and communities are often matriarchal, and we heard that it would be important to involve mothers, grandmothers, and extended family members in these discussions. This leadership was also seen as important to address the increased risk that Black women face within drug use communities due to targeting and harassment. What are your thoughts on the importance of Black women in leadership around safe supply?
Michael Nurse: Yes, I see a need for developing the presence, leadership skills and knowledge of women of African descent in safe supply. And indeed, this applies to most marginalized and racialized women. In the context of African People’s communities, it should be known that women are pretty much the anchors in homes. Most homes are held together and are led by women. So, I mean, it would be a fundamental flaw in any design for a community service that does not take into account the role women play in maintaining spaces for people. Remember, if we’re talking about this being a project that is being led by people with truly lived experience, women have a tremendous amount to offer from their lived experience. So that alone should say yes, women need to be factored in in a very high priority way. Because women carry that burden already, they play those roles already.
Frank Crichlow: But when you look at most organizations, Black women are seen mostly in frontline worker roles. There is just one community health centre I know of where we have a Black woman in an executive leadership position. To me, there is a need for women of ACB communities to be in higher positions. They are skillful and knowledgeable enough to be in those positions.
Michael Nurse: You also bring up another point Frank. In most cases women in the ACB community are the trusted figures. They are the ones we go to for care, for advice, for intimacy, in these areas they are the trusted figures. When we look at the mistrust that we as People of African descent have in institutions, in organizations, you can see clearly why there is a need for more Black women within those fields. Just to heal that image, just to break down distrust between us and the service entity as we seek access to care and support. And also for the institutions that already exist to offer services in response to our real needs or desires.
Frank Crichlow: Where is that distrust coming from?
Michael Nurse: That distrust is coming from the histories of this type of engagement.
Frank Crichlow: Of whiteness?
Michael Nurse: Not necessarily from whiteness. I would say it comes from the system, the institution, the whole capitalization of how people live, you know. It’s about business, it’s all about money, it’s all about funding. Organizations will dump you in a moment, dump programs in a moment, if it means that they can get a better handle on their money. So, the distrust doesn’t just come from whiteness, even though you could make that connection due to the high incidence of white privilege in the field and our society in general. But It comes from the way that money is prioritized in our society, with people being secondary.
Frank Crichlow: Yeah, but we have to remember, many Black women haven’t gotten over how they’ve been treated within these organizations. All that people report to is White people. How many people report to Black women in leadership roles?
Michael Nurse: I don’t know if I agree with you there, Frank. Because to me the treatment of Black people, women, or men in general, from organizations they need to trust isn’t just a fact of race. For example, I strongly believe that some of the most demeaning treatment a person of African descent can get from a police officer, is from a Black police officer.
Frank Crichlow: Yea, that’s true.
Michael Nurse: If it is within the culture of society – be it black, white, yellow, green, brown, pink – we all buy into it because it is a system that controls how we access services. If we don’t really allow the people who are experiencing this to drive it, then we end up with the same model that we’ve always had. And I wouldn’t just pin this on White people. I would pin this on the cultural system we live in. It is still White people who are visible in representing the system, but we are also represented in there.
Frank Crichlow: It was just a point that I was raising about how some of us feel because of whiteness and how they look at us as weak people.
Michael Nurse: I don’t think you can package everything into whiteness. Because you know the Franz Fanon book “Black Skin White Mask”? I think some of it speaks to this experience. Once we have to exist within the system, we make choices based on the system and what it allows us. So, to me this is a struggle not against people but against the system. That’s where I see it.
Frank Crichlow: Okay, I could accept that. But I still believe that one of the main struggles is how we have been treated.
Michael Nurse: Fair enough. But let’s say nothing changes within the way that safe supply is being developed and administered and the focus continues to be on opiates, after People of African descent are hired on to promote and help drive this work. As Black people, wouldn’t we be perpetuating the same kind of mal treatment that was always there before?
