Drug dealers selling Pokemon ecstasy pills to target youngsters and cash in on computer game craze

Yellow-Pikachu

Dangerous ecstasy tablets in the shape of characters from Pokémon are on sale for less than a pound as dealers cash in on the computer game craze.

The Sunday People found that super-strength­ pills laced with ecstasy and the drug 2CB are being made in Dutch factories, then smuggled in bulk via encrypted ‘dark net’ drugs markets.

UK dealers pay with the anonymous online bitcoin currency and make huge profits by selling tablets at £5 a time.

The streets are being flooded with these Class A drugs .

Two teenage girls have died this year after taking ecstasy. And a 13-year-old boy and three girls aged 12 are seriously ill after taking the pills in the last month alone.

Callous dealers make tablets attractive to youngsters by moulding them into the shape of “Pikachu” characters from Pokémon.
They plan to rake in a fortune­ following the global launch Nintendo’s app phenomenon Pokémon GO last Thursday.

The app uses GPS to alert players on smartphones when Pokémon creatures are in nearby real-life locations, then urges them­ to track them down on foot to capture them.

The tablets bear names such as Minions, iPhones, Twitter, Hello Kitty and Lego.

We found Pikachu pills on a special-access Ebay-style auction­, one of dozens hidden on the deep web.

Dealers can buy 50 high-dose tablets for £49.71.

The shadowy seller from Holland warned us: “They are really high dosed 2CB pills – so be careful.”

A staggering 17,635 ecstasy batches are in stock at the illegal cyber store, which also sells guns, hitmen services and fake documents.

We also found Pikachu pills containing 210mg of ecstasy – dangerously above the recommended safe dose.

A gang source in Manchester ­revealed: “There are hundreds of thousands of these pills being pressed in Holland and Germany and shipped here.

“Chances of them being intercepted­ are pretty slim. Sell them for a fiver a go and you make a wedge. There’s massive demand. Pills are back in a big way.”

Brits killed by illegal drugs hits highest level since records began

The number of Brits killed by illegal drugs has hit its highest level since records began.

Deaths related to misuse of illegal drugs in England and Wales are at their highest level since records began in 1993, official figures revealed.

In 2014, there were 2,250 deaths related to the misuse of illegal drugs.

This was a rise of 15% on 2013 – 1,960 – and 44% higher than in 2004 – 1,570.

Men accounted for 72% of the deaths and women, 28%.

There were also 14,279 hospital admissions for illegal drug poisoning in 2014/15, up 2% on the previous year and up 57% since 2004/05.
This is in spite of a 10.5% fall in adult drug use over the same decade.

Leading health experts demanded urgent action from the Government to tackle the problem.

Shirley Cramer CBE, chief executive of the Royal Society for Public Health, said the new figures were a ‘stark reminder’ of the ‘continued failure of UK government drugs policy’.

She added: “Despite falls in use, more people are dying and suffering serious harm to their health from drug misuse than ever before.

Men account for nearly three quarters of deaths due to drug use

The number of Brits killed by illegal drugs has hit its highest level since records began.

Deaths related to misuse of illegal drugs in England and Wales are at their highest level since records began in 1993, official figures revealed.

In 2014, there were 2,250 deaths related to the misuse of illegal drugs.

This was a rise of 15% on 2013 – 1,960 – and 44% higher than in 2004 – 1,570.

Men accounted for 72% of the deaths and women, 28%.

There were also 14,279 hospital admissions for illegal drug poisoning in 2014/15, up 2% on the previous year and up 57% since 2004/05.

This is in spite of a 10.5% fall in adult drug use over the same decade.

Leading health experts demanded urgent action from the Government to tackle the problem.

Shirley Cramer CBE, chief executive of the Royal Society for Public Health, said the new figures were a ‘stark reminder’ of the ‘continued failure of UK government drugs policy’.

She added: “Despite falls in use, more people are dying and suffering serious harm to their health from drug misuse than ever before.

Health & Social Care Information Centre

“This is largely a result of a drugs policy that has over-focused on criminal justice at the expense of public health, pushing the most vulnerable users to the margins of society and discouraging them from coming forward for treatment and support.

Across the globe, many countries have started to turn this situation around by decriminalising drug use and moving towards policies based on public health and harm reduction.

