Following the evidence-base or exacerbating harms? An autoethnography of a London metropolitan police officer

Julia Ryland, Benjamin D. Scher
{"title":"Following the evidence-base or exacerbating harms? An autoethnography of a London metropolitan police officer","authors":"Julia Ryland, Benjamin D. Scher","doi":"10.1108/jcrpp-01-2024-0002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose\nThis study uses autoethnography to examine the impact of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 on policing and public health in the UK. Bridging the gap between scholarly discourse and practical law enforcement insights, this paper aims to highlight the cognitive dissonance experienced by frontline officers when using policing methods that conflict with evidence-based practices and personal values. It critiques routine police procedures, highlighting the ineffectiveness of criminal sanctions in reducing drug offences and the resultant damage to community trust and police legitimacy.\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nUsing autoethnography and critical reflection that combines personal narrative and ethnographic observation, this paper presents a practitioner's perspective on the challenges of enforcing low-level drug offences. It integrates the author's experiences as a neighbourhood police officer in Camden Town, London, with theoretical analysis to highlight the practical realities of drug law enforcement at the intersection of law enforcement and public health.\n\nFindings\nThis research reveals contradictions between current drug law enforcement strategies and public health objectives, and the consequences for law enforcement. It highlights the risks of limiting police discretion and preventing their ability to respond appropriately to complex needs. The paper emphasises the need for public health and trauma-informed policing strategies to mitigate the adverse effects on vulnerable and disadvantaged communities.\n\nPractical implications\nImproved public health outcomes: prioritising treatment and support over punishment. Adoption of trauma-informed practices: reducing marginalisation, stigma and improved experiences of police interaction. Improved trust and legitimacy: when the public perceive policing as fair and aligned with community values, it strengthens procedural justice and police legitimacy. Enhanced officer well-being: an improved working environment and experience, through more meaningful, impactful work and improved interactions and relationships with the public. Policy change: policymakers should recognise the discretionary role of police when developing drug policy and acknowledge the risks associated with enforcement approaches that conflict with community needs and broader policing objectives.\n\nOriginality/value\nOffering a novel critique of prohibitionist drug policies within the British context, this paper advocates for a cultural shift towards public health and trauma-informed approaches in UK policing. It emphasises the importance of recognising police officers' discretionary role as “citizen-agents” and the integration law enforcement approaches with harm reduction initiatives for enhanced procedural justice and police legitimacy.\n","PeriodicalId":506712,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Criminological Research, Policy and Practice","volume":"37 15","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Criminological Research, Policy and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jcrpp-01-2024-0002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose This study uses autoethnography to examine the impact of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 on policing and public health in the UK. Bridging the gap between scholarly discourse and practical law enforcement insights, this paper aims to highlight the cognitive dissonance experienced by frontline officers when using policing methods that conflict with evidence-based practices and personal values. It critiques routine police procedures, highlighting the ineffectiveness of criminal sanctions in reducing drug offences and the resultant damage to community trust and police legitimacy. Design/methodology/approach Using autoethnography and critical reflection that combines personal narrative and ethnographic observation, this paper presents a practitioner's perspective on the challenges of enforcing low-level drug offences. It integrates the author's experiences as a neighbourhood police officer in Camden Town, London, with theoretical analysis to highlight the practical realities of drug law enforcement at the intersection of law enforcement and public health. Findings This research reveals contradictions between current drug law enforcement strategies and public health objectives, and the consequences for law enforcement. It highlights the risks of limiting police discretion and preventing their ability to respond appropriately to complex needs. The paper emphasises the need for public health and trauma-informed policing strategies to mitigate the adverse effects on vulnerable and disadvantaged communities. Practical implications Improved public health outcomes: prioritising treatment and support over punishment. Adoption of trauma-informed practices: reducing marginalisation, stigma and improved experiences of police interaction. Improved trust and legitimacy: when the public perceive policing as fair and aligned with community values, it strengthens procedural justice and police legitimacy. Enhanced officer well-being: an improved working environment and experience, through more meaningful, impactful work and improved interactions and relationships with the public. Policy change: policymakers should recognise the discretionary role of police when developing drug policy and acknowledge the risks associated with enforcement approaches that conflict with community needs and broader policing objectives. Originality/value Offering a novel critique of prohibitionist drug policies within the British context, this paper advocates for a cultural shift towards public health and trauma-informed approaches in UK policing. It emphasises the importance of recognising police officers' discretionary role as “citizen-agents” and the integration law enforcement approaches with harm reduction initiatives for enhanced procedural justice and police legitimacy.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
遵循证据基础还是加剧危害?一名伦敦警察的自述
目的 本研究采用自述式方法,探讨 1971 年《滥用毒品法》对英国警务和公共卫生的影响。本文旨在弥合学术论述与实际执法见解之间的差距,强调一线警官在使用与循证实践和个人价值观相冲突的警务方法时所经历的认知失调。本文对常规警务程序进行了批判,强调了刑事制裁在减少毒品犯罪方面的无效性,以及由此对社区信任和警察合法性造成的损害。设计/方法/方法本文采用了自述和批判性反思的方法,将个人叙述和人种学观察相结合,以从业人员的视角阐述了执行低级毒品犯罪所面临的挑战。本文将作者在伦敦卡姆登镇担任社区警官的经历与理论分析相结合,强调了在执法与公共卫生交汇点上缉毒执法的实际情况。研究结果这项研究揭示了当前缉毒执法策略与公共卫生目标之间的矛盾,以及对执法工作造成的影响。它强调了限制警察自由裁量权的风险,以及妨碍他们对复杂需求做出适当反应的能力。本文强调了公共卫生和以心理创伤为基础的警务策略的必要性,以减轻对弱势和处境不利社区的不利影响。采用关注创伤的做法:减少边缘化、污名化,改善与警察互动的体验。提高信任度和合法性:当公众认为警务工作公平并符合社区价值观时,就会加强程序正义和警察的合法性。提高警员福利:通过更有意义、更有影响力的工作以及与公众更好的互动和关系,改善工作环境和体验。政策改变:政策制定者在制定毒品政策时应认识到警察的自由裁量权作用,并认识到与社区需求和更广泛的警务目标相冲突的执法方法所带来的风险。原创性/价值本文对英国背景下的禁药政策提出了新颖的批评,倡导英国警务文化向公共卫生和创伤知情方法转变。它强调了认识到警官作为 "公民代理人 "的自由裁量角色的重要性,以及将执法方法与减少伤害倡议相结合以增强程序正义和警察合法性的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The ripple effect of school dropout: exploring the nexus between school dropout, deviance, and subsequent arrest amongst children in India Following the evidence-base or exacerbating harms? An autoethnography of a London metropolitan police officer The interplay of social capital, faith, and offender resettlement Youth mentors’ experiences working with young people to support desistance from criminal behaviour within the community Understanding the retention factors of prison officers within His Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1