Articulating Connections between the Harm-Reduction Paradigm and the Marginalisation of People Who Use Illicit Drugs
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we argue for the importance of unsettling dominant narratives in the current terrain of harm-reduction policy, practice and research. To accomplish this, we trace the historical developments regarding the Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV), the Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) and harm-reduction policies and practice. We argue that multiple historical junctures rather than single causes of social exclusion engender the processes of marginalisation, propelled by social movements, institutional interests, state legislation, community practices, neo-liberalism and governmentality techniques. We analyse interests (activist, lay expert, institutional and state) in the harm-reduction field, and consider conceptualisations of risk, pleasure, stigma, social control and exclusionary moral identities. Based on our review of the literature, this paper provides recommendations for social workers and others delivering health and social care interested in the fields of substance use, HIV prevention and harm reduction.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it