Supervised Consumption Sites Analysis

Introduction Supervised Consumption Sites (SCS) has always been a controversial topic that has divide society into two. The people who support SCSs often argue that it has the potential to reduce disease transmission, prevent people from overdosing, and give them more access to health and social programs (Article). The people who are against however argue that it is promoting illegal drug use and sends a negative message to society. The issue here is that for SCS to truly be effective, they must have the full cooperation of society and more importantly the police force. If the police force does not support SCSs, the clients of the SCSs may feel harassed and thus impede their road to recovery (Article). Knowing the importance of this, it
Secondly the article talks about how police use evidence to support certain harm reduction initiatives (Article). What this means is that the researchers want to know how the police feel about SCSs, whether they support it or not. As well, they want to know whether or not the police agree or disagree with the SCSs' attempt to reduce harm by providing a legal site where people can safely inject themselves with medics around and how they came to this conclusion. This is important as by studying police's views towards SCSs, and how they came to their views, we can better understand why certain police forces are against the SCSs and potentially alter them. This is all done because the support of the police force is crucial for the success of SCS's as the SCS clients should not feel afraid to approach these sites
Watson and her colleagues decided to use one on one interviews then combined it with group discussions in order to produce detailed results of the participants personal perspectives (Ritchie & Lewis, 2013, p. 28). This would be considered a generated data as they recreating or retelling their experiences to the researchers. This method of data collection is ideal for the study as it gives the police officers a platform where they can express their views. Individual interviews also allows the researcher a chance to ask questions to clarify any points. This is crucial as the researchers are attempting to find out the views that these participants have towards SCSs, meaning the answers are subjective and may require the participant to clarify unambiguous terms. The group discussion also helps facilitate discussion and allows the group to collectively work together to attempt to understand a complex subject such as their views on SCSs (article). As well, with group discussion, multiple point of views and stands are presented which only adds a layer of richness to the results. The other method of collecting data, the naturally occurring data, would also work, but may raise ethical questions such as lying to the police about their true objectives in an attempt to not influence their decision making. Also doing ride along with police officers poses a treat to the researcher and to the police officers and documentary analysis would not be ideal here as the subject as