Running Head: INSITE AS REPRESENTATION AND REGULATION Insite as Representation and Regulation: A Discursively-Informed Analysis of the Implementation and Implications of Canada’s First Safe Injection Site Author: Alicia Sanderson Thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the MA degree in Criminology Department of Criminology Faculty of Social Sciences University of Ottawa © Alicia Sanderson, Ottawa, Canada, 2011 INSITE AS REPRESENTATION AND REGULATION ii Table of Contents Abstract .............................................................................................................................. p. iv Introduction ........................................................................................................................ p. 1 Chapter 2: Review of Governmentality Theory .............................................................. p. 4 2.1 Origins and Definition ............................................................................................................. p. 4 2.2 Biopower.................................................................................................................................. p. 9 2.2.1 Biopolitics and anatomo-politics ...................................................................................... p. 9 2.2.2 The “subject” .................................................................................................................. p. 11 2.3 Neoliberalism ......................................................................................................................... p. 12 2.3.1 Market principles ............................................................................................................ p. 14 2.3.2 Government at a distance ............................................................................................... p. 16 2.3.3 Responsibilization .......................................................................................................... p. 17 2.4 Technologies of the Self ........................................................................................................ p. 20 2.5 Governmentality and Drug Use ............................................................................................. p. 23 Chapter 3: Review of the Harm Reduction Perspective ............................................... p. 25 3.1 Origins and Definition ........................................................................................................... p. 25 3.2 Brief Overview of Drug Policy in Canada ............................................................................. p. 30 3.3 Harms Generated by Traditional Drug Policies ..................................................................... p. 35 3.4 Humanistic Principles ............................................................................................................ p. 38 3.5 Value-neutral Discourse ........................................................................................................ p. 39 3.6 User-focused Interventions .................................................................................................... p. 41 3.7 Practical and Realistic Objectives .......................................................................................... p. 42 3.8 Harm Reduction for Injection Drug Users (IDUs) and the Evolution of the Safe Injection Site (SIS) ............................................................................................................................................. p. 44 Chapter 4: Methodology .................................................................................................. p. 47 4.1 Research Questions ................................................................................................................ p. 47 4.2 Research Method ................................................................................................................... p. 50 4.3 The Importance of Discourse ................................................................................................. p. 52 4.4 Sample Characteristics ........................................................................................................... p. 53 4.5 Analytical Framework ........................................................................................................... p. 55 4.5.1 Example coding sheet ..................................................................................................... p. 56 4.6 Methodological Limitations ................................................................................................... p. 58 INSITE AS REPRESENTATION AND REGULATION iii Chapter 5: Analysis, Discussion and Implications ........................................................ p. 60 5.1 How is the user of Insite‟s services represented in the media discourse? .............................. p. 60 5.1.1 Moral/criminal model ..................................................................................................... p. 61 5.1.2 Medical/disease model ................................................................................................... p. 62 5.1.3 Client model ................................................................................................................... p. 64 5.1.4 The Insite user as “social junk” ...................................................................................... p. 65 5.1.5 Mixed representation ...................................................................................................... p. 66 5.2 In what ways are the drug use practices of the clients of Insite moralized? .......................... p. 67 5.2.1 Overt moralization .......................................................................................................... p. 67 5.2.2 Covert moralization ........................................................................................................ p. 69 5.3 Are the humanistic principles of harm reduction expressed in the discussion surrounding Insite? ........................................................................................................................................... p. 70 5.3.1 Individual interests ......................................................................................................... p. 71 5.3.2 Collective interests ......................................................................................................... p. 73 5.3.3 Individual and collective interests .................................................................................. p. 76 5.4 Is the physical space of Insite portrayed as a site of inclusion or exclusion? ..................................................................................................................................................... p. 77 5.4.1 Site of inclusion .............................................................................................................. p. 77 5.4.2 Site of exclusion ............................................................................................................. p. 83 5.4.3 Site of inclusion and exclusion ....................................................................................... p. 85 5.5 How is the presence of Insite and its clients represented as relating to the living environment of the area surrounding the safe injection site? ................................................................................ p. 86 5.5.1 Order ............................................................................................................................... p. 86 5.5.2 Disorder .......................................................................................................................... p. 89 5.6 Overall Thoughts ................................................................................................................... p. 92 Conclusion ......................................................................................................................... p. 93 Appendix: Bibliographic Information for Sample Articles ......................................... p. 99 The Vancouver Sun Articles ........................................................................................................ p. 99 The Globe and Mail Articles ..................................................................................................... p. 104 References ....................................................................................................................... p. 107 INSITE AS REPRESENTATION AND REGULATION iv Abstract This study consisted of a qualitative analysis of articles from two Canadian newspapers related to North America‟s only safe injection facility for drug users, Vancouver‟s Insite, and examined the texts for latent themes derived from a review of harm reduction and governmentality literature. The investigation asked “In what ways are Insite and its clients represented in the media and what implications do those portrayals have in terms of Insite’s operation as a harm reduction practice as well as a governmental strategy designed to direct the conduct of drug users who visit the site?” The analysis revealed conflicting representations, some which have positive potential in terms of Insite‟s adherence to the fundamental principles of harm reduction and others that undermined those principles and suggested that the site may have traditional