Frank Crichlow: I would say no.
Michael Nurse: What would change? Would we have the ability to make changes on the spot as we work, as people?
Frank Crichlow: Exactly, see that’s the challenge. That is where we have to challenge the system to make those changes.
Michael Nurse: So, the action is still against the system?
Frank Crichlow: Yes.
Michael Nurse: Yeah, so that to me it is where we meet. And for me, the key is for people to collaborate to change the system. We need to point out challenges, but also encourage people of all types to join in and fight to change the system and culture that seeks to dictate how people live and how they access safety and care. Yeah, that is where I see it. There definitely is a need for change and we need collaboration among all people to bring about this change.
Frank Crichlow: The Imagine Safe Supply research team heard that discrimination around gender and sexuality for Black LGBTQIA+ people leads to increased mental health risks and associated drug use. Do you see this as a problem in terms of LGBTQIA+ discrimination within ACB communities? How do you think we can provide a safe space for the Black LGBTQIA+ community with safe supply?
Michael Nurse: Of course, any kind of racism or oppression has a lasting effect on mental health. For me, that goes without saying. There are definite barriers against LGBTQIA+ people, against queer people, and this is compounded for LGBTQIA+ people who use drugs. It appears to me that discrimination expands according to how different you are from the mainstream, from the status quo. I remember when Black people I knew began to inject. It took a long time for that to be talked about with service providers or even in the community. People resisted telling other people within the community that they were injecting drugs because it was frowned upon. Injecting with needles was seen as much less desirable than smoking crack. Add now being LGBTQIA+, then you step into a whole new set of discrimination.
And remember that most ACB communities are grounded in the Church. That’s where many black people seek spiritual and social guidance, connection with each other, social organizing. Predominantly, most of that comes through the church. And the church says sexual activity or love exchange between same sex genders is sinful. So, starting with that, the Church is actively subscribing to the social alienation and oppression of LGBTQIA+ people. How then do you expect LGBTQIA+ people to access places that offer safe supply if hanging over their heads is the stress of having to navigate discrimination and other oppressive social and cultural barriers based on their sexual preferences?
It does mean that we need to address and deal with the social harms the Church presents. One segment of a community or population doesn’t represent everybody and cannot be dictating to all people how people live. So, the Church’s influence and involvement in maintaining harm to a segment of the population has to be addressed. It’s been suggested that a way to move this change forward is by finding the progressive members of religious communities and showing them the benefit of harm reduction and safe supply. If that works, it works. If it doesn’t work, straight out, confrontation. Because I believe in justice. You don’t need to pussy foot around this. Things need to change, definitely.
Frank Crichlow: The Church seems part of the problem because the church should be addressing those issues.
Michael Nurse: The Church is part of the problem and the Church appears unwilling to address these issues, but that doesn’t mean that we should ignore them. We need to bring it forward and fight. My trust and my hope are not really in the Church, my hope is in the people. I certainly don’t have to accept anything that the Church says or that doesn’t make sense to me. I’m looking at progress. I’m looking at people beginning to assert their existence. To say, this is what I need. Look at me, I’m here! For me, that is where safe supply and harm reduction need to be led. How will people who use drugs come out of the shadows? It shouldn’t be a shadow issue. It shouldn’t be a shadow movement. We should be out of the shadows, living our lives. I mean respecting each other.
Frank Crichlow: So, should the Church address harm reduction or safe supply?
Michael Nurse: What I would say in answer to that question is that the Church needs to get real. The message that’s coming out of the Church in terms of sin and how people live their lives, is it touching people today? You know, it isn’t touching people today as it used to. My thing is more about focusing on how we collaborate to have laws, policies, programs, and services that represent us as people. And realize that we can.
Frank Crichlow: The reason why I ask that question is because you know when anything happens, the grandma and the great grandma say, “because you don’t believe in God” and they start praying, and they want you to start praying. So, what if they would go tell the preacher that the Church should address these issues of discrimination?
