The Netherlands Drug Situation 2010 - Trimbos-instituut

More documents

Recommendations

Info

PREFACEThe Report on the Drug Situation in the Netherlands 2010 has been written for the EuropeanMonitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA). Each year, nationalcentres of expertise on drug-related issues in the member states of the European Union(‘Focal Points’) draw up a report on their respective national drugs situation, according toguidelines provided by the EMCDDA. These reports form the basis of the “Annual Reporton the State of the Drug Problem in the European Union” compiled by the EMCDDA. Inkeeping with the guidelines, the report focuses on new developments in the reportingyear. In order to avoid too much overlap, the reader is repeatedly referred to previousNational Reports.This 2010 national report was written by the staff of the Bureau of the Netherlands NationalDrug Monitor (NDM) at the Trimbos Institute and staff of the Scientific Researchand Documentation Centre (WODC) of the Ministry of Justice. The NDM was establishedin 1999 on the initiative of the Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport. The Ministry of Securityand Justice also participates in the NDM. The NDM carries out the functions of theNetherlands Focal Point.The NDM relies on the contribution of a multitude of experts and input from registrationsystems and monitors in the Netherlands. In particular, the authors would like to thankthe members of the Scientific Committee of the NDM and other expert reviewers for theirvaluable comments on the draft version of the report.5
Page 1 and 2: Margriet van Laar, Guus Cruts, Andr
Page 3 and 4: ColophonThis National Report was su
Page 8 and 9: Table of contentsPreface 5Summary 9
Page 10 and 11: SummaryDevelopments in drug law and
Page 12 and 13: Health correlates and consequences
Page 14: ecstasy and amphetamine seems to ha
Page 18 and 19: 1 Drug policy: legislation, strateg
Page 20 and 21: New developments concerning the Opi
Page 22 and 23: a regular penitentiary regime throu
Page 24 and 25: 1.2 National action plan, strategy,
Page 26 and 27: eral Local Bye-law (Algemene Plaats
Page 28 and 29: tening of the so-called W-AHOJ-G cr
Page 30: Table 1.3.1: Expenditures in the fi
Page 33 and 34: Age and gender NNIA. The numbers of
Page 35 and 36: 2.2.1 Regular secondary schoolsNNIA
Page 37 and 38: years, except for the last month pr
Page 39 and 40: The Amsterdam Antenna monitor, incl
Page 41 and 42: Figure 2.3.1: Prevalence of drug us
Page 43 and 44: Cocaine: from the mid-1990s to 2006
Page 45 and 46: and Response (RAR), interviews were
Page 47 and 48: style interventions, general inform
Page 49 and 50: order to reduce substance use or pr
Page 51 and 52: search has been done on the interve
Page 54 and 55: 4 Problem drug use4.1 Prevalence es
Page 56 and 57:
Figure 4.1.1: Estimated number of p
Page 58 and 59:
Table 4.2.1: Proportions among diff
Page 60 and 61:
Table 4.2.2: Comparisons between pr
Page 62:
eported prevalence rates of problem
Page 65 and 66:
y the National Branch Organization
Page 67 and 68:
The International Cannabis Need of
Page 69 and 70:
than 200 clients have entered via t
Page 71 and 72:
special attention should be paid to
Page 73 and 74:
tient treatment merged with the reg
Page 75 and 76:
Figure 5.3.2: Clients recorded in 2
Page 77 and 78:
Figure 5.3.4: Number of admissions
Page 80 and 81:
6 Health correlates and consequence
Page 82 and 83:
Figure 6.1.1 Age distribution at HI
Page 84 and 85:
Figure 6.1.2 Yearly HIV-incidence o
Page 86 and 87:
notify the disease, the large-scale
Page 88 and 89:
curred after 1980, indicating a wit
Page 90 and 91:
Table 6.1.5: Antibody test results
