PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 9693862

Parallel process: moral failure, addiction and society.

W E Sowers
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Recent legislation restricting disability and other financial benefits for persons with substance related disorders provides the latest chapter in this country's relationship with mind altering chemicals and its attempts to control their use. Whether seen from the perspective of a substance user or from that of an angry and insecure public, this relationship seems to lead inevitably to self-destructive processes. This paper will examine the historical context of drug control policy in this country and the impact of current policy on vulnerable populations and on society as a whole. Parallels between factors which drive addictive disorders and those that perpetuate ineffective public policy will be considered along with their moral implications.

Explore related subjects

Drug and Narcotic ControlEligibility DeterminationHumansMoralsPoliticsPublic PolicySocial SecuritySocial ValuesSubstance-Related DisordersUnited StatesJournal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

W E Sowers. 1998. Parallel process: moral failure, addiction and society.. https://doi.org/10.1023/a%3A1018727821763

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2006

Clarification of registration requirements for individual practitioners. Final rule.

The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) is amending its registration regulations to make it clear that when an individual practitioner practices in more than one State, he or she must obtain a separate DEA registration for each State. This amendment will make it easier for practitioners to understand the requirements of the Controlled Substances Act and its implementing regulations.

Drug and Narcotic Control↗
PubMed2006

The legal status of medical marijuana.

OBJECTIVE: To review the legal status of medical marijuana in the US. DATA SOURCES: Relevant publications were located using LexisNexis (1982-October 2006), WestLaw (1996-October 2006), BNA Health Law Reporter (1996-October 2006), MEDLINE (1996-October 2006), EMBASE (1980-October 2006), International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (1970-October 2006), and an Internet search targeting government sites using the key words medical marijuana. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: Federal and state medical marijuana laws were examined. Relevant cannabinoid-based drug products were reviewed. Federal and State Supreme Court and Appeal level cases involving medical marijuana were evaluated. DATA SYNTHESIS: Marijuana is regulated as a Schedule I controlled substance and its use is prohibited under federal law. Dronabinol and nabilone are synthetic cannabinoids approved by the Food and Drug Administration and Sativex is a cannabis-based extract being evaluated in Phase III trials. The federal government sponsors a single patient compassionate use Investigational New Drug Application program providing medical marijuana for a small number of patients. Eleven states permit marijuana use for medical purposes and one state provides a defense of medical necessity. Employers do not have to provide workplace accommodations for employees using medical marijuana and can terminate them at will. Healthcare providers have First Amendment constitutional protections that allow them to discuss marijuana with patients. CONCLUSIONS: Until the Supreme Court rules directly on the constitutionality of state medical marijuana laws, a conflict remains. Marijuana use remains illegal under federal law and states assume their medical marijuana laws to be constitutional.

Drug and Narcotic Control↗