Michael Nurse: Yeah, you know, I remember when dancing and winding up and so was seen as really wrong within the Church. Frank, you can’t really go into a Caribbean church these days and not hear reggae and soca music jamming, people singing to this music. It has changed, and the change doesn’t necessarily have to start within the Church, it has to start with people. And if it is right for the people, they will take it to Church, people will take it wherever, because it will reflect their lives.
Frank Crichlow: Yea.
Michael Nurse: It does need to be real.
Frank Crichlow: Particularly at the barber shop. Anywhere Black people congregate, these conversations should happen.
Michael Nurse: Yes!
Frank Crichlow: Everywhere Black people congregate, whether a street corner, whether in a bar, anywhere. And I think that is the solution there.
Michael Nurse: We also have to take on a responsibility in terms of being proactive in challenging stigma and discrimination. The first time I walked into a needle exchange there were all these messages and images on the walls, and stuff that reflected positively on me and my lifestyle. And this wasn’t done because I asked for it. It was done because I was recognized by a group of mindful people, and they created that space. I always see communities as an extension of that needle exchange. And we don’t need to just make that space comfortable; make the whole organization, the social spacecomfortable. Bring those images and messages out so that people know. Make posters and stuff. Give them to the barber shops, give them to the church, too! Put that up there! When people come in, let them see this, show them that you represent this, that you’re okay with it. Show them that this is good, you know. I feel like that’s something that we can do, just promote that goodness, you know.
Frank Crichlow: Great, very good points, Michael. Thank you very much.
Imagine Safe Supply is a community-based research project that explored participation in safe supply in Canada for people who use drugs and frontline workers. For more information on this research please visithere.
Marc McKenzie is a semi-retired frontline worker with Shepherds of Good Hope supportive housing in Ottawa. A lifelong human rights and development proponent in the social services world, he has worked in case management, mental health, and addictions harm reduction advocacy and is a founding member of the Men’s Health Group operating through the South Riverdale Community Health Centre in Toronto. Marc has a passion for music, especially jazz, and served as the transportation co-ordinator of the first Toronto Downtown Jazz Festival. For two years in the mid-90’s, he also was the host of two radio programs at CKWR, then a community radio station, in Waterloo, Ontario. Marc has a keen interest in the connectedness of all things: “Personal discovery, growth, and development is the best gig ever…so much life available, through listening”.
Frank Crichlow is the Board President of the Canadian Association of People Who Use Drugs and President of the Toronto Drug Users Union. He works at the South Riverdale Community Health Centre in Toronto as a Community Health Worker and is a community advocate with multiple organizations for people who are unhoused and who use drugs within African, Caribbean, Black, and racialized communities.
Frank Crichlow: Marc, could you share a little bit about yourself in terms of your work or pursuits and how you came to be interested in the topic of safe supply?
Marc McKenzie: My interest in safe supply started when, many years ago, a lethal herbicide called paraquat started to be sprayed on marijuana crop, which made its way into the consumer marketplace in Canada none-the-less, as part of the war on drugs campaign. At that time, Mexican pot dominated the North American market, and the spraying of their fields was carried out by the Mexican government in response to mandates set by the American government. The action started quietly, almost covertly, without notification to the public, but was outed by the American anti-discrimination group NORML (National Organisation for the Reform of Marijuana Laws), a private advocacy group. To me, the war on drugs is foolish at best and unconscionable at worst, and I don’t think that humanity can thrive under that mentality. After first working for large corporations for a number of years, I redirected my energies to social work and advocacy. I started with peer work and then, over time, moved on to other forms of social work. At every turn, whether working on the frontline, in case management, housing, or some other aspect of support services, the need for comprehensive harm reduction – from operating philosophy through to integrated service delivery – always presents itself.
