Leacsaidh Marlow
The term ‘spiking’ refers to giving somebody a substance without their knowledge and thus consent, most commonly with the intention of rendering that person incapacitated and/or to harm them. Spiking is a significant problem at UK universities in particular, with steep escalations in recent years. Spiking has become disturbingly common in the university clubbing scene, and in 2021 the police reported a noticeable rise in incidents of drink-spiking and needle-spiking. The lack of legal specificity, and concerns around applications of the law in spiking incidences, has led to a call for further legislation to tackle the spiking crisis.
Men are far more confident than women in reporting sexual assault/harassment and crimes of a similar nature
With spiking becoming ever more prevalent, the need for strong and consistent police action is becoming increasingly evident. However, there remain notable logistical and legal barriers that inhibit effective tackling of the spiking crisis, especially in university spheres that already encourage reckless drinking and substance abuse. Government reports from 2023 detailed that in a 2022 YouGov poll 10% of women said they had been spiked compared to 5% of men, while Drinkaware reports that in 2022 their surveyed group showed a similar statistic, but in 2023 this changed to an almost even split (2.3% vs 2.1% reported being spiked in the 12 months before being surveyed). It is notoriously hard to pin down true numbers for cases, and there are added confounding factors such as the small sample size of reports to begin with. Furthermore, a second YouGov poll in 2020 showed that men are far more confident than women in reporting sexual assault/harassment and crimes of a similar nature, being consistently more confident in police ability to deal with incidences, and thus this data may be reflective of that rather than a genuine increase. What is clear from the data though is that there is far less of a distinct gender bias in the numbers of those who report being spiked or who believe they have been.
Taking risks or making reckless decisions such as sharing drinks or being more lax becomes part of the fun
Logistically, spiking can be difficult to prevent because it is most frequently occurring in high-capacity locations like nightclubs where people are already heavily under the influence of alcohol and often other substances and are less likely to notice small changes in themselves or friends until it is too late. Attempting to curb spiking incidences in these environments is an immense challenge, and it can be extremely difficult to determine the difference between someone who has consumed too much alcohol, or poorly mixed substances, and someone who has been spiked. Especially as female students, the risks of date-rape drugs and spiking at bars are age-old tales that we’re very well versed in how to avoid, and women are typically incredibly vigilant on dates or in social settings for this reason. Often when clubbing though these instincts can go out the window – you are already very drunk when you arrive at a venue, the atmosphere is very different, and taking risks or making reckless decisions such as sharing drinks or being more lax becomes part of the fun. This makes targeting individuals to spike far easier, and subsequently make spiking incidences far more difficult to both notice and trace. Spiking is of course never the victim’s fault, but it is pertinent to note that this disparity in self-protective behaviour largely contributes to the difficulty in policing these incidences.
All forms of intentional spiking can be prosecuted as the law stands currently, however, the lack of specific legislation against spiking has led to misunderstandings about how to apply the law to spiking cases and inconsistencies in police and legal responses to incidences. Spiking is covered in UK law by 2 acts: the 1861 Offences Against the Person Act, and the 2003 Sexual Offences Act when committed with the intention of sexually assaulting an individual. Social and legal pressure has led the government to focus on the creation of a new ‘administering of harmful substance’ offence, setting out spiking as an individual criminal offence (it is currently covered by 3 separate substance offences in the Offences Against the Person Act). The current categories used to record reported spiking incidences will also be further sub-categorised, to better understand the distribution and occurrence of different spiking tactics. Streamlined collection of data is hoped to assist police in more effectively targeting the crimes, and streamlined legislation is hoped to assist prosecutors in carrying out the legal cases against individuals with more ease and efficacy.
It is clear that legislative changes are a step in the right direction
But how effective will this change prove to be?
Spiking is already a tricky crime to pin down – because in cases where sexual assault isn’t the aim, which are becoming far more common, a perpetrator can commit the crime and be out of the vicinity before their victim has even consumed, or felt any effects of, the substance. Most people do not realise they have been spiked until it is too late, and either suffer effects mild enough to be blamed on their own alcohol consumption, or severe enough that memory may be largely impaired and any key details of the offence are non-existent or inaccurate. Furthermore, in incidences where victims are sexually assaulted there is an added layer of difficulty. Sexual assault is already a horrific experience for the victim, but that can be further exacerbated when it occurs under the influence of substances that affect a victim’s memory. Reporting such an offence can be extremely difficult emotionally, and for many women especially, the very real fear of not being believed, being dismissed, or the police being unable to do anything due to a lack of evidence, means that victims are highly unlikely to report such cases. Not only does this mean that spiking is heavily underreported, but that police statistics are likely skewed. It’s possible that clearer legislation will tackle some of the fear surrounding police being ineffective in these incidences, as the course of action upon receiving a report of spiking and sexual assault becomes easier. Altering the law will not, however, counteract the fundamental barriers that stop sexual assault victims from coming forwards – any statistical changes in reporting are unlikely to be significant and numbers of reported cases will remain insufficiently representative of the actual landscape of the issue.
It is clear that legislative changes are a step in the right direction, but with key hurdles still in place and spiking techniques ever-improving, it remains to be seen whether there will be any marked improvements.
Leacsaidh Marlow
Featured image courtesy of Raghavendra V. Konkathi via Unsplash. Image license found here. No changes were made to this image.
For more content including uni news, reviews, entertainment, lifestyle, features and so much more, follow us on Instagram and like our Facebook page for more articles and information on how to get involved.
If you just can’t get enough of Features, like our Facebook page as a reader or a contributor and follow us on Instagram.