“Given yet more evidence that harm to the public is increasing, the time is now right for the UK to adopt a new approach to drugs policy.
Thursday’s report by the Health & Social Care Information Centre also found that in 2014, 15% of pupils aged 11 to 15 had taken drugs.

Hospital admissions for drug-related problems reach decade high

More people are ending up in hospital with physical or mental health problems related to drug use than at any time in the past 10 years, despite an overall fall in the number of people using illegal drugs, figures show.

There were 14,279 cases of people admitted to hospital with a primary diagnosis of poisoning by illicit drugs in England in 2014-15, the latest year for which figures are available – a 57% rise since 2004-05 and up 2% year on year.
About 2.7 million people in England and Wales used illicit drugs in the past year
At the same time, 74,801 hospital admissions resulted in a primary or secondary diagnosis of drug-related mental health and behavioural disorders, a 9% rise over 2013-14 and more than double the level of 10 years ago, according to the data from the Health and Social Care Information Centre (HSCIC).

The figures will prove uncomfortable for policymakers who say they are keen to minimise the harm caused by drugs in society, particularly with separate data from the crime survey of England and Wales, also published on Thursday, showing a continued decline in drug use. Despite that, deaths from drug poisoning are at an all-time high.

Shirley Cramer, chief executive of the Royal Society for Public Health (RSPH), which last month called for the decriminalisation of drugs, said the contrasting figures showed up UK drugs policy as a “continued failure”.

She said: “Despite falls in use, more people are dying and suffering serious harm to their health from drug misuse than ever before. This is largely a result of a drugs policy that has over-focused on criminal justice at the expense of public health, pushing the most vulnerable users to the margins of society and discouraging them from coming forward for treatment and support.

“Across the globe, many countries have started to turn this situation around by decriminalising drug use and moving towards policies based on public health and harm reduction. Given yet more evidence that harm to the public is increasing, the time is now right for the UK to adopt a new approach to drugs policy.”
Deaths related to drug misuse in England and Wales are at their highest level since comparable records began in 1993
The HSCIC data showed that adults between the ages of 16-34 were the most likely to end up up in hospital for drug poisoning, with that age group constituting 45% of cases. Slightly more than half – 54% – of those admitted were men. Blackpool borough council had the highest rate of admissions, with 103 per 100,000 of population.

Hospital admissions for drug poisoning are up 57% in the past 10 years
Admissions in England with a primary diagnosis of poisoning by illicit drugs

Among those admitted to hospital with primary or secondary diagnoses of drug-related mental health and behavioural disorders, most (59%) were aged between 25-44, and 69% were male. Liverpool had the highest rate of admissions, with 444 per 100,000 population. Overall, the north-west had the highest hospital admissions for drug-related problems of any English region.

Hospital admissions with a primary or secondary diagnosis of drug-related mental health and behavioural disorders have more than doubled in the past 10 years

Increases in hospital admissions for drug-related problems mirror a soaring rate of drug deaths which was first reported by the Office for National Statistics last September and was highlighted again in the HSCIC report on Thursday.

Coroners attributed 2,248 deaths to drug misuse in 2014, the latest year for which that data is available, an increase of 15% on 2013. The figure represents a 44% rise from 2004 and the highest number of drug deaths since at least 1993, when comparable records began.

But Paul Hayes, chief executive of Collective Voice, an umbrella group for third-sector substance misuse services, said that merely blaming the increase in deaths on austerity cuts to drug treatment was simplistic. A number of factors including increased availability of strong heroin and an ageing population of drug users was to blame for the increase in deaths, which Hayes said was more a “return to trend” than a dramatic escalation.

“It isn’t use that’s driving it, it’s age and vulnerability,” Hayes said. “Their lung function is shot to pieces, their livers are shot to pieces, their hearts aren’t very good. So [with] the same behaviour in terms of using drugs that they could get away with when they were 25, when they’re 45 they keel over and die.”

Trends in alcohol consumption and deaths – Must what comes down go back up?

This guest post by John Holmes orginally appeared on his personal blog, APE: Alcohol Policy and Epidemiology and has been reproduced with his permission. The piece represents his views only and not those of the Sheffield Alcohol Research Group.