Frank Crichlow: There is currently a gap in culturally oriented harm reduction and safe supply models for African, Caribbean, and Black (ACB) communities. Imagine Safe Supply research findings point to the importance of ACB leadership in the development of organizational and social policies, and a greater involvement of racialized communities in the development of drug policy in general. For example, we heard about a desire for ACB and Black LGBTQIA+ counsellors that can respond to the cultural aspects of people’s needs. My viewpoint is that there are Black people in the lower staffing roles or who are receiving services, but where is the leadership? My question to you is, what advice would you give Black people transitioning into organizational leadership roles in social service and frontline organizations that would be part of safe supply access and support?
Marc McKenzie: The concept, “safe supply”, is seated in a radically different perspective from that of any other mindset that has ruled society up to this point. At the societal level, embracing it calls for a paradigm shift in core belief. History shows that legislators and elected officials are generally slow, if not disinclined, to move towards such a big swing. Among their many concerns is mainstream public opinion, even if making the move is an act of true leadership. Skillful advocating to the public is key to opening channels of discussion towards gaining a sense of permission to rethink, let alone act.
To Black people in service leadership roles, I would say if you don’t already have a solid grasp of the factors that form(ed) the history and subsequent present circumstances that shape the ACB experience, then make that learning a priority and share what you learn. Whether through intensive immersion or relaxed conversation, look to soak up as much relevant socio-political insight as you can, such as theory and practice of class stratification and the nature and full objectives of the systems by which Canada operates. Be mindful of your information sources and of your influencers. A grounded understanding of that mechanism – how it all works and to what ultimate ends – furthers the prospect of independent-minded growth and development. Successful advocacy for safe supply calls for the pursuit and maintenance of informed original thinking.
Home-grown talent is needed. Look to develop streaming programs that can cultivate new leaders, especially from within the ACB community. This goes for those who could be mentors, as well. In society at large, inequities that plague the ACB community and especially those needing safe supply, as unique and glaring as some of those are, are largely underexposed and remain unperceived. The war on drugs narrative currently owns centre stage. More and new vitality is needed; I think the ACB community voice would benefit from steady grassroots on up development, meaning steady progressive job positions for peers, frontline workers, and beyond, and for those who can mentor. Community self-determination and strength development needs to have more of a voice, and ears listening who are motivated to respond. Safe leadership means being in regular and ongoing meaningful contact with people who have current, recent, or long past /elder lived experience.
Check yourself closely and ongoingly as best you can, to have an updated sense of where you and your team truly stand on relevant issues and service ideas, and why. Know your limits. Know what the Canadian Constitution and the UDHR (Universal Declaration of Human Rights) say on human rights. Challenge status-quo practices that work against human rights and the promotion of health and well-being.
Gather input through dialogue from as wide a range of sources as you are able, including input from those opposed to the viewpoint you represent, to build community through relationship. Model open-mindedness and support the work of other safe supply stakeholders and allies. Look to contribute towards, utilize, and reference networks active in any medium that aim at furthering harm reduction ideals and services. Support initiatives that promote healthy self-determination. Grass-roots development and action is vital; demonstrate a spirit of advocacy in action as a community standard.
Bring the conversation forward at all relevant discussion tables and look for opportunities to have best ideas explored. In a country said to be aspiring to democracy, the way forward is through dialogue. True resolution of contentious matters is more successfully negotiated than fought. Do not be sidelined from pushing the discussion envelope beyond the existing company and/or industry narrative and practices. Use evidence-based awareness raising as an orientation for listeners. At meetings, through in-house and outside partner workshops, at community “town-hall” and “coffee house” gatherings, in any relevant forum, humanize the concern. Report on real-life lack of safe access story outcomes and the related further implications. Link these to the nation’s determinants of health, and health and well-being agenda. This also has implications for the CDSA (the Controlled Drug and Substance Act of Canada) and the broader Canadian legal framework in which many of the downstream inequities that negatively impact the ACB community play out.
