Punitive & Rehabilitative Approaches to Drug Policy
This is an excerpt from the paper...
In 1989, amid great public fanfare, a newly intensified federal "War on Drug" was proclaimed. Federal antidrug spending was sharply increased. A debate then arose about how this money should be spent; particularly, whether the emphasis should be heavily in favor of law enforcement and punitive approaches, as in fact it was, or whether a greater emphasis on treatment and rehabilitation of hard drug abusers would be a more productive approach to an antidrug strategy. This debate is not new, but goes back to the earliest days of Federal action against drugs, in the World War I era. Since that time, as we shall see, the public response to the "drug problem" has followed a generally predictable pattern. It is a pattern which has consistantly favored punishment over rehabilitation for drug users; which has persisted in treating drugs and drug addiction as essentially criminal vice matters, roughly parallel to gambling and prostitution, rather than as medical matters. This study traces the history of the conflict between punitive and rehabilitative approaches in American federal antidrug policy, and examines some of the major factors which have driven policy so persistantly in a punitive direction. Roughly, we may say that the driving force is political in the broad sense, cultural politics. The American public regards "drugs" essentially not as a phenomenon in their own right, but as a manifestation and symbol of what it most fears in society: crime, deviant behavior,
. . .
the doctors convicted were often abusing their prescription powers, prescribing to "street" addicts as a profitable sideline business.
However, a conflict was built into this policy, since at this same time the medical profession was establishing its prestige and virtual independence of outside authority in professional matters. A powerful medical establishment was emerging, at least potentially dedicated to the proposition that no one but doctors was qualified to pass judgement on medical prescriptions.
A 1925 court case might well have established the medical model of drug control in the United States. A doctor named Linder was convicted of prescribing maintenance level quantities of opiates to an elderly patient. In a decision throwing out this conviction, the Supreme Court accepted the proposition that opiate addiction was a disease, and that "maintenance" of an addict was a treatment program which a doctor might rightfully apply.
Earlier in the 1920s, as the legal ability of individual doctors to prescribe opiates was effectively removed by the application of the Harrison Act, drug maintenance "clinics" grew up in a number of cities around the countries. The clinics were subjected to official
. . .
Some common words found in the essay are:
Des Jarlais, Richard Nixon, Alice Wonderland, Harry Anslinger, Harrison Act, CareUnit CompCare, Treasury Department, Bennett Lapham, Carry Nation, Nixon Bennett, jarlais 1989, des jarlais, punitive model, des jarlais 1989, joseph des jarlais, courtwright joseph, joseph des, courtwright joseph des, treatment model, war drugs, drug policy, lindesmith 1965, harrison act, late nineteenth century, model treatment model,
Approximate Word count = 7902
Approximate Pages = 32 (250 words per page)
|
Customer Service
to Over
32,000 Professionally Written Papers!!!