In April, a BMJ analysis piece by Nick Sheron and Ian Gilmore argued that the recent downward trend in alcohol-related deaths in England and Wales was most likely caused by economic factors. In particular, it pointed to the global recession and the alcohol duty escalator which, between 2008 and 2013, raised alcohol taxes by 2% above inflation each year. Sheron and Gilmore’s main concern was that the combination of subsequent duty cuts and the UK’s economic recovery mean “the relentless rise [in alcohol-related deaths which preceded the downturn] is likely to resume as incomes outstrip rises in taxation”.

Support for this gloomy outlook followed in May when NHS Health Scotland’s MESAS project published its annual summary of alcohol sales data. The headline figures for England and Wales showed that the amount of pure alcohol sold per adult increased slightly in 2015 from 9.0 to 9.1 litres after declining from 2005 to 2013 and holding steady in 2014. Whether alcohol sales will continue to rise and trigger increases in alcohol-related mortality is unclear but, at first glance, Sheron and Gilmore seem to be on firm ground with their predictions. However, I am unconvinced for two reasons.

First, although there is ample evidence that economic factors influence alcohol consumption and related harm, other factors also seem to be playing an important role in today’s alcohol market. Most notably, the UK’s steady decline in youth drinking predates both the recession and the duty escalator and shows no signs of abating as economic trends reverse. Instead, a wide range of hypotheses with little connection to economic factors have been proposed to explain why today’s youth are turning their backs on alcohol. These include increased health consciousness, the rise of the internet, better enforcement around underage sales, changes in parental attitudes and practices, increased educational pressures, a desire for more diverse life experiences and migration from abstemious societies. Notably, several of these hypotheses do not exclusively apply to young people and may also explain declines in consumption among older populations. So yes, an improving economy and tax cuts may lead drinkers to consume more than would they would otherwise have been the case, and we should not be blasé about the consequences. However, it is also possible that economic forces will not be sufficient to outweigh other countervailing forces pushing alcohol trends in the opposite direction.

Second, Sheron and Gilmore’s prediction rests heavily on the total consumption or population model of alcohol policy. This model has been around for decades and comes in both refined and crude forms, but the heart of the argument (i.e. the crude version) is that when average levels of alcohol consumption in a population go up, alcohol-related harm in that population also tends to go up. Superficially, this proposition is unproblematic and the general tendency has ample supporting evidence. However, things can get messy when the average consumption trend is made up of lots of sub-trends going in opposite directions – and that is what has been happening in the UK in recent years. Alongside sharp declines in youth drinking, we have also seen continuing increases in middle-aged women’s drinking, declines in male drinking, increases in female abstinence and an increasing share of the country’s alcohol consumption being accounted for by older age groups. And that’s just the alcohol consumption trends. Throw in migration from countries with different drinking cultures, a collapsing pub sector, an ageing population and attempts to diversify major sectors of the drinks market and claims that changes in a simple average will produce predictable outcomes starts to look somewhat shaky.

None of this is to say that we should be unconcerned about increases in the affordability of alcohol, particularly at the lower end of the market. Alcohol Focus Scotland recently showed that it is still possible to buy cider for 18p per unit, lager for 26p per unit and vodka for 36p per unit in Scotland. That means a woman can give herself a one-in-five chance of dying from alcohol and still have change from £10 each week. Meanwhile, researchers in Australia found that, like the UK, cheap alcohol in their country is disproportionately purchased by the heaviest drinkers on the lowest incomes who are at greatest risk of harm from their drinking. So the economics of alcohol remains an important area for policy debate. However, when considering where things are going in the future, we should be cautious in assuming that an economic recovery and tax cuts will see a decade of consumption declines revert to the post-war norm of increasing alcohol problems. It may happen, but there are good reasons to hedge our bets and give greater attention to what is going on under the bonnet of our drinking trends to understand what the future may hold.

5 Things to Do When You’ve Inherited Addiction

It’s an inevitable lament at birthday parties, girls’ nights and cook-outs: “None for me, thank you. If I eat just one (insert something delicious here), I won’t stop.”

People will laugh and nod with understanding at the admission of a so-called addictive personality, even offering up their own Herculean struggle with mocktails, chips or ice cream. But these conversations are often couched in language about willpower, weakness and a lack of self-discipline. And for those who truly have a genetic predisposition toward substance abuse or addiction, the compulsion is no laughing matter.

Research shows that about half of a person’s vulnerability to addiction stems from biological factors. Their environment and the circumstances surrounding their development also contribute to whether or not that predisposition manifests itself in the form of full-blown addiction.