Finally, be mindful of developing and maintaining an empowered proactive perspective rather than a reactive, victim-centric one. Having a personal need for safe supply or not, we share origins and overall group history with all the ACB community, and generally face some form of the same barriers, one way or other.
Frank Crichlow: We heard about needed aspects of equity for Black women in relation to safe supply. One, there’s a need for anonymous, non-medical safe supply avenues where Black women can speak about substance use without judgment or police involvement. Two, there is a need for spaces at harm reduction gatherings and conferences for Black women. Third is the need for better access to support services for Black women, such as mental health and housing. Question, are there any additional areas that you think deserve attention to ensure safe supply equity for Black women? What kinds of safe supply and harm reduction support do you think Black women need, and what are the considerations around this access?
Marc McKenzie: So, within the situational context of our society, Black women typically occupy the lowest rungs of the socio-political and socio-economic ladders. For me, theirs qualifies as a “special status” which arises from racism coupled with gender bias. I believe the inequities you mention (and others) are expressions or symptoms of the mentality that brokers power in this society.
Reordering society to support rather than oppress Black women – and therefore all Black community since the women are the nexus of its well-being – would quite naturally over time result in greater equity and abundance for everyone. By this I mean all of society, considering that in humanity if anyone suffers, everyone suffers. But this support would be at the material expense of those who currently enjoy the “privilege of more” as their circumstance and way of life. Oppressing the lives of Black women is the surest way to gut all Black people.
For ACB women needing non-medical safe supply, for a start, the relationship between these women and the police (and by extension the judicial system) needs to be improved and demonstrated through routine actions to the point where the women can know they are not being targeted or dismissed; that they are related to and are served as full-value members of society. This is tricky because ultimately, the police and courts serve the status quo. Still, often enough an event that spirals into more downstream negative outcomes for these women, and by extension their families, begins with a situation the police come into, or are not called into when they should be because of fear and trust concerns. In my view, how the police and courts treat a group of people generally sets the tone for how they are regarded by most other services, and by broader society overall.
As a place to start, a presence of ACB female police officers and other first responders, especially in lead roles, would likely invite a sense of approachability and reasonable engagement. Same goes for all other support services, especially counselling. In particular, a visible Black LGBTQIA+ councillor presence would be invaluable to this community. Such representation could help people move out of the silos they live in around substance use and step towards relationship building, brought on by action and response informed by recognition, respect, cultural affinity, and understanding. These are attitudes open to progressive solutions and which move away from the existing “war on drugs” impasse. Along with this, having non-uniform officers from “community-oriented-policing” units visibly involved in social justice and advocacy initiatives, even when just as listeners, demonstrates a willingness by “the system” to develop practical humanistic relationships with communities, which is an important signal to young people coming up.
Still, there is a primary factor present to this day, deep in the psyche of much of the ACB community at large, that underpins its vulnerability. Its impact expresses in a spiral of forms, but its origins come back to oppression and the denial of self-determination. The commonly used terms “baby mother” and “baby father”, for example, indicate it. These terms originated as a way of Black slave men and women who’d had a child together, referring to each other, arising from the slave owner program of disallowing marriage amongst them and pairing each with different sexual partners at each “breeding” session, as if managing cattle. This was a routine practise in Black slave history in the Americas, for a long time, applied as a device intended to damage the psyches of slaves through the disruption of family ties. It rendered these people “emotionally diminished” and thus easier to control. Additionally, any member of the union – man, woman, or child – could be sold off separately to another owner, at any time.
