Neurocops: the politics of prohibtion and the future of enforcing social policy from inside the body.

Journal of law and health Pub Date : 2004-01-01
Richard Glen Boire
{"title":"Neurocops: the politics of prohibtion and the future of enforcing social policy from inside the body.","authors":"Richard Glen Boire","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Over the next decade an increasing number of new \"pharmacotherapy\" medications will become available with the potential to tremendously impact the use and abuse of illegal drugs and the overall direction of national and international drug policy. These pharmacotherapy medications are designed to block or significantly reduce the \"highs\" elicited by illegal drugs. Used as part of a drug treatment program, pharmacotherapy medications may provide valuable assistance for people voluntarily seeking a chemical aid in limiting or eliminating problem drug use. However, the tremendously politicized nature of the \"drug war\" raises substantial concerns that, in addition to those who voluntarily choose to use such medications, some people will be compelled to use them. This article concludes that in the absence of extraordinary circumstances, governmental action forcing or coercing a person to use a pharmacotherapy drug would violate a number of important legal rights. Among the rights implicated by compulsory use of pharmacotherapy drugs are the right to informed consent, the right to bodily integrity and privacy, the protection against cruel and unusual punishment, and the right to freedom of thought.</p>","PeriodicalId":73804,"journal":{"name":"Journal of law and health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2004-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of law and health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Over the next decade an increasing number of new "pharmacotherapy" medications will become available with the potential to tremendously impact the use and abuse of illegal drugs and the overall direction of national and international drug policy. These pharmacotherapy medications are designed to block or significantly reduce the "highs" elicited by illegal drugs. Used as part of a drug treatment program, pharmacotherapy medications may provide valuable assistance for people voluntarily seeking a chemical aid in limiting or eliminating problem drug use. However, the tremendously politicized nature of the "drug war" raises substantial concerns that, in addition to those who voluntarily choose to use such medications, some people will be compelled to use them. This article concludes that in the absence of extraordinary circumstances, governmental action forcing or coercing a person to use a pharmacotherapy drug would violate a number of important legal rights. Among the rights implicated by compulsory use of pharmacotherapy drugs are the right to informed consent, the right to bodily integrity and privacy, the protection against cruel and unusual punishment, and the right to freedom of thought.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
神经警察:禁止的政治和从身体内部执行社会政策的未来。
在今后十年中,将有越来越多的新的“药物治疗”药物可供使用,这些药物有可能对非法药物的使用和滥用以及国家和国际药物政策的总体方向产生巨大影响。这些药物治疗药物旨在阻止或显着减少非法药物引起的“高潮”。作为药物治疗计划的一部分,药物治疗药物可以为自愿寻求化学帮助以限制或消除问题药物使用的人提供有价值的帮助。然而,“毒品战争”的巨大政治化性质引起了人们的极大关注,除了那些自愿选择使用这些药物的人之外,还有一些人将被迫使用它们。这篇文章的结论是,在没有特殊情况的情况下,政府强迫或胁迫一个人使用药物治疗药物的行为将侵犯一些重要的法律权利。强制使用药物治疗药物所涉及的权利包括知情同意权、身体完整权和隐私权、免受残忍和不寻常惩罚的权利以及思想自由权。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The Ninth Amendment: An Underutilized Protection for Reproductive Choice. Distorted Burden Shifting and Barred Mitigation: Being a Stubborn 234 Years Old Ironically Hasn't Helped the Supreme Court Mature. How Bodily Autonomy Can Fail Against Vaccination Mandates: The Few vs. the Many. When Governors Prioritize Individual Freedom over Public Health: Tort Liability for Government Failures. Without Due Process of Law: The Dobbs Decision and Its Cataclysmic Impact on the Substantive Due Process and Privacy Rights of Ohio Women.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1