Page 92 and 93:
Most of the intoxications due to ca
Page 94 and 95:
Table 6.2.1: Number of non-fatal em
Page 96 and 97:
When having used cannabis during th
Page 98 and 99:
among Dutch residents. In this peri
Page 102 and 103:
7 Responses to health correlates an
Page 104 and 105:
eduction facilities are concentrate
Page 106 and 107:
impeding factors in the implementat
Page 108 and 109:
7.3 Responses to other health corre
Page 110 and 111:
8 Social correlates and social rein
Page 112 and 113:
February 2010, a total of 225 homel
Page 114 and 115:
legally obliged to prepare a social
Page 116 and 117:
Table 8.2.1 (Continued)Institute, r
Page 118 and 119:
Hague, and 1,150 homeless in Utrech
Page 120 and 121:
9 Drug related crime, prevention of
Page 122 and 123:
two different types of hard drugs a
Page 124 and 125:
In 2009 the preliminary Opium Act r
Page 126 and 127:
Relatively small fractions are dism
Page 128 and 129:
new drugs can pose to the EU (T.K.2
Page 130 and 131:
Table 9.1.6: Type of crime of suspe
Page 132 and 133:
Recent research gives some informat
Page 134 and 135:
Most of the referrals concern: Non-
Page 136 and 137:
Cannabis ranks third and seems to b
Page 138 and 139:
Measure of Placement in an Institut
Page 140 and 141:
Compared to detainees in a regular
Page 142 and 143:
The majority of the boys (65%) repo
Page 144 and 145:
10 Drug markets10.1 Availability an
Page 146 and 147:
er for 2009 (n=88). Highest frequen
Page 148 and 149:
New developments in 2010 The splitt
Page 150 and 151:
Identified without lab testsIn 2009
Page 152 and 153:
Amphetamine:In 2009, DIMSTM receive
Page 154 and 155:
analysed. Figure 10.3.4 shows the a
Page 156 and 157:
ent samples of visitors of clubs, c
Page 158 and 159:
Part B: Selected issues157
Page 160 and 161:
fessional practice, to offer a basi
Page 162 and 163:
Table 11.2.1 Published Dutch guidel
Page 164 and 165:
process. The results of the two pil
Page 166 and 167:
the programming of (often long-term
Page 168 and 169:
this patient group (e.g. motivation
Page 170 and 171:
published in the Netherlands from 2
Page 172 and 173:
11.3.2 Evaluating the implementatio
Page 174 and 175:
treatment. These reports will be re
Page 176 and 177:
tion has been initiated, namely the
Page 178 and 179:
2.7 Psychosocial support should be
Page 180 and 181:
12 Mortality related to drug use: a
Page 182 and 183:
Figure 12.1.2:Mortality per 1,000 p
Page 184:
With regard to the third group of r
Page 187 and 188:
186
Page 189 and 190:
Bijl, R., Boelhouwer, J., Pommer, E
Page 191 and 192:
Commissie Fränzel (2009). Daadkrac
Page 193 and 194:
Driessen, C. and Janbroers, P. (201
Page 195 and 196:
Grol, R. (2009b). Introduction, In:
Page 197 and 198:
Koutakis, N., Stattin, H., and Kerr
Page 199 and 200:
Openbaar Ministerie (2010). Aanwijz
Page 201 and 202:
Schreuder I, Van der Sande MAB, De
Page 203 and 204:
Stevens, A., Berto, D., Frick, U.,
Page 205 and 206:
aanbieding van Programma versterkin
Page 207 and 208:
gepercipieerde rol van alcohol en c
Page 209 and 210:
Van Hasselt, N., Van Laar, M., Onru
Page 211 and 212:
Webb, C.W., Seudder, M., Kaminer, Y
Page 213 and 214:
National survey on the contents of
Page 215 and 216:
OGGZ Monitor Amsterdam, Public Ment
Page 217 and 218:
http://www.rijksoverheid.nl/ministe
Page 220 and 221:
14 Annexes14.1 List of tables used
Page 222 and 223:
Figure 6.1.1: Age distribution at H
Page 224 and 225:
HCVHIVHKSHTNICASAICDIDDTIDUsIGZIMCI
Page 226 and 227:
Map of the Netherlands: provinces a
Page 228:
Each year, the National Focal Point
show all

The Netherlands Drug Situation 2010 - Trimbos-instituut

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?