{"title":"DOJ Overreach: The Criminalization of Physicians.","authors":"Cathleen London","doi":"10.1080/01947648.2022.2147366","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The primary narrative directing opioid policy is that the overdose epidemic is driven by clinician overprescribing, creating patient addicts. This has led to draconian laws and the use of invasive prescription monitoring programs that have harmed patients with chronic pain throughout the country. 1 The black box algorithms mine data and have never been subjected to independent verification. 2 Patients and prescribers alike are flagged as sus-picious. 3 Although opioid prescribing has dropped dramatically since the introduction of prescription monitoring, overdose deaths have risen expo-nentially, driven by the illicit fentanyl market. Despite this, law enforcement continues to focus on the diversion of prescription medication. The drug prohibition policy set by the Department of Justice (DOJ) is a mis-guided attempt to address skyrocketing opioid overdoses. It is their way of trying to fix the issue of the unchecked distribution of opioids. The blame for that falls on the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA), Congress, and lobbyists. 4 This focus on limiting the prescribing of legal opioids has led to an increasingly lethal illicit opiate supply. The DOJ continues to erroneously cite diversion of licit legitimate prescriptions of opioids as the problem. As a result, doctors have been imprisoned for terms ranging from 20 years to life without parole, all for practicing medicine. Others have had their careers and reputations irreparably harmed.","PeriodicalId":44014,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Legal Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Legal Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/01947648.2022.2147366","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
Abstract
The primary narrative directing opioid policy is that the overdose epidemic is driven by clinician overprescribing, creating patient addicts. This has led to draconian laws and the use of invasive prescription monitoring programs that have harmed patients with chronic pain throughout the country. 1 The black box algorithms mine data and have never been subjected to independent verification. 2 Patients and prescribers alike are flagged as sus-picious. 3 Although opioid prescribing has dropped dramatically since the introduction of prescription monitoring, overdose deaths have risen expo-nentially, driven by the illicit fentanyl market. Despite this, law enforcement continues to focus on the diversion of prescription medication. The drug prohibition policy set by the Department of Justice (DOJ) is a mis-guided attempt to address skyrocketing opioid overdoses. It is their way of trying to fix the issue of the unchecked distribution of opioids. The blame for that falls on the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA), Congress, and lobbyists. 4 This focus on limiting the prescribing of legal opioids has led to an increasingly lethal illicit opiate supply. The DOJ continues to erroneously cite diversion of licit legitimate prescriptions of opioids as the problem. As a result, doctors have been imprisoned for terms ranging from 20 years to life without parole, all for practicing medicine. Others have had their careers and reputations irreparably harmed.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Legal Medicine is the official quarterly publication of the American College of Legal Medicine (ACLM). Incorporated in 1960, the ACLM has among its objectives the fostering and encouragement of research and study in the field of legal medicine. The Journal of Legal Medicine is internationally circulated and includes articles and commentaries on topics of interest in legal medicine, health law and policy, professional liability, hospital law, food and drug law, medical legal research and education, the history of legal medicine, and a broad range of other related topics. Book review essays, featuring leading contributions to the field, are included in each issue.