Coercive Treatment and Democracy – Incompatible Phenomena?

Abstract

The question of coercive treatment of substance abusers is regularly debated both publically and professionally. Apart from being a persistently recurring topic, the debate was particularly fervent in Norway in connection with the introduction of a new social services act in 1993, and in the aftermath when feed-back concerning the implementation of the law was provided. The article focuses on the principles surrounding use of coercive measures in relation to democratic ideals and realities. It is suggested that coercion as such is not alien to democracy, but in order to understand why coercive treatment of substance abusers is such a difficult and controversial topic, it is necessary to look closer at how various public measures are defined by negotiations between society and the individual. A main point is that coercive treatment is usually defined as benefitial for the individual (“this is for your own good”) by society, but the individual sees this as a burden or punishment. In this perspective, “regular” imprisonment is less troublesome because in this case both society and the individual agree that the encroachment can be understood as primarily a burden. Finally, it is discussed why young drug addicts and pregnant substance abusers are particularly identified as relevant target groups for eventual coercive measures. It is possible to see this as an attempt to categorize youths and pregnant substance abusers as “children” – viewing the formally delimited childhood as perhaps the only legitimate exception to the general principle of individual autonomy.