The result was a fragile and injured alliance between the women and men, and children chronically raised in forced single parent, variable half-sibling situations, as prescribed by external forces and not resulting from choices based in self-determination. Because the program operated to serve the interest of commerce, the drive of the institution of slavery-for-profit trumped human kinship ties. Enslaved people’s sense of grounding commitment between the sexes, and parent-child relationships, were destabilized if not torn apart (divide and conquer) and the ACB community has yet to fully recover. The ties between women and men are still often described and exercised more through the existence of a child they co-create, than by direct lasting commitment to each other as full-value people and equals. Self-esteem issues linger as a slave trade hangover and emotional trust remains at a premium, just as the program always intended. Subsequently, the sense of grounding and empowerment that a lineage of stable relationships between parents, grandparents, and ancestors provides the psyche of a child stands on shaky ground. With the weight of such historical scars on their shoulders, the children, in turn, live out the cycle as new marks for underdevelopment and exploitation.
The downstream impact is that society targets, discriminates against, and punishes people who come from this history. This impact plays out in myriad ways including restricted access to housing, stigmatization, discriminatory education streaming, reduced job opportunities and prospects, fear of the process around acquiring citizenship status and equity, and more. There is barrier-ridden health care that often means no situational or culturally sensitive (and sometimes, instead, even inappropriate) care available, and deliberate negative agenda-driven high incarceration rates have additional harmful impacts on development and stability.
These factors become the normalized circumstances that shape the lives of many in the ACB community. And reflexively, support services all too often treat members of this community as societal outcasts. This is the framework that harm reduction for the ACB community needs to know of, and to inform about, if it is to formulate appropriate responses to this community’s needs. And yes, I know that there are other important questions to be asked and answered, but you have to start with knowledge and sharing of the formative elements. Connecting the dots and letting everyone in on the secret(s) brings this matter out of the shadows, and at least invites permission to service providers across the board to think boldly in terms of solutions. Remember, we’re asking the system, which is reflected in the mainstream, to rethink itself.
The unique plight of the ACB community, especially with regard to harm reduction and safe supply, remains virtually unknown to the general public. Typically, politicians, even if they know, don’t want to deal with it. That is why I feel that, for the long term, the development of a grassroots leadership through people who can share ownership of the movement is the next step to bringing sustainable growth and improvement. Of course, this needs to be done while continuing to petition against the long list of existing and still developing day-to-day inequities and harms.
At the end of the day, this initiative signals a spiritual, transformative quest for all of society. Safe supply and harm reduction are not really to be conditional privileges. They are actually woven into the human birthright.
Imagine Safe Supply is a community-based research project that explored participation in safe supply in Canada for people who use drugs and frontline workers. For more information on this research please visit here.
xʷməθkʷəy̓əm, sḵwx̱wú7mesh & səlilwətaɬ landsVancouver, BC | November 3, 2023
Last week’s police raid and arrests of Drug User Liberation Front (DULF) members in Vancouver have triggered an outpouring of local, national, and international support for DULF and the urgent expansion of nonmedical safe supply in response to the ongoing unregulated drug crisis.
Building on a series of safe supply protest actions, DULF launched a compassion club in 2022 to offer non-prescription safe supply to 43 people at risk from the unregulated drug market. After a year of operation, the compassion club’s preliminary findings showed significant health and safety benefits for members. DULF’s intervention demonstrates a viable grassroots model to address the devastating consequences of the unregulated drug market, led by people who use drugs.
The necessity of DULF’s nonmedical safe supply framework was affirmed this week with the release of the BC Coroners Service Death Review Panel Report: An Urgent Response to a Continuing Crisis. The report calls on the Ministry of Mental Health and Addictions to seek a federal exemption for opioid and stimulant drug access without a prescription. “The consensus of the panel is that with a proper system of checks and balances in place, the substances can be provided in a safe and responsible manner,” said Michael Egilson, chair of the death review panel.
The criminalization of DULF has ignited widespread national and international support. Communities in Toronto, Vancouver and Victoria held public solidarity rallies today, with an event planned in Ottawa for Sunday. These rallies in support of DULF advocate for the scaling up of community-based compassion clubs, rather than criminalization.
