Continence vs . Damage Reduction
" Abstinence Or Harm Reduction”
" Drug policy regarding the control of the traditional illicit substances (opiates, crack, cannabis) happens to be moving through upbeat occasions in just about all Western countries. Prohibition on such basis as repressive police force not only appears to fail on the large scale, nevertheless also to produce vast added costs, complications, and harm for drug consumers, who have often result in extreme sociable, economic, and health conditions” (Fischer 1995: 389).
Western countries struggle with the control of substance abuse. America, for example , has been faltering with eliminating or minimizing the persistent issues of drug abuse and crimes associated with drugs. America's goal about these complications consistently continues to be complete continence. By providing medications programs, the drug make use of and maltreatment is contacted with " solutions” that may heal drug-addicted individuals. However , other countries such as The european countries and Germany developed an alternative solution approach known as harm decrease. This practice is " aimed at lowering the harms related to drug use --- including the harms caused by severe drug regulations --- devoid of attempting to remove drug work with per se” (Reinarman and Levine 1997: 345). The harm decrease tactic has shown more success than abstinence in Europe and Germany; America could follow their particular footsteps. In this essay, I will be discussing the two other approaches of abstinence and harm reduction, then explain why I really believe harm decrease is the most successful way to supply drug treatment in the usa.
" Complete celibacy from nonmedical drugs is the goal on most substance abuse treatment in the United States” (MacMaster 2004: 1). With the passing of Harrison Act in 1914, the usa of America begin their regulation about drug employ. Policies regarding drug use incorporated the thought of abstinence and prohibition. In that case, " the Anti-Drug Mistreatment Act of 1988 mandates abstinence-based drug policy” (MacMaster 2004: 2) that stimulates a natural America. As well, critics of the harm lowering policy declare that as medications are legalized, so does the rates of drug dependency. In the article " For the Un Drug Events: The Fights Against Illicit Drug Legalization and Injury Reduction, ” David G. Evans communicates his rival view of harm decrease and says reasons why legalizing drugs intended for the harm reduction plan will increase medication use, drug problems, drug-related crimes, and drug markets. One primary argument Evans claims is the fact " dubious drugs will be addictive and dangerous” (Evans 2009: 9). Therefore , legalizing these harmful drugs could increase the likelihood of abuse. Evans asserts that from the earlier, America offers learned that sanctioning drugs to get harm lowering and establishing lenient regulations to regulate drug abuse will increase drug abuse and there is fewer drug abuse when there is good drug control. For instance, the 1914 Harrison Act " contributed to a significant decline in narcotic addiction in the Combined States” (Evans 2009: 10). Evans concludes that treatment programs that aim for disuse could improve in various methods but this individual believes that " the best goal for the people addicted to drugs which is abstinence” (Evans 2009: 48). In general, Evans says that reducing the injury won't assist in preventing or get rid of the issues of drug abuse, " only treatment and restoration will save the addict” (Evans 2009: 45).
Alternatively, the alternative method of abstinence can be harm lowering. The concept 1st arose inside the 1980s delivering a way to manage drug concerns more humanely and successfully (Reinarm and Levine 1997). Although people require a " effective drug-free America” or maybe a " crime-free America, ” we know that the utilization of drugs and crime will always exist. Therefore , harm lowering attempts to minimize the injury in these issues instead of attempting to eliminate drugs and offense. In " Real Opposition, Real Alternatives, ” Reinarm and Levine stress that abstinence is definitely not the only goal of drug procedures....
Bibliography: 1 . Evans, David G. " The Quarrels Against Dubious Drugs and Harm Reduction. " (2009): 1-49. Yahoo Scholar. World wide web. 29 Nov. 2010..
2 . Fischer, Benedikt. " Medicines, Communites, and Harm Decrease in Germany: The modern Relevance of Public Health Concepts in Regional Responses. " Journal of Public Health Policy 16. 4 (1995): 389-411. JSTOR. Web. 29 Nov. 2010..
3. Levine, Harry G. " Real Opposition, Genuine Alternatives. " Crack in the us: Demon Medicines and Sociable Justice. By simply Craig Reinarman. Regents of the University of California, 1997. 345-66. Printing.
4. MacMaster, Samuel A. " Harm Reduction: a New Perspective on Substance Abuse Providers. " (2004): 1-11. Print out.
5. Peele, Stanton. " Hungry for the next Fix: In back of the Persistent, Misguided Visit a Medical Treatment for Addiction. " (2002): 1-6. Print.
6. Schmidt, Joan, and Elena Williams. " When All Else Falls flat, Try Injury Reduction. " The American Journal of Nursing, 99. 10 (1999): 67-70. JSTOR. Web. up to 29 Nov. 2010..
Log Article Week 4 Andria Allen Grand Canyon School SPE-553 Study course Characteristics of Intellectual ..