UNASSIGNED: Despite the legalization of cannabis use for medical purposes in Thailand in February 2019, illicit providers are still widespread and accessible. This study aimed to understand why people still chose to receive medical cannabis treatment or products from unlicensed or illegal providers. The practices of unlicensed or illegal providers in provision of medical cannabis products or treatment services were also examined.
UNASSIGNED: Qualitative in-depth interviews were conducted among medical cannabis providers and users, including 36 unlicensed and 7 licensed providers and 25 users in 2019-2021. Snowball sampling was used to recruit participants until saturation of data was achieved. Interviews included open-ended questions about the providers\' practices and attitudes towards medical cannabis. Interviews were recorded and transcribed, and thematic analysis was performed.
UNASSIGNED: Overall, six reasons were identified to answer why unlicensed/illicit providers were still popular, including: 1) easy accessibility; 2) familiarity with the unlicensed providers before the legal scheme became available; 3) favorable characters (kind, supportive, non-judgmental) of unlicensed providers; 4) affordable treatment fees; 5) trust in the quality of the medicines; and 6) lack of knowledge and negative attitudes towards cannabis from healthcare professionals. Most providers started their career as medical cannabis providers by using it themselves or with their relatives and being satisfied with the results. They used cannabis products to treat all diseases, including skin, eyes, HIV/AIDS, non-communicable diseases and all kinds of cancers. Additionally, they believed that it was effective, with no or minimal adverse effects.
UNASSIGNED: This study suggests that some patients will continue receiving medical cannabis treatment and products from unlicensed or illegal providers. More attention should be paid on increasing the capacity of medical cannabis service systems within public health hospitals, and the certification of unlicensed providers, so as to integrate them into a regulated system.

BACKGROUND: North America and the province of British Columbia (BC), Canada, is experiencing an unprecedented number of overdose deaths. In BC, overdose has become the leading cause of death for people between the ages of 10-59 years old. In January 2023, BC decriminalized personal possession of a number of illegal substances with one aim being to address overdose deaths through stigma reduction and promoting access to substance use services.
METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study to understand people who use drugs\' (PWUD) perceptions of the new decriminalization policy, immediately prior to its\' implementation (October-December 2022). To contextualize decriminalization within broader drug policy, we also asked PWUD what they perceived as the priority issues drug policy ought to address and the necessary solutions. Our final sample included 38 participants who used illegal drugs in the past month.
RESULTS: We identified four themes: 1) The illicit drug supply as the main driver of drug toxicity deaths 2) Concerns about the impact of decriminalization on drug toxicity deaths 3) Views towards decriminalization as a policy response in the context of the drug toxicity crisis 4) Regulation as a symbol of hope for reducing drug toxicity deaths.
CONCLUSIONS: From our data it became clear that many anticipated that decriminalization would have minimal or no impact on the overdose crisis. Regulation was perceived as the necessary policy approach for effectively and candidly addressing the drivers of the ongoing overdose crisis. These findings are important as jurisdictions consider different approaches to moving away from prohibition-based drug policy.

BACKGROUND: In January 2023, British Columbia implemented a three-year exemption to Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, as granted by the federal government of Canada, to decriminalize the personal possession of small amounts of certain illegal drugs. This decriminalization policy, the first in Canada, was announced in response to the overdose emergency in British Columbia as a public health intervention that could help curb overdose deaths by reducing the impact of criminalization and increasing access to health and social services through stigma reduction.
METHODS: The current multi-method study examines people who use drugs\' awareness and knowledge of British Columbia\'s decriminalization model through cross-sectional quantitative surveys and qualitative interviews among people who use drugs from September-November 2022, immediately prior to the implementation of decriminalization.
RESULTS: Quantitative findings show that two-thirds (63%) of people who use drugs were aware of the policy, but substantial knowledge gaps existed about the legal protections afforded (threshold amount, substances included, drug trafficking, confiscation). The qualitative findings suggest that people who use drugs misunderstood the details of the provincial decriminalization model and often conflated it with regulation. Results suggest that information sharing about decriminalization were minimal pre-implementation, highlighting areas for knowledge dissemination about people who use drugs\' rights under this policy.
CONCLUSIONS: Given that decriminalization in British Columbia is a new and landmark reform, and that the success of decriminalization and its benefits may be undermined by poor awareness and knowledge of it, efforts to share information, increase understanding, and empower the community, may be required to promote its implementation and benefits for the community.