“Governments and police are scapegoating those bold enough to disobey unjust laws and save lives – like our DULF colleagues. We didn’t set out to be outlaws. But we realized that nobody was coming to save us, so we’ll have to save ourselves.” said Garth Mullins, host of Crackdown Podcast and community organizer.
An open letter in support of DULF has received endorsements from over 200 organizations and 1,700 individuals. The letter calls for the immediate halt to criminalization of community-regulated safe supply, restoration of DULF funding, and a formalized commitment to create a framework to uphold and protect community-regulated safe supply in BC.
“Businesses are seeking solutions that keep their staff, operations and neighbours safe,” said Euan Thomson, letter signatory and executive director of EACH+EVERY, a national coalition of businesses supporting harm reduction approaches to unregulated drug poisoning. “It’s well past time that grassroots initiatives led by people who use drugs were provided the space to operate without being criminalized.”
DULF’s small, community-led model of safe supply, has demonstrated how access to safety-tested drugs with known potency and contents can reduce overdose, keep people alive, reduce hospitalizations and stabilize lives. DULF’s work has support from leading researchers, physicians and health care providers, public health officials, and community groups.
“People in places of institutional power and policy-making must not hide behind the word illegal. Instead, they must focus on the law and policy that forces people and organizations like DULF to take action at great personal risk,” said DJ Larkin, executive director of the Canadian Drug Policy Coalition. “A compassion club that is saving lives every day is only illegal because the law and policy is unjust.”
In the words of members of the DULF Compassion Club, “We speak out in support of their actions with DULF, actions that opened up possibilities for us, for our community, and for drug users and people everywhere. The possibility to stay alive, and even to thrive. Today our survival hangs by a thread.”
Founded in 2010, the Canadian Drug Policy Coalition works in partnership with more than 60 organizations and 7,000 individuals working to support the development of a drug policy for Canada that is based in science, guided by public health principles, respectful of the human rights of all, and seeks to include people who use drugs and those harmed by the war on drugs in moving towards a healthier society. Learn more at www.drugpolicy.ca
Advocates, community organizations and concerned members of the public across the country are adding their names to an open letter condemning the October 25 arrests of members of the Drug User Liberation Front (DULF).
Please see below for our response to the criminalization of the Drug User Liberation Front’s heroin, cocaine and methamphetamine compassion club in Vancouver, and view the live documentwhich will be updated continuously with new signatories.
Media are invited to contact organizations listed among the signatories directly for comment.
RE: Vancouver Police Press Release, “VPD executes search warrants in Downtown Eastside drug investigation”
To:
Vancouver Police Department
City of Vancouver, and
Province of British Columbia:
The signatories of this letter condemn the criminalization of community-regulated safe drug supply distribution in Vancouver on October 25, 2023, executed through search warrants, arrests and interrogations by Vancouver Police Department.
Unregulated drug toxicity is the leading cause of death in BC for persons aged 10 to 59, accounting for more deaths than homicides, suicides, accidents and natural diseases combined. In this urgent context, the Drug User Liberation Front (DULF) operates a compassion club to save lives and reduce the harms of the unregulated drug market.
DULF has been publicabout its activities since its first safe supply action on April 14, 2021. Its second action in July 2021 was conducted in plain sight of a Vancouver Police Department station with officers in attendance. In 2022, the City of Vancouver issued a business license to DULF. That year, the Province of BC initiated a $200,000 grant through Vancouver Coastal Health to help cover DULF’s overhead costs.
DULF was transparent in its application for a Controlled Drugs and Substances Act exemption to the Government of Canada, publishing both its application and the Government’s denial of the exemption for public examination.
DULF has conducted formal evaluation of its compassion club in partnership with qualified researchers at the BC Centre on Substance Use (BCCSU). The data show the program is keeping people alive and in better health, with lower reliance on criminal activity. The removal of funding not only hinders DULF’s compassion club, it closes down a critical overdose prevention site – an outcome with legal precedent to be reversed.
