Treatment and rehabilitation for illicit drug users in the Philippines: a review of policy and service arrangement

Main Article Content

Carl Abelardo T. Antonio
Chi Mei Jessica Li
Judy Yuen-man Siu
Jonathan P. Guevarra
Jose Bienvenido M. Leabres
Salvador Benjamin D. Vista
Leonardo R. Estacio, Jr.

Abstract

Drug use disorders remain a social and political concern in the Philippines despite the promulgation of a policy on drug treatment and rehabilitation in 1972. This study reviewed and discussed the Philippine drug treatment and rehabilitation policy through the comparison of formal policy documents promulgated between 2002 and 2019 (n = 23) with dimensions on drug abuse treatment and rehabilitation identified by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. The local policy can account for all principal and subsidiary domains of drug treatment and rehabilitation. The most well-articulated and explicated domains were (a) strategic definitions and principles, (b) legal and regulatory background and (c) development and implementation of an effective treatment strategy. Provisions regarding the rights and duties of treatment participants were few and general in scope. As a growing area of focus by practitioners and academics in the local and regional areas, the results of this analysis may serve as a starting point for a more thorough examination of the Philippine drug rehabilitation and treatment policy to inform policy review and revision.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

Section
Review articles
Author Biographies

Carl Abelardo T. Antonio, Department of Applied Social Sciences, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, China. 11 Yuk Choi Road, Hung Hom, Kowloon, Hong Kong, China

Department of Applied Social Sciences, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, China. 11 Yuk Choi Road, Hung Hom, Kowloon, Hong Kong, China

Department of Health Policy and Administration, College of Public Health, University of the Philippines Manila, Manila, Philippines

Chi Mei Jessica Li, Department of Applied Social Sciences, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, China. 11 Yuk Choi Road, Hung Hom, Kowloon, Hong Kong, China

Department of Applied Social Sciences, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, China. 11 Yuk Choi Road, Hung Hom, Kowloon, Hong Kong, China

Judy Yuen-man Siu, Department of Applied Social Sciences, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, China. 11 Yuk Choi Road, Hung Hom, Kowloon, Hong Kong, China

Department of Applied Social Sciences, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, China. 11 Yuk Choi Road, Hung Hom, Kowloon, Hong Kong, China

Jonathan P. Guevarra, Department of Health Promotion and Education, College of Public Health, University of the Philippines Manila, Manila, Philippines

Department of Health Promotion and Education, College of Public Health, University of the Philippines Manila, Manila, Philippines

Jose Bienvenido M. Leabres, Dangerous Drugs Abuse Prevention and Treatment Program, Department of Health, Manila, Philippines

Dangerous Drugs Abuse Prevention and Treatment Program, Department of Health, Manila, Philippines

Salvador Benjamin D. Vista, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, College of Medicine and Philippines General Hospital, University of the Philippines Manila, Manila, Philippines

Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, College of Medicine and Philippines General Hospital, University of the Philippines Manila, Manila, Philippines

Leonardo R. Estacio, Jr., Department of Behavioral Sciences, College of Arts and Sciences, University of the Philippines Manila, Manila, Philippines

Department of Behavioral Sciences, College of Arts and Sciences, University of the Philippines Manila, Manila, Philippines

