司法部越权:医生的刑事定罪。

IF 0.3 4区 医学 Q3 LAW Journal of Legal Medicine Pub Date : 2021-07-01 DOI:10.1080/01947648.2022.2147366
Cathleen London
{"title":"司法部越权:医生的刑事定罪。","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":"{\"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}","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
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
DOJ Overreach: The Criminalization of Physicians.
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.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
3
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.
期刊最新文献
The Problem with Using Medical Boards to Regulate Misinformation 2022-2023 Southern Illinois University National Health Law Moot Court Competition. 2022-2023 Southern Illinois University National Health Law Moot Court Competition: Winning Brief. Fitness to Drive: It is Time for Evidence-Based Consensus and Italian Guidelines for Medical Driving Assessment. Who Decides? State Bans on Gender-Affirming Care for Minors in Tension with Parental Rights and Equal Protection Under the Law.
×
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