A major study conducted by the UK Drugs Policy Commission, with funding from the Home Office, has revealed that gay men are still abusing drugs more than any other demographic.
As media partners with the UKDPC, PinkPaper.com reveal the study's main findings before anyone else.
At a cost of £34,362, the UKPCD – an independent organisation which helps shape UK drug policy through research – examined gay men’s behavioral trends from October 2009.
The move was part of three rapid evidence assessments, which also studied drug service provisions for BME and disability communities.
The studies are reviews of published and unpublished literature as opposed to original research with individuals and organisations.
It found that gay men use illegal substances more than lesbians (with the exception of Cannabis) and massively more than heterosexuals across the board. This was true for all drugs. They study also found that gay men are often early adopters of new drugs, consuming new arrivals before they become a national trend, and are also likely to use more several substances simultaneously.
For gay and bisexual women in particular, cannabis is the substance of choice, yet services designed to tackle such dependence are almost non-existent for women.
These are the results in greater detail:
Policy implications
- Given comparatively high rates of drug use among the LGBT communities, government policy and local commissioners should address the needs of this group.
- A review of the current level of focus and examples of good practice would be useful.
- Further information is needed about the extent to which the drug use is problematic and the overlap with alcohol use.
- Evidence suggests that LGBT communities include a comparatively high proportion of risk takers and ‘early adopters’ regarding drugs. Together with continual development of new synthetic drugs, this may be helping to develop new (mainstream) drug markets.
- This group may also provide early warning of ‘new’ or emerging patterns of use; appropriate data-gathering and intelligence-sharing mechanisms would be required to monitor this.
Research gaps
- A better understanding of the patterns and extent of drug use among different LGBT groups. The inclusion of a question on sexual orientation in the British Crime Survey (BCS) provides analysis opportunities; other national surveys could follow this lead.
- Evidence concerning the range of risk behaviours associated with recreational drug use to inform prevention and harm reduction service provision.
Drug treatment and prevention programmes
- Evidence relating to LGBT people concerns ‘self-referral’ services (ie drop-in centres) and out-reach provision in a range of settings (such as nightclubs); general awareness of services appears poor.
- Good practice is generally seen by the LGBT community to be non-judgmental and empowering, focused on the specific needs of the group.
- It is also characterised by provision of information and support on wider health and emotional well-being needs of LGBT people.
- Limited availability of information suggests knowledge and uptake of services are low given drug use levels in the population.
- Barriers to uptake include the absence of perceived problematic use and perceptions that ‘mainstream’ services do not cater for the most commonly used drugs (such as GHB) within the community.
- An absence of LGBT groups from the government drug strategy, and a focus on opiates and crack, compounds this situation.
- Improved journey times to specialist support groups, and further training of staff on the particular needs of LGBT might also encourage use of mainstream services.
- Additional areas of potential focus include drug prevention, joint working between mental health and substance misuse services, and more consideration of substance use in sexual health services.
Policy implications
- LGBT groups may be culturally/socially greater risk takers and hence require different approaches to affect behaviours, perhaps focusing on community venues, networks and resources, such as internet sites, and increasing the use of innovative social media approaches.
- LGBT groups may not develop major problems with drugs like heroin, but there are growing problems with synthetics/stimulants. Both LGBT-specific and mainstream services need to focus in the differing requirements within the community.
- Drug services need to adapt to dealing with a variety of substances; this has implications for commissioning and resourcing, as well as the development of appropriate care.
- The LGBT community is geographically free, although the concentration of needs in urban localities requires focus. However, innovative and cost effective responses offering access to help and support in other areas will also be needed.
- The introduction of a ‘kite-mark’ system for services demonstrating good practice is one suggestion.
- Other health services providing care (ie sexual health and mental health services), need to have greater knowledge and understanding of LGBT-specific substance use issues, and targeted prevention or referral to drug services as necessary.
Evidence gaps
- Evidence for effective treatment models and pathways for some of the stimulant drugs commonly used by LGBT groups.
- A clearer understanding of the barriers to access to services, in particular among different LGBT groups and geographical areas.
Interaction with the Police and criminal justice system
- There is little evidence as regards the LGBT community, the Police and CJS in respect of drug problems.
- One study suggests the provision of drug treatment in prison is the main focus of interaction with the CJS; indeed that it may be the main source of drug treatment for gay men.
- Some evidence suggests that many LGBT users obtain drugs from within the community; as they would not purchase from outside dealers, they may not view the activity as being ‘criminal’.
- Historically poor relations between LGBT groups and the Police in relation to other associated issues (ie domestic violence, personal safety, and discrimination) may also present a barrier to interaction; proactive Police initiatives may be required to overcome distrust.
Policy implications
- Domestic violence in same sex relationships appears to be a concern. Drug services should be looking for evidence of such situations and feel confident of their ability to respond.
Evidence gaps
- The extent and nature of LGBT people’s interaction with the Police and criminal justice system in relation to drugs.
- Experiences of LGBT people’s interaction with the Police and CJS in relation to drugs (both in the community and custodial settings).
- The potential role of the Police in signposting and providing access to drug treatment and support for LGBT groups.
“When it was set up in 2007, the UK Drug Policy Commission felt that there had never been a systematic bringing together of all the studies and evidence on the impact of drugs on diverse groups,” says Roger Howard, UKDPC’s Chief Executive. “Despite some outstanding pockets of good practice, national and local drug policy has struggled to see the needs of diverse communities as a priority. This needs to change”.
Tris Reid-Smith, editor-in-chief of PinkPaper.com, said: "We are proud to be working with the UKDPC as media partners of this important research. It clearly shows the scale of drug use in our community and the need for there to be drug services and education specifically targeted at us. It's those kind of approaches, rather than a legal clampdown, that I believe will make the most impact on gay people who are struggling with drug use."