References

1. Crowley R, Kirschner N, Dunn AS, Bornstein SS. Health and public policy to facilitate effective prevention and treatment of substance use disorders involving illicit and prescription drugs: an American college of physicians position paper. Ann Intern Med. 2017;166(10): 733.
2. Pace CA, Samet JH. In the Clinic. Substance Use Disorders. Ann Intern Med. 2016;164(7): ITC49-ITC64.
3. UNODC. International Standards for the Treatment of Drug Use Disorders. Vienna 2017.
4. Dangerous Drugs Board and Resources, Resources E, and Economics Center for Studies, Inc.,. 2015 Nationwide survey on the nature and extent of drug abuse in the Philippines. Quezon City: Dangerous Drugs Board and Resources, Environment, and Economics Center for Studies, Inc. 2016.
5. UNODC. Synthetic Drugs in East and South-East Asia – Trends and Patterns of Amphetamine-type Stimulants and New Psychoactive Substances. Vienna: United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime 2019.
6. Simbulan N, Estacio L, Dioquino-Maligaso C, Herbosa T, Withers M. The Manila Declaration on the Drug Problem in the Philippines. Ann Glob Health. 2019;85(1).
7. DDB. 2014 Statistics (updated October 15) [Internet]. 2015. Available from: https://www.ddb.gov.ph/research-statistics/statistics/45-research-and-statistics/246-2014-statistics.
8. DDB. 2015 Statistics [Internet]. 2016. Available from: https://www.ddb. gov.ph/research-statistics/statistics/45-research-and-statistics/287-2015-statistics.
9. DDB. 2016 statistics (updated April 18) [Internet]. 2017 [cited 2018 April 8]. Available from: https://www.ddb. gov.ph/research-statistics/statistics/45-research-and-statistics/287-2015-statistics.
10. DDB. 2017 Statistics (updated April 18) [Internet]. 2017. Available from: https://www.ddb.gov.ph/research-statistics/statistics/45-research-and-statistics/396-2017-statistics.
11. DDB. 2018 Statistics (updated October 14) [Internet]. 2019. Available from: https://www.ddb.gov.ph/research-statistics/statistics/45-research-and-statistics/434-2018-statistics.
12. Congress of the Philippines. Republic Act No. 9165, Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002. 2002.
13. Congress of the Philippines. Republic Act No. 6425, The Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972. 1972.
14. DOH. Department of Health Annual Report 2015. Manila: Health Policy Development and Planning Bureau-Department of Health. 2016.
15. DOH. 2016 DOH Annual Report. Manila: Health Policy Development and Planning Bureau-Department of Health. 2017.
16. DOH. DOH Annual Report 2017. Manila: Health Policy Development and Planning Bureau, Department of Health. 2018.
17. Atun JML, Mendoza RU, David CC, Cossid RPN, Soriano CRR. The Philippines’ antidrug campaign: Spatial and temporal patterns of killings linked to drugs. Int J Drug Policy. 2019;73:100-11.
18. Cornelio J, Medina E. Christianity and Duterte's War on Drugs in the Philippines. Politics, Religion & Ideology 2019;20(2):151-69.
19. Gallagher A, Raffle E, Maulana Z. Failing to fulfil the responsibility to protect: the war on drugs as crimes against humanity in the Philippines. Pac. Rev. 2019;33(2): 247-77.
20. Jensen S, Hapal K. Police Violence and Corruption in the Philippines: Violent Exchange and the War on Drugs. J Curr Southeast Asian Aff. 2018;37(2): 39-62.
21. Johnson DT, Fernquest J. Governing through Killing: The War on Drugs in the Philippines. Asian J Law Soc. 2018;5(2):359-90.
22. Lasco G. Pampagilas: Methamphetamine in the everyday economic lives of underclass male youths in a Philippine port. Int J. Drug Policy. 2014;25(4):783-8.
23. Lasco G. Kalaban: Young drug users’ engagements with law enforcement in the Philippines. Int J. Drug Policy. 2018;52:39-44.
24. Lopega D. On President Rodrigo Duterte's "War on Drugs": Its Impact on Philippine-China Relations. Contemporary Chinese Political Economy and Strategic Relations 2019;5(1):137-X.
25. Reyes DA. The Spectacle of Violence in Duterte's “War on Drugs”. J Curr Southeast Asian Aff. 2016;35(3): 111-37.
26. Tan JG. The Philippines National Drug Policy Program: Reviewing a nine-year experience (1987-1995). Australian Prescriber 1997;20(1):41-5.
27. Mutiarin D, Tomaro QPV, Almarez DN. The War on Drugs of Philippines and Indonesia: A Literature Review. J Public Adm Res Theory. 2019;9(1):41-59.
28. UNODC. Drug Abuse Treatment and Rehabilitation: a Practical Planning and Implementation Guide. Vienna 2003.
29. UNODC. International Standards for the Treatment of Drug Use Disorders: Revised edition incorporating results of field-testing. Geneva 2020.
30. Antonio CAT, Guevarra JP, Cavinta LL, Gloriani NG, Peralta JT, Reyes-Sare ML, et al. Lessons learned from government-academe-civil society partnership to improve the assessment and management of drug dependence in the Philippines. Acta Med Philipp. 2018;52(3):277-80.
31. Antonio CAT, Guevarra JP, Cavinta LL, Cabrera PJDL, Castillo EC, Hembra MS, et al. The Philippine experience on the 'basic training course for rehabilitation workers on the assessment and management of drug dependence', 2013-2016. Int J Train Res. 2019;17(2):187-98.
