The “public health” approach to illicit drugs: an eradicative drug discourse in a sanitorial disguise?

IF 1.3 Q4 SUBSTANCE ABUSE Drugs, habits and social policy Pub Date : 2022-12-22 DOI:10.1108/dhs-09-2022-0030
Steven Debbaut, Tobias Kammersgaard
{"title":"The “public health” approach to illicit drugs: an eradicative drug discourse in a sanitorial disguise?","authors":"Steven Debbaut, Tobias Kammersgaard","doi":"10.1108/dhs-09-2022-0030","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThis study aims to problematize current calls for a “public health” approach to governing illicit drugs and the people who use them.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nIt draws on a range of historical sources to describe how drugs became a problem for governments, in order to critically diagnose the present and investigate the origins of current perspectives on drugs.\n\n\nFindings\nIt is argued that there are currently two authoritative drug discourses. The first discourse is the dominant one and is eradicative, with blame and punishment as its primary responses. The second discourse is subauthoritative, but growing in importance, and is sanitorial, with care and cure as its primary responses.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nWhile these two discourses have often been thought of as distinct, this historical exploration demonstrates that the eradicative and sanitorial discourses are both based on similar principles.\n","PeriodicalId":72849,"journal":{"name":"Drugs, habits and social policy","volume":"92 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Drugs, habits and social policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/dhs-09-2022-0030","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SUBSTANCE ABUSE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Purpose This study aims to problematize current calls for a “public health” approach to governing illicit drugs and the people who use them. Design/methodology/approach It draws on a range of historical sources to describe how drugs became a problem for governments, in order to critically diagnose the present and investigate the origins of current perspectives on drugs. Findings It is argued that there are currently two authoritative drug discourses. The first discourse is the dominant one and is eradicative, with blame and punishment as its primary responses. The second discourse is subauthoritative, but growing in importance, and is sanitorial, with care and cure as its primary responses. Originality/value While these two discourses have often been thought of as distinct, this historical exploration demonstrates that the eradicative and sanitorial discourses are both based on similar principles.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
对非法药物的"公共卫生"方针:卫生伪装下的根除性药物话语?
目的:本研究旨在对当前呼吁采取"公共卫生"方法来管理非法药物及其使用者的问题提出质疑。设计/方法/方法它借鉴了一系列的历史资料来描述药物如何成为政府的一个问题,以便批判性地诊断当前和调查当前药物观点的起源。研究结果认为,目前有两种权威的药物话语。第一种话语占主导地位,是根除性的,指责和惩罚是它的主要反应。第二种话语是次权威的,但越来越重要,是卫生的,以护理和治疗为主要反应。虽然这两种话语通常被认为是不同的,但这一历史探索表明,根除和卫生话语都基于类似的原则。
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
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Cultural variations in conceptualization of excessive drinking among young adults in Denmark, Estonia and Italy Pandemic-related changes in alcohol use among LGB+ people with and without mental health and neurodevelopmental conditions: a multinational cross-sectional study Implications of legalisation of cannabis cultivation in Ghana: a critical review Family ties: examining family functioning and alcohol use among American Indian youth Ayahuasca ceremonies: set and setting features across Italy and Colombia
×
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