In May 2022, Health Canada approved a three-year exemption from the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act decriminalizing possession of certain illegal substances for personal use among adults in the province of British Columbia. The exemption explicitly includes a cumulative threshold of 2.5 g of opioids, cocaine, methamphetamine, and MDMA. Threshold quantities are commonly included in decriminalization policies and justified within law enforcement systems to delineate personal use among people who use drugs versus drug dealers who are carrying for trafficking purposes. Understanding the impact of the 2.5g threshold can help define the extent to which people who use drugs will be decriminalized.
From June-October 2022, 45 people who use drugs from British Columbia were interviewed to gain an understanding of their perceptions on decriminalization, particularly on the proposed threshold of 2.5 g. We conduced descriptive thematic analyses to synthesize common interview responses.
Results are displayed under two categories: 1) Implications for substance use profiles and purchasing patterns, including implications on the cumulative nature of the threshold and impacts on bulk purchasing, and 2) Implications of police enforcement, including distrust of police use of discretion, potential for net widening and jurisdictional discrepancies in enforcing the threshold. Results illustrate the need for the decriminalization policy to consider diversity in consumption patterns and frequency of use among people who use drugs, the inclination to purchase larger quantities of substances for reduced costs and to guarantee a safe and available supply, and the role police will play in delineating between possession for personal use or trafficking purposes.
The findings underscore the importance of monitoring the impact of the threshold on people who use drugs and whether it is countering the goals of the policy. Consultations with people who use drugs can help policymakers understand the challenges they may face when trying to abide by this threshold.

To determine whether shifts in various state-level cannabis policies are associated with individual-level changes in adolescent cannabis use following implementation.
We use the restricted-access youth cohort of the PATH Study, a recent, longitudinal, and nationally representative dataset, to assess whether changes in cannabis policy affect youth cannabis use. Data include respondents aged 12 to 17 years across up to six repeated observations (N = 26,673). Hybrid (between-person and within-person) panel models are used to examine adolescent past-month cannabis use.
Within-person effects showed that the odds of past-month cannabis use are lower (odds ratio [OR] = 0.632; p < .05) in years when a respondent\'s state allowed only cannabidiol (CBD) compared to years when the state had legalized medical cannabis. The odds of past-month cannabis use are lower during years when a respondent\'s state had decriminalized (OR = 0.617; p < .01) or criminalized (OR = 0.648; p < .05) adult recreational cannabis possession compared to years when it was legalized. These effects were robust to numerous controls, including time and state fixed effects. By contrast, significant between-person effects became nonsignificant with state fixed effects included, implying that state-level average use distinguishes average differences between states rather than policy.
Liberalized cannabis policy is significantly associated with recent adolescent cannabis use. The most consequential policy shift associated with adolescent use is from either criminalization or decriminalization of cannabis possession to legalization, such that states making these changes should consider additional prevention efforts.

Bystanders to drug overdoses often avoid or delay calling 9-1-1 and cite fear of police involvement as a main reason. In 2017, the Good Samaritan Drug Overdose Act (GSDOA) was enacted by the Canadian government to provide people present at an overdose with legal protection from charges for simple drug possession, and conditions stemming from simple possession. Few studies have taken a multi-methods approach to evaluating the GSDOA. We used quantitative surveys and qualitative interviews to explore awareness, understanding, and perceptions of the GSDOA in people at risk of witnessing an overdose.
Quantitative cross-sectional surveys and qualitative telephone interviews were conducted with adults and youth at risk of witnessing an overdose across British Columbia. Cross-sectional survey participants were recruited at 19 Take Home Naloxone sites and online through Foundry. Multivariable logistic regression models were constructed hierarchically to determine factors associated with GSDOA awareness. Telephone interview participants were recruited by research assistants with lived/living experience of substance use. Deductive and inductive thematic analyses were conducted to identify major themes.
Overall, 52.7% (n = 296) of the quantitative study sample (N = 453) reported being aware of the GSDOA. In multivariable analysis, cellphone possession (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 2.19; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.36, 3.54) and having recently witnessed an opioid overdose (AOR = 2.34; 95% CI 1.45, 3.80) were positively associated with GSDOA awareness. Young adults (25 - 34 years) were more likely to be aware of the Act (AOR = 2.10; 95% CI 1.11, 3.98) compared to youth (16-24 years). Qualitative interviews (N = 42) revealed that many overestimated the protections offered by the GSDOA. To increase awareness and knowledge of the Act among youth, participants recommended adding the GSDOA to school curricula and using social media. Word of mouth was suggested to reach adults.
Both awareness and knowledge of the GSDOA remain low in BC, with many overestimating the protections the Act offers. Dissemination efforts should be led by people with lived/living experience and should target those with limited awareness and understanding of the Act as misunderstandings can erode trust in law enforcement and harm reduction policy.