It’s a phenomenon noted roughly 2,000 years ago by Greek philosopher Plutarch and echoed in the work of 17th-century scholar Robert Burton, best-known for “The Anatomy of Melancholy:” Ebrii gignunt ebrios, one drunkard begets another.

Conventional wisdom posits that if a person’s parents or grandparents struggled with substance abuse or addiction, they too will be fated to some form of chemical dependency. But many children of addicts live against the grain of that upbringing, swearing off any substances that could be abused.

That a propensity toward dependency appears to exist within families is beyond dispute. What, exactly, explains the link is another matter. Pushback against the 19th (and to some extent, 20th) century narrative of addiction as a moral failing in part spurred the hunt for scientific evidence of a connection.

But scientists believe there is no singular addiction gene. There is no test that can label someone a future addict. So where does that leave those with a family history of chemical dependency? Awareness and education can go a long way in this case.

Here are five things that people with a family history of addiction can do to break the cycle:

1. Build a knowledge base.

There is more attention focused on addiction and addiction science now than ever, and increasingly few excuses for not paying attention. This epidemic touches everyone. Even those without a family history of addiction likely know one or a dozen people who are struggling – possibly in silence.

For those fortunate enough to be aware of their own connection to addiction, there is even more incentive to locate resources in their own community. From recovery groups to counseling to the glut of information available online about causes and treatment, the time to become educated is right now.

2. Scrutinize behaviors.

Now, too, is the time for analyzing the underlying problems that may manifest themselves in harmful behavior. You might polish off a pint of Cherry Garcia the night before a project is due, or just because you are bored. You pause in the pantry to down that last glass of wine out of sight, lest someone think you have a drinking problem.

Overdoing it on sweets or having one beer too many may not seem like a big deal – and it’s not, if it never escalates. But it could also be an attempt at self-medication for anxiety or depression for someone prone to impulsive or compulsive behavior. These folks might not be in active addiction, but they are struggling with the same issues that can lead others into a downward spiral.

3. Understand risk factors.

Risk factors for dependency or addiction don’t stop with the genetic hand one is dealt. A social circle that revolves around drinking or drugs, a personal history of trauma, low self-esteem, family dysfunction and a lack of social support can all leave someone vulnerable to drug abuse.

4. Prevention is key.

The best way to avoid addiction is simply never to begin experimenting. This may sound obvious, but it’s borne out by fact. Although experimentation at any age can open the door to the chronic compulsion to seek and use illicit substances, someone who tries drugs is more likely to wind up in full-blown addiction if they start young, before the parts of their brain that govern impulse control mature.

And they start young, according to annual estimates from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health. About one in 10 people aged 12 or older had used an illicit substance within 30 days of taking the most recently published survey. That’s 27 million people, with nearly 8,000 people aged 12 or older using an illicit drug for the first time within the preceding 12 months. About 10 to 20 percent of people who try those drugs become dependent on them. Why take the risk?

5. Lead by example.

Anyone with a genetic predisposition toward addiction ultimately has a responsibility to pass lessons learned on to the next generation. When children enter the picture, the stakes are high. They have a right to understand what they are up against. That means openness, honesty and courage on the part of a parent who might rather not discuss such a sensitive subject. Moreover, it means having the courage to seek help if help is needed. It takes courage to acknowledge a problem, but even more courage to resolve it.

Service User Barbeque July 20th

BBQ
You are invited to the Summer Service User BBQ!
Outside Edge, The Firm, Turning Point, Build on Belief, CGL, Groundswell, and Blenheim are hosting a BBQ on Wednesday, July 20th at 1pm, at 61 Munster Rd, SW6 5RE. Food and refreshments will be provided. All service users are welcome!

