Suchergebnisse

Paul Gillbard, SPO/Warden of Wilton Place Probation and Bail Hostel in Oldham, responds to a Northamptonshire perspective on residents who inject drugs.

Abstract 'Harm reduction' programs are usually justified on the utilitarian grounds that they aim to reduce the net harms of a behavior. In this paper, I contend that (1) the historical genesis of harm reduction programs, and the crucial moral imperative that distinguishes these programs from other interventions and policies, are not utilitarian; (2) the practical implementation of harm reduction programs is not, and probably cannot be, utilitarian; and (3) the continued justification of harm reduction on utilitarian grounds is untenable and may itself cause harm. Promoting harm reduction programs as utilitarian in the public arena disregards their deeper prioritarian impulses. 'Harm reduction' is a misnomer, and the name should be abandoned sooner rather than later.

CRITICAL APPROACHES TO HARM REDUCTION CONFLICT, INSTITUTIONALIZATION, (DE-)POLITICIZATION, AND DIRECT ACTION -- CRITICAL APPROACHES TO HARM REDUCTION CONFLICT, INSTITUTIONALIZATION, (DE-)POLITICIZATION, AND DIRECT ACTION -- CONTENTS -- INTRODUCTION -- REFERENCES -- PART ONE: CRITICAL HARM REDUCTION POLICY: FROM OPPOSITIONAL SOCIAL MOVEMENT TO INSTITUTIONALIZED PUBLIC HEALTH POLICY -- Chapter 1 WHO NEEDS NALOXONE? -- ABSTRACT -- INTRODUCTION -- METHODOLOGY -- Background/Context: Placing Naloxone within the Politics of Needs Interpretation

This dissertation depicts and analyzes the emergence of Taiwan's harm reduction policy as a governmental strategy to address the epidemic of HIV/AIDS among intravenous drug users (IDUs). The policy is portrayed as a biopolitical project situated in Taiwan's unique history of drug control. It was made possible by the office , a heterogeneous assemblage of human and nonhuman actors and elements associated with each other by guanxi . Within this assemblage, different experts endeavored to educate themselves, make alliances, or establish a new profession. This policy fashioned citizen addicts on the one hand and offered opportunities for rethinking policy transplantation on the other. The study utilized archival research, in-depth interviews, and field observations as its data sources. The analysis was informed by the constructivist tradition of grounded theory, especially situational analysis. The concept of assemblages was used to address the fluid and transient situations encountered in the making of harm reduction policy. The theoretical implications of this study include: integrating the discussions of technoscience into a Foucaultian critique of modernity, reappraising the global and the local as explanatory terms, searching for a useful analytic frame such as the office or assemblages, de-centering Euro-American versions of biopolitics, studying the significance of short-lived events, and suggesting a new socio-epistemic position for experts.

Talk of harm reduction has expanded horizontally, to apply to an ever-widening range of policy domains, and vertically, becoming part of official legal and political discourse. This expansion calls for philosophical theorization. What is the best way in which to characterize harm reduction? Does it represent a distinctive ethical position? How is it best morally justified, and what are its moral limits? I distinguish two varieties of harm reduction. One of them, technocratic harm reduction, is premised on the fact of non-enforceability of prohibitionist policies. The second, deliberative harm reduction, is premised on the fact of reasonable disagreement, grounded in the fact that reasonable persons disagree about a range of controversial behaviours. I argue that deliberative harm reduction better accounts for some of harm reduction's most attractive features, and provides a plausible way of accounting for harm reductions's justificatory grounds and limits.

Harm reduction entails policies, programs and practices aimed at reducing the harms associated with the use of psychoactive drugs in people who are unwilling or unable to stop. The focus is on the prevention of harm, rather than on the prevention of drug use itself. Harm reduction has been a principle of Australias approach to drug use for several decades. However, recent overdose deaths and hospitalisations at music festivals have highlighted the clear harms of illicit drug use and prompted a debate over the introduction of pill testing, with political leaders being reluctant to implement the measure. This book explores the ethical, legal and medical pros and cons in the debate, with a topical focus on pill testing. Does pill testing give young people a false sense of security and promote further risky drug use, when there is really no safe level at which these substances can be taken? Or are harm reduction approaches such as pill testing and needle and syringe programs simply about saving lives and giving people a safety net? In a perfect world, no one would risk their lives by taking party drugs but in reality, is harm reduction too bitter a pill to swallow?--

The original version of this article unfortunately contained a mistake. The fourth sentence of third paragraph under section Do Harm Reduction Programs Condone Harm? Should be "One of us (Corvino)" instead of "One of us (name removed for blinded manuscript)". The original article has been corrected.

Abstract In this paper, I will argue that some prominent objections to parental licensing rely on dubious claims about the existence of a very stringent, if not indefeasible, right to parent, which would be violated by licensing. I claim that attaching such stringency to the right only makes sense if we make a number of idealising assumptions. Otherwise, it is deeply implausible. Instead, I argue that we should evaluate parental licensing policies in much the same way we would harm reduction policies. By adopting this critical perspective, we can see that there are powerful, but quite different, reasons to be cautious about parental licensing relating to our ability to minimize the harmful effects of mass-parenting in a world of minimal surveillance and intervention.