Over the last decade, some states have considered reforms to address the consequences of \"get tough\" justice. The passage of recreational marijuana laws-albeit incorporated across a minority of jurisdictions-is just one popular example. While recent scholarship indicates support for such measures among the public, there is a need for exploration of public views in light of the social unrest of 2020. Additionally, there is a need to understand public views across jurisdictions that are diverse. Accordingly, Virginia stands out as an ideal case study as it is the first state in the South to incorporate or consider a variety of progressive justice reforms. Drawing on a statewide poll conducted in 2021 (N = 1,017), this study explores the extent to which Virginians support recreational marijuana legislation, the repeal of mandatory minimums, and a moratorium on the death penalty. Findings indicate that approval varies by measure and that there are divides in public views, specifically, across socio-demographic dimensions (e.g., political ideology), and also across views about the state of society and willingness to fund the justice system. Implications are discussed.

Emerging evidence suggests that sex workers face unique and profound risks arising from the COVID-19 pandemic. To illuminate the pandemic\'s effects on sex worker health and safety and identify intervention opportunities, from May-August 2020 in-depth interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of 15 sex workers, four service providers and two individuals who were both. Sampled sex workers included eight people of color, eight cisgender women, five cisgender men, three non-binary people, and one transgender woman. Using Conservation of Resources Theory to define impacts on sex worker resources and resulting health and safety implications, a deductive thematic analysis was conducted. Seven resources were threatened due to the pandemic: work opportunity, sex work venues, social support, health services, money, food, and housing. The loss of these resources was exacerbated by stigma - notably sex work criminalization - and significantly undermined health and safety by increasing food and housing instability, increasing risks of violence, and diminishing safer sex negotiation. Six resources were activated in response: social support, digital skills, health knowledge, non-sex work employment, money, and resilience. While social support had numerous benefits, investing digital skills and non-sex work employment were generally of limited impact. The pandemic\'s negative health and safety effects were most profound at the intersections of race, gender, class, and migration status. These findings suggest sex workers need urgent and ongoing support, with investments in social support and sex work decriminalization likely to have the greatest effects on health and safety relative to and beyond the COVID-19 pandemic.

This study examines criminal charges amongst cannabis use disorder (CUD) patients and a matched sample in a setting of drug criminalization, and simulates the effect of policy changes on the proportion obtaining a criminal record and on the number of charges for those being charged.
All CUD patients entering specialist treatment in Norway in 2009-2010 (n=3,951) were included from the Norwegian Patient Registry and a random sample matched on age and gender drawn from the general population by Statistics Norway (n=7,902). Data were linked to the Norwegian Crime Registry (2009-2014). The nature and extent of all charges were examined. A static simulation exercise assessed the hypothetical effect on charges if a) all charges for use and possession of illicit drugs were eliminated (\"decriminalization\") and b) in addition, all charges for cultivation, manufacturing, and sales were eliminated (\"legalization\").
Two thirds (66%) of patients and 12% of matched sample were charged during the observation period. While the most common offence for patients was drug law violations (52%), relatively few (14%) had no other charges. Road traffic violations was the most common offence for the matched sample and 1.2% were charged with drug offences only. The mean number of charges were 9 for the patients and 3 for the matched sample. Simulations suggest that decriminalization may decrease the proportion being charged by 8% for patients and 4% for the matched sample under \"decriminalization\", compared to 24% and 11%, respectively if all drugs were legalized. The number of charges for patients and non-patients would drop by 23% and 13% respectively, while legalization may decrease the number of charges by 46% and 25%, respectively.
The simulations suggest that the impacts of decriminalisation and legalisation on the proportion being charged are relatively modest, while the policy changes are likely to lead to substantial reductions in the number of charges for both the patient and non-patient groups.

Canada decriminalized abortion, uniquely in the world, 30 years ago. We present the timeline of relevant Canadian legal, political, and policy events before and since decriminalization. We assess implications for clinical care, health service and systems decisions, health policy, and the epidemiology of abortion in the absence of criminal legislation. As the criminal abortion law was struck down, dozens of similar private member\'s bills, and one government bill, have been proposed, but none were passed. Key findings include that initially Canadian provinces attempted to provide restrictive regulations and legislation, all of which have been revoked and largely replaced with supportive policies that improve equitable, accessible, state-provided abortion service. Abortion rates have been stable over 30 years since decriminalization, and a falling proportion of abortions occur late in the second trimester. Canada demonstrates that abortion care can safely and effectively be regulated as a normal component of usual medical care.