The Alcohol Service

gcl_poster_header

For residents of: Hammersmith & Fulham, Kensington & Chelsea, and Westminster

The New Venue for Coffee Mornings, Table Tennis & Pool
10 am to 12 pm every Wednesday&Thursday
At Lytton Community Hall
North End Crescent, West Kensington W14 8TE
Free Coffee, Tea and Snacks,Food parcels, Plus Good Company!
Situated on North End Crescent, off North End Road. 5 minutes’ walk from West Kensington Tube station
For more information call: 0800 014 7440

Heroin

I destroy homes, tear families apart, take your children, and that’s just the start. I’m most costly than diamonds, more costly than gold, the sorrow I bring is a sight to behold, and if you need me, remember I’m easily found, I live all around you, in schools and in town. I live with the rich I live with the poor, I live down the street and maybe next door. My power is awesome, try me your see, but if you do you may never break free. Try me once I might let you go, but try me twice and I’ll own your soul. When I possess you, your steal and your lie, your do what you have to just to get high. The crimes you’ll commit for the narcotic charms, will be worth the pleasure your feel in your arms. Your lie to your mother, you’ll steal from your dad, when you see their tears you should feel sad. But you’ll forget your morals and how you were raised, I’ll be you conscience, I’ll teach you my ways. I take kids from parents and parents from kids, I turn people from god, and seperate friends. I’ll take everything from you, your looks and your pride. I’ll always be with you right by your side. Your give up everything your family, your home, your friends your money then you’re be alone. I’ll take and take, till you have nothing more to give. When I’m finished with you you’ll be lucky to live. If you try me be warned this is no game. If given the chance I’ll drive you insane, I’ll ravish your body, I’ll control your mind, I’ll own you completely, your soul will be mine. The nightmares I’ll give you while lying in bed, the voices your head inside your head, the sweat the shakes, the visions your see, I want you to know, these are all gifts from me, but then it’s too late, and you know in your heart, that you are mine and we shall not part. You’ll regret that you tried me, you always do, but you came to me, not I too you. You knew this would happen. Many times you were told, but you challenged my power, you chose to be bold. You could have said no, and just walked away, if you could live that day over now what would you say? I’ll be your master you’ll be my slave, I’ll even go with you, when you go to your grave. Now that you have met me, what will you do? It’s all up too you. I can bring more misery than words can tell. Come take my hand, let me lead you too hell.

New Writing workshops with Outside Edge!

We have an exciting new writing workshop starting this Wednesday 4pm-6pm. Have you got something you want to say? At Write Now you can develop writing skills, share stories, and build your confidence. Write Now is a safe, and supportive environment challenging the social stigma that people in recovery often feel. Feel free to forward this message on to anyone you think might be interested! We ask that participants are abstinent on the day of the workshop; however those on low-level scripts are welcome.

E-mail us at: admin@edgetc.org or call the office on 020 7371 8020 for more information.

We would love to see you there!

“Legal highs” and the Psychoactive Substances Act 2016: what employers need to know

The Psychoactive Substances Act 2016 (the Act) will come into force on 26 May 2016. You can find government guidance and resources on the Government’s website.
160523_drug-testing
What does the Act do?

The Act makes it a criminal offence to produce, supply, offer to supply, possess with intent to supply and import or export psychoactive substances. The main thrust of the new law is to allow the police and local authorities to shut down shops and websites that currently trade in ‘legal highs’.

The law is targeted at the supply and production of legal highs. Unlike pre-existing drugs legislation, the Act does not criminalise individual users. Simple possession is not a criminal offence, except in a custodial institution. There are also protections for certain ‘excluded activities’ which cover healthcare activities and legitimate scientific research to develop new medicines.

The new offences will work alongside the existing laws around controlled drugs – such as heroin, cocaine and amphetamines. Police will be able to stop and search individuals, vehicles, vessels and aircraft and (with a warrant) enter any premises to seize substances and/or evidence.
Which substances are covered?

The Act covers any substance which is deemed to be psychoactive; that is, any substance intended for human consumption which is capable of producing a psychoactive effect. This is defined very broadly in the Act as any affect which, by stimulating or depressing the central nervous system, affects a person’s mental functioning or emotional state.

This wide definition has been one of the more contentious aspects of the Act. The Government’s own drugs adviser, the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs, previously warned that it was too broad and unworkable in practice – it captured common substances such as caffeine, nicotine and, perhaps surprisingly, even certain foodstuffs like nutmeg.

To help address those concerns, the Act provides for a number of exempted classes of substances which will not be regulated by the new law:

Medicinal products;
Controlled drugs (as these are already illegal under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971);
Alcohol;
Caffeine, nicotine and tobacco products; and
Foodstuffs (unless supplied primarily for their psychoactive effect).

