Man and His Mind-Changers: Highlights of the 30th International Congress on Alcoholism and Drug Dependence, Amsterdam, September 4–9, 1972

106 Pages·1973·2.48 MB·English

by  E. Dekker

MAN AND HIS MIND-CHANGERS
MAN AND HIS
MIND-CHANGERS
Highlights of the 30th International Congress on Alcoholism
and Drug Dependence, Amsterdam, September 4-9,1972
Edited by
E. DEKKER
Public Health Inspectorate for Mental Health, Leidschendam
and
H. J. VAN DER WAL
Foundation for Alcohol and Drugs Research, Amsterdam
D. REIDEL PUBLISHING COMPANY
DORDRECHT-HOLLAND / BOSTON-U.S.A.
Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 73-76520
ISBN-13: 978-94-010-2621-5 e-ISBN-13: 978-94-010-2619-2
DOl: 10.1007/978-94-010-2619-2
Published by D. Reidel Publishing Company,
P.O. Box 17, Dordrecht, Holland
Sold and distributed in the U.S.A., Canada, and Mexico
by D. Reidel Publishing Company, Inc.
306 Dartmouth Street, Boston,
Mass. 02116, U.S.A.
All Rights Reserved
Copyright (C 1973 by D. Reidel Publishing Company,
Dordrecht, Holland
Softcover reprint of the hardcover 1s t edition 1973
No part of this book may be reproduced in any form, by print,
photoprint, microfilm, or any other means,
without written permission from the publisher
TABLE OF CONTENTS
E. DEKKER and H. J. V AN DER W AL / Introduction 1
L. B. J. STUYT / Opening Address 10
w. K. V AN DIJK / Where are We, What is Permitted,
What is the Impact? 18
THE CANNABIS DISCUSSION 41
THE SOCIAL POLICY PANEL 62
D. S. BELL / Evaluation of the Congress 92
E. DEKKER AND H. J. VAN DER WAL
INTRODUCTION
"We ourselves are part of the problem, not ofits solution".
This pronouncement, made by psychologist R. S. B.
Wiener during the panel on social policy, provided a
leading Dutch weekly with an excellent headline for an
article on the 30th International Congress on Alcoholism
and Drug Dependence. With it Wiener touched one of the
central, if not the central issue of the alcohol and drug
problem. Why do we fix our attention so emphatically on
'the other people', on the consumers, abusers and addicts?
Has not the time come that, also at scientific and learned
congresses, we should start occupying ourselves with the
shortcomings of society and with its legislation and policy
as factors promoting this abuse and addiction? The
question is so obvious that no one will dare give a neg
ative answer. For this reason it is even more striking that
it is given so little serious thought. We still try to change
the consumer instead of the social structure.
In his opening address, the Minister of Public Health
and Environmental Hygiene of the Netherlands, Dr
1. B. J. Stuyt, gave some attention to this social structure.
He pointed out that a social structure which is characterized
by poverty and deprivation promotes the abuse of alcohol.
Dekker/van der Wal (eds.). Man and His Mind-Changers. 1-9. All Rights Reserved.
Copyright © 1973 by D. Reidel Publishing Company. Dordrecht-Holland
2 E. DEKKER AND H. J. VAN DER WAL
Furthermore, he wondered if there does not exist a positive
link between our society's ethics of performance and the
use of tranquillizers, etc. And finally he presented the
hypothesis as to the positive connection between the
stigmatizing of those using drugs and the escalation of the
use of drugs.
The point, however, is not only the social structure in
the general sense of the term but also the policy and course
of action of the authorities and social organizations.
To raise this problem has been one of the principal pur
poses of this congress and we have therefore, wanted to
pay ample attention to this aspect in these 'Highlights' by
including the address of the Minister of Public Health
and Environmental Hygiene, a report on the discussion of
cannabis, the panel report on social policy, and Dr Bell's
evaluation of the congress, in which he also pays atten
tion to the social course of action.
A course of action bears upon a number of concrete
measures having been derived from or linked up with a
number of political views or orientations of values of a
higher level of abstraction. A course of action implies
action. A campaign is carried on by government agencies
and social organizations, among others. This has always
been the case. The novelty of our time, however, is that
these actions are more and more based on the results of
scientific research. This development is justified by at least
two circumstances. In the first place the complexity, inter
dependence and rapid changes which are characteristic for
INTRODUCTION 3
our present-day society require action which is as much
justified as possible, i.e. weB-considered as to its possible
consequences. Secondly, scientific research may serve as
a feed-back, as a signal from society. In this case scientific
research is looked upon as an instrument for democratic
government; as a means to show up social processes for
policy-makers.
Meanwhile, it should at the same time be acknowledged
that the theory that every policy should be 'caused'
causally through the results of scientific research is not
reasonable. A policy is first and foremost a result of im
plicit or explicit political points of view and/or orientations
of values. Scientific research herewith fulfills the function
of gathering reliable information which may serve as the
basis which facilitates making a choice. But at the same
