Examining social supply among nonmedical prescription stimulant users in the San Francisco Bay Area

Abstract

In the US, prescription stimulants are prescribed for a variety of conditions including attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and narcolepsy. Over the last two decades, dramatic increases in stimulant prescriptions have led to greater availability and increased risk for diversion and nonmedical use. Our own and other investigators' findings indicate that many drug “suppliers” do not fit into the traditional image of drug “dealers.” These suppliers typically do not identify themselves as “dealers,” but instead understand their drug distribution as sharing with people they know. Coomber and colleagues' (2007; 2013) concept of “social supply” raises the question: When friends supply or facilitate supply of drugs to friends, is this really dealing? Further, if dealing and supplying are distinct kinds of social transactions, should different types of criminal justice approaches be applied? Social supply extends our understanding of drug dealing as a complex social activity. In this article, we examine the issue of social supply among nonmedical users of prescription stimulants. We conducted a 36-month National Institute on Drug Abuse-funded project to conduct a qualitative, mixed methods study of 150 adult nonmedical prescription stimulant users in the San Francisco Bay Area. We explore intersecting factors, including life stage and social location, that contribute to decisions to use prescription stimulants nonmedically, motivations to use, knowledge about risks and benefits of prescription stimulant use, any adverse health or social consequences experienced, availability, acquisition and diversion of prescription stimulants, and differences in attitudes and behaviours. For this analysis, we rely on participants' narratives concerning prescription stimulant acquisition practices and how they understood these interactions, purchases, and exchanges with the suppliers of prescription stimulants in their social networks. The authors argue that acknowledging the distinction between social supply and “proper” drug dealing would redress the disparity between drug sharing and profiteering particularly regarding criminal sentencing.