| User info | |
|---|---|
| User name: | jeniusmudj |
| Website: | http://transformationstreatment1.blogspot.com/ |
| Bio: | <p class="p__2">2016 Koppel JDS. This is an open-access article dispersed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which allows unlimited usage, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. The ethical and medical designs, the dominant paradigms of drug dependency, disagree on the question of duty. The medical design views it as the behavior of a' pirated' brain. Amid efforts to decarcerate American prisons, the relative benefits of these 2 designs are being weighed. Which raises the question of whether policy- makers should be resigned to picking one side of the ethical/ medical dichotomy. In this commentary, the ethical and medical models will be critically assessed, and an alternative 3rd way, a multi-level design, recommended. The essential difference in between them is where they place blame for an addicts' habits: the ethical model views drug addiction as the choice of a free and self-governing person; the medical model views it as the item of a' hijacked' brain. For the last a number of decades, United States 'drug crime policy has actually been grounded in the ethical model of dependency: drug-involved transgressors are assumed to exercise choice in dedicating a crime, are blameworthy, and penalty is justified either for retributive or substantial functions. According to this view, habits of an addict is not easily chosen but is the outcome of biological procedures. So to blame a drug user for his or her conduct-or to enforce punishment without resolving the root cause of the problem-would be misguided. Amidst the chorus of calls to lower imprisonment levels, drug criminal activity policies have as soon as again come to the fore. As reformers consider methods to minimize imprisonment levels, the relative merits of the' moral' and' medical' designs.</p>
<p class="p__3">will be under dispute; and the irresolvable differences between the 2 will be plain - where to go for treatment of addiction to video games for children. Which raises a question: Must policymakers be resigned to choose between the 2? Or exist other evidence-based options offered? In this paper the prominent features of the ethical and medical designs of drug dependency, with a focus on empirical proof of their constraints were highlighted.</p> |
| History | |
| Joined: | |
This user does not accept Private Messages