The statement issued by Vancouver Police on October 26, 2023 is an apparent attempt to distance governments and police from the active and passive roles that each have played in DULF’s activities while political backlash builds against safe supply more broadly.
International reporting on DULF includes articles in Time Magazine and The Guardian. It is inconceivable that any institution operating in drug policy or enforcement could have remained unaware that DULF operates a compassion club.
If political institutions took issue with DULF’s activities, carried out with a clear aim to minimize harms to its community while more than 2,000 people are killed each year in BC by policy inaction, they had ample opportunity to respond when DULF distributed regulated drugs in front of a Vancouver Police station in 2021, requested a business license from the City of Vancouver, and approached Vancouver Coastal Health for funding.
Given the transparency with which DULF has operated, it is fair to conclude that these institutions are disingenuously betraying people who are at risk of death while a seven-year unmitigated public health emergency persists.
In solidarity with DULF, the signatories of this letter demand that Vancouver Police, the City of Vancouver, and the Province of BC:
Immediately cease criminalizing community-regulated safe supply in BC;
Restore DULF funding cut by Vancouver Coastal Health;
Formalize a commitment to create a framework to uphold and protect community-regulated safe supply in BC.
To view the growing live list of signatories, including individuals, click here.
MEDIA: Please engage organizations directly from the list below.
Signed:
National Organizations
Canadian Association of People Who Use Drugs
Canadian Students for Sensible Drug Policy
Canadian Drug Policy Coalition
CATIE: Canada’s Source for HIV and Hepatitis C Information
Drug Policy Alliance (USA)
EACH+EVERY: Businesses for Harm Reduction
Harm Reduction Nurses Association
HIV Legal Network
International Network of People who Use Drugs
Moms Stop The Harm
Regional Organizations
4B Harm Reduction Society, Edmonton, AB
Alberta Alliance Who Educate and Advocate Responsibly, AB
Bonfire Counselling, Vancouver, BC
Canadian Students for Sensible Drug Policy – Vancouver, Vancouver, BC
Canadian Students for Sensible Drug Policy – Calgary, Calgary, AB
Coalition of Substance Users of the North (CSUN), Lhtako Dene Nation, BC
Corporación ATS / Echele Cabeza, Colombia
Disability Arts & Activism Archive, BC
Harrogate Psychological Services, Edmonton, AB
HIV & AIDS Legal Clinic Ontario (HALCO), ON
Kootenay Independent Safe Supply Society, Nelson, BC
Kootenay Insurrection for Safe Supply, Nelson, BC
Kykeon Analytics Ltd, Victoria, BC
Langley Community Action Team: We All Play a ROLE, Langley, BC
Medicine Hat Drug Coalition, Medicine Hat, AB
Metzineres – Refuge Environments for Drug Users, Barcelona, Spain
PAN, Vancouver, BC
Sure Shot Harm Reduction, Ottawa, ON
People For Reproductive Rights and Freedoms, Edmonton, AB
Pivot Legal Society, Vancouver, BC
Prairie Harm Reduction, Saskatoon, SK
Project SAFE, Philadelphia, USA
REMA Feminist & Antiprohibitionist Network, Spain
Ryan’s Hope, Barrie, ON
SafeLink Alberta, AB
SAFER Victoria, Victoria, BC
Solid Outreach Society, Victoria, BC
Student Overdose Prevention and Education Network, Hamilton, ON
The POUNDS Project, Prince George, BC
Toronto Overdose Prevention Society, Toronto, ON
Tri-Cities Community Action Team, Tri-Cities, BC
United For Change Edmonton, Edmonton, AB
Vancouver Community Action Team, Vancouver, BC
We Care Substance Use Resource Society, BC
Workers for Ethical Substance Use Policy, Vancouver, BC
Whistler Community Services Society, Whistler, BC
WILD collaborative harm reduction association, Vancouver Island, BC