time scientific research may put up for discussion the
starting-points of this policy. By playing this part scientific
research has the function to serve as a conscience for
politicians and policy-makers. In Dr Stuyt's address this
problem has been worked out further.
The organizers of the congress held that in the past far
too little attention had been paid to the communication
between politics and policy on one hand and scientific
research on the other hand. They believe that during this
congress a start was made with a dialogue, but that the
result may still be called anything but satisfactory.
Questions as to the decriminalization of the use of drugs
or as to the harmonization of the course of action with
4 E.DEKKER AND H.J. VAN DER WAL
regard to all 'mind-changers' did come up for discussion,
but the congress failed to formulate a point of view on
them. It has become clear to us as the editors of this
volume, who have also borne an important part of the
responsibility for the contents of the programme of this
congress (E. Dekker was chairman of the programme com
mittee, while H. J. van der Wal acted as secretary), that
money-eating events like this one are only justifiable in
our present world if there is an intensive dialogue, for
example in so-called workshops, between users or groups
of users, those doing scientific research, politicians and
those framing policy. If a starting-point like this one is
taken seriously, it will appear that much more attention
and time have to be given to subjects like:
How is a social policy on 'mind-changers' brought
about and how should it be brought about?
What pressure-groups and interests are involved in this
policy?
How long will society be prepared to accept discrepan
cies in this policy as to the various 'mind-changers?' With
'mind-changers' we also think of alcohol, illegal drugs,
medical drugs, and tobacco.
How can we really penetrate into the problems of
young people who have 'resorted to drugs', of adults who
can only cope with daily stress with the assistance of
substantial portions of alcohol, tobacco, and medicine?
In short, we believe that on future congresses, by the side
of the numerous disciplines already present, also those of
INTRODUCTION 5
political science and public administration should be
allowed to take part. Special attention then will have to be
paid to the problems of communication and decision
formation. With this the spotlight does not fall only on
clients and patients but also on 'ourselves': researchers,
those giving professional assistance, and politicians.
Finally a short justification of the aims of this congress,
the results of which will be found partly in this volume.
The organizers have aimed at a method which was not
'dic;cipline-oriented' or 'profession-oriented' but 'problem
oriented'. Any frequenter of congresses knows that multi
disciplinary collaboration has hitherto been rather a
slogan than reality. Also during this congress we have not
been entirely successful in bringing about a real dialogue
between the disciplines.
Another aim is the raising for discussion of all 'mind
changers'. The high degree of selective attention paid to
illegal drugs all over the world has given rise to a counter
movement in the direction of greater attention for other
potential stuff creating dependency. By the side of the
'father of drugs', alcohol, the attention for tobacco and
medical drugs as problematic problem-solvers is on the
increase.
This congress has clearly had the intention to bring
about a dialogue between scholars and policy-makers.
The International Council on Alcohol and Addictions has
explicitly endorsed this aim. In our opinion the organizers
have only been partly successful in this: the debate on
6 E.DEKKER AND H.J. VAN DER WAL
cannabis especially was a disappointment to many of the
participants. It appeared that the experts in the panel were
so unanimously agreed that the audience felt themselves
placed up against a uniformity giving the impression of
being unreal. The debate unfortunately did not go much
further than the following thesis which was contested by
hardly anybody: cannabis should be decriminalized!
The panel on social policy, whose report has likewise been
included in this volume, on the other hand offered a
refreshing diversity giving food for thought.
Although the users of illegal drugs had not officially been
allotted a place in the programme - it is a matter of course
that there was an ample attendance of moderate and
severe users of alcohol and nicotine, both among the
speakers and the listeners - yet, during the last few days
of the congress, so-called alternative youths from Amster
dam had succeeded in procuring themselves a seat amongst
the learned establishment. For instance, it could happen
that in the 'main hall' there were youths smoking hash
sitting almost within reach of officials of the United
Nations Narcotics Control Board. A pleasing scene for all
believing in the democracy and pluriformity of society.
But also an essential amplification of scientific informa
tion which at most may occasion cognate changes. By
their presence these young people demonstrated that not
all the users of drugs are curious, pitiful or criminal beings
from another planet. They played a constructive although
critical part. The reports of the various panel-discussions