The Government is free to add or remove items from the list of exempted substances. The intention is that this will allow new medicines – which have been tested and deemed safe – to be exempted in the future.
Sanctions

The penalties for producing, supplying or offering to supply psychoactive substances are up to seven years in jail, an unlimited fine, or both. The law also gives wide powers to the police – and in some cases local authorities – to obtain a new raft of civil sanctions:

Prohibition Notices and Prohibition Orders – these require the subject to stop carrying out activities prohibited by the Act and/or hand over stocks of psychoactive substances.
Premises Notices and Premises Orders – these can be directed at employers and landlords and their severity can range from requiring the employer/landlord to take all reasonable steps to prevent prohibited activities taking place on their premises, to imposing a complete ‘access prohibition’ which effectively closes down their premises for up to six months.

These civil sanctions can be imposed as an alternative or in addition to the criminal offences. Breach of one of the Orders is itself a criminal offence punishable by up to two years in jail, an unlimited fine, or both. In addition, following amendments to the original Act, supplying or offering to supply psychoactive substances to a child will result in automatic inclusion on the Children’s barred list.

What does this mean for employers?

To ensure that the issue of misuse of drugs and alcohol in the workplace can be addressed, many employers already operate drug and alcohol policies. This is particularly the case where the organisation is involved in health and safety critical activity such as in the rail, aviation, construction or mining industries. Those policies establish the rules which bind employees and allow employers to ensure that employees are treated consistently and fairly in the event of breach. Such policies are also often implemented as a supportive measure where drug and alcohol use are seen as an illness.

What are the legal obligations on employers?

The Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 (HSWA) requires employers to ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, the health and safety of all employees while at work. Employers also have a responsibility to ensure that others are not exposed to any risk as a result of their business activities or their employees’ work related actions. In addition, under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, employers must not knowingly permit use of controlled substances on their premises. This includes employees who drive for work – under the Road Traffic Act 1988 and Transport and Works Act 1992.

Although the law does not ban possession and use of legal highs, an employer is unlikely to be found to have discharged its duties under the HSWA if it does not take steps to assess the risk of psychoactive substances being used in the workplace and subsequently implements appropriate control measures. For example, if an employee under the influence of legal highs causes harm to themselves or others while at work, an employer might be found liable for those actions if they failed to take reasonable measures to control drug use at work.

In addition, imagine the consequences of your premises being shut down by the police and the press interest if a premises notice or order was issued, if it were found that an employee had been supplying psychoactive substances while at work. So it’s not just the risk of accident or injury present if the employee has indulged, but also the risk to the reputation and operations of the business as a result of supply within the workplace.

What should employers be doing now?
Review

The introduction of the new prohibition on legal highs is the latest development which will impact on existing policies and risk assessments.

Employers should review their Drug and Alcohol or substance misuse policy and any relevant risk assessments to ensure they are sufficiently robust to cover the use of “legal highs” or psychoactive substances and amend where necessary. If no policy or risk assessments exist employers will need to create them.

Employers should also review their Disciplinary Rules to make it clear that examples of gross misconduct include:

Supply or attempted supply of psychoactive substances banned under the Act; and
Being under the influence of a psychoactive substance.

Communicate

The organisation’s attitude to and policy on drug and alcohol use at work must be clear. Any amendments to any existing policy or working practice should be communicated clearly to the workforce. In particular, the expectation of the employer must be communicated to staff together with the consequences of breach. There should also be a robust procedure in place which encourages employees to report any issues.
Testing

Publicise drug and alcohol testing arrangements and ensure these tests will capture substances which are considered psychoactive under the new Act.

Remember, such testing requires the consent of the individual concerned. Ensure that there is scope for a refusal to result in disciplinary action and ensure that the workforce is aware that there may be consequences should there be a refusal. Employers should also take care to ensure that the requirement for testing complies with the ICO’s Employment Practices Data Protection Code – Information about Workers’ Health.
Education

A combination of induction training, refresher training and briefings to employees will ensure employees are aware of:

The harmful effects that legal highs, especially if combined with stress or fatigue, can have on a person’s ability to carry out their role;
Any help and assistance available to staff to encourage them to come forward if they feel that they may have issues with alcohol or drugs;
Any training available on how to spot potential problems and how to report these.

NOT LEGAL ADVICE. Information made available on this website in any form is for information purposes only. It is not, and should not be taken as, legal advice. You should not rely on, or take or fail to take any action based upon this information. Never disregard professional legal advice or delay in seeking legal advice because of something you have read.