Legislative Council Fifty-Third Parliament, Second Session (53-2) 53 2 Parliament of South Australia Legislative Council published Matters of Interest Ice Addiction Ice Addiction The Hon. D.G.E. HOOD Legislative Council The Hon. D.G.E. HOOD (15:40): I rise today to speak on some of the issues that we face with the current ice epidemic in Australia, in particular in South Australia. I have previously spoken on the cost of drugs to society, so I will not cover those statistics again today. However, what I will remind members of is that the Australian Institute of Health reported that South Australia recorded treatment episodes with amphetamines almost double that of the national average (24 per cent for South Australia compared with 14 per cent for the national average). Ice use had more than doubled from 22 per cent of that 24 per cent in 2010 to 50.4 per cent in 2013, and this is something that must be addressed as a matter of urgency in the view of Family First. Hospital drug admissions are also on the rise. The Advertiser reported that 154 people were admitted to metropolitan emergency wards with amphetamine-induced psychosis between July 2014 and January 2015. That was nearly double the 84 in the same period the year before. At a recent ice forum held in Mount Barker, it was noted that the increase in ice use was due to it being cheaper, more readily available, more pure, and eight times more potent than the powder form of speed. The average user is getting younger and more people are using on a weekly basis, increasing the possible associated harms, including psychosis and, obviously, addiction. The psychiatric symptoms associated with ice use, including paranoid psychosis, have never been seen on this scale before in any illicit drug use in Australia. South Australia now has 96 publicly-funded treatment centres, up from 56 a decade ago, but, rather than witnessing a fall in drug use, what we are being told is that the problem is escalating. That brings into question the effectiveness of these rehabilitation centres. We simply do not have sufficient rehabilitation options for those suffering from ice addiction. Rehab wait times can be pushed out as far as six months, with private treatment cost prohibitive for most people. In many instances practitioners refer people interstate for treatment. A further issue is that not all treatment centres are equipped to deal with the problems associated with ice addiction. Most drug withdrawal services are short term, which is a problem because ice symptoms can last for around 18 months. The more severe the addiction or the symptoms experienced the more intensive treatment needs to be, and there are not many resources in the area at present. In many instances detoxing from ice requires a secure facility, and they are in short supply. People can beat ice addiction, but it takes a lot longer than it does with other drugs in most cases. The terrible fact of the matter is that we are ill equipped to deal with this issue in this state and, to some extent, in this country. We need to start offering some real options to those people who are suffering a daily basis with the devastating impact of this drug on themselves and their families. An area that must be considered is that of mandatory rehabilitation. Currently, rehabilitation is only for people who self-refer. However, I am reliably told by workers in the area that not many ice users are cognizant of a problem at all and, due to the effect that the drug has on the brain, they probably never will be. Therefore, the likelihood of self referral for ice abuse is incredibly low. We do not have any way of compelling someone to enter and remain in rehabilitation; however, I believe it is time we looked at this very seriously. Psychologist Dr Michael Carr-Gregg also commented on radio recently that there was a case for forced treatment in these cases, citing a New South Wales' government report into a compulsory treatment centre, noting that the outcomes of the patients were good, with over three-quarters of former drug users recording negative when further tested to see whether they were still using the drug. If this is not a strong case for considering mandatory rehabilitation in this area, I do not know what is. Psychologist Dr Chris Hamilton agreed that mandatory rehabilitation must be considered if significant intervention is needed. Parents and families of ice-affected people report that they want practical help before their child ends up in a prison or, even worse, dead. They need advice on how to deal with the violence, how to live with a drug user and what to do when someone is trying to kill themselves, harm themselves or harm someone else. A particularly disturbing story that has been repeated is how frequently parents and carers call police for help or end up in hospital with, usually, their addicted child, only to be told that all was well in terms of that situation at that present time but then offered no ongoing help. We need to seriously consider creating options for mandatory rehabilitation for all levels of drug users and, most specifically for ice users, as a matter of urgency. This thing really is getting out of control.