32. Antonio CAT, Torres CDH, Guevarra JP, Cavinta LL, Castillo EC, Hembra MS, et al. Evaluation of the "Basic Training Course for Physicians on the Assessment and Management of Drug Dependence", 2013-2017. . Int J Train Res. 2019;17(2):176-86.
33. Walsh J. Drug Abuse Control: Policy Turns toward Rehabilitation. Science 1971;173(3991):32-4.
34. Simangan D. Is the Philippine "War on Drugs" an Act of Genocide?. Journal of Genocide Research 2018;20(1):68-89.
35. Csete J, Kamarulzaman A, Kazatchkine M, Altice F, Balicki M, Buxton J, et al. Public health and international drug policy. The Lancet 2016;387(10026):1427-80.
36. Asumbrado R, Canoy N. A critical narrative inquiry to understand relapse among Filipino methamphetamine polydrug users in low-income communities. Drugs Educ Prev Pol. 2020;1-10.
37. Harvey-Vera AY, González-Zúñiga P, Vargas-Ojeda AC, Medina-Mora ME, Magis-Rodríguez CL, Wagner K, et al. Risk of violence in drug rehabilitation centers: perceptions of people who inject drugs in Tijuana, Mexico. Substance abuse treatment, prevention, and policy 2016;11(1):5.
38. Klingemann J. The rights of drug treatment patients: Experience of addiction treatment in Poland from a human rights perspective. Int J Drug Policy. 2017;43: 67-73.
39. Guabong J, Longno D, Castro K, Guinto E. The Journey of drug dependents towards recovery. Int J Soc Sci Stud. 2016;4(2): 108-113.
40. Mangaoil A. A framework of counseling strategies for persons with substance use disorder. J Psychol Educ Res. 2020;28(1): 81-96.
41. Sy MP, Reyes RCD, Roraldo MPNR, Ohshima N. Uncovering the lived experiences of Filipino drug recoverees towards occupational participation and justice through an interpretative phenomenological analysis. Scand J Occup Ther. 2019: 1-14.
42. Sikula AF. Administrative Authority: Its Genesis and Locus. Business & Society 1975;15(2): 22-30.
43. Congress of the Philippines. Republic Act No. 7160, Local Government Code of 1991. 1991.
44. Guess GM. Comparative Decentralization Lessons from Pakistan, Indonesia, and the Philippines. Public Adm Rev. 2005;65(2): 217-30.
45. Liwanag HJ, Wyss K. What conditions enable decentralization to improve the health system? Qualitative analysis of perspectives on decision space after 25 years of devolution in the Philippines. PLoS ONE 2018;13(11): e0206809.
46. Yu NG. Devolution: Discontinuity and dissonance. Int Soc Work. 2013;56(2): 193-207.
47. Estacio LR. Resiliency approach to addressing drug addiction: A paradigm shift to building drug-resistant communities in the Philippines. The University of the Philippines Manila Journal 2009(Special Issue 2009) :61-85.
48. Guevarra JP, Castillo EC, Antonio CAT, Ting MAL, Cavinta LL, Lara AB, et al. Tuberculosis case-finding and case-holding practices in selected Drug Abuse Treatment and Rehabilitation Centers in the Philippines. Acta Medica Philippina 2021. doi: 10.47895/ amp.vi0.3112.
49. Matsuzaki M, Vu QM, Gwadz M, Delaney JAC, Kuo I, Trejo MEP, et al. Perceived access and barriers to care among illicit drug users and hazardous drinkers: findings from the Seek, Test, Treat, and Retain data harmonization initiative (STTR). BMC public health 2018; 18(1).
50. Congress of the Philippines. Republic Act No. 11223, Universal Health Care Act. 2019.
51. Lipscomb RJ, Yabroff LK, Brown GM, Lawrence GW, Barnett GP. Health Care Costing: Data, Methods, Current Applications. Medical Care 2009;47(7-1):S1-S6.
52. Buse K. Making health policy. 2nd ed. ed. Mays N, Walt G, editors. New York2013.
53. Marlowe DB, Elwork A, Festinger DS, McLellan AT. Drug policy by popular referendum: This, too, shall pass. Journal of substance abuse treatment 2003;25(3): 213.
54. Birgden A, Grant L. Establishing a compulsory drug treatment prison: Therapeutic policy, principles, and practices in addressing offender rights and rehabilitation. Int'l J.L. & Psychiatry 2010;33(5-6): 341-9.
55. Lee RLM. Alternative systems in Malaysian drug rehabilitation: Organization and control in comparative perspective. Soc Sci Med. 1985;21(11): 1289-96.
56. Liu L, Chui WH. Rehabilitation policy for drug addicted offenders in China: current trends, patterns, and practice implications. Asia Pac J SocWork 2018;28(3):192-204.
57. McKeganey N. Clear rhetoric and blurred reality: The development of a recovery focus in UK drug treatment policy and practice. Int J Drug Policy 2014;25(5): 957-63.
58. Mehrolhassani MH, Yazdi-Feyzabadi V, Hajebi A, Mirzaei S. Cross-country Comparison of Treatment Policies Facing the Drug Abuse in Five Selected Countries. Addict Health 2019;11(2):81-92.
59. Parkin S. Salutogenesis: Contextualising place and space in the policies and politics of recovery from drug dependence. Int J Drug Policy. 2016;33: 21-6.
60. Tourunen J, Weckroth A, Kaskela T. Prison-based drug treatment in Finland: History, shifts in policy making and current status. Nord Stud Alcohol Dr. 2012;29(6): 575.
61. Wahler EA. Retribution or Rehabilitation? Conflicting Goals of US Policies Pertaining to Drug Felonies and Their Impact on Women. J Women Politics Policy. 2015;36(1): 95-106.