This paper will be concerned with the issue of having needle-exchange programs (NEPs) in the United States, for the purpose of encouraging injection drug users (IDUs) to engage in safer practices. Specifically, this paper will address the question of whether or not such programs are a desirable policy for reducing the spread of HIV/AIDS. This topic was chosen because it is evident that something needs to be done to stop the spread of AIDS, a problem that has reached epidemic proportions in nations around the world. The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) has determined that approximately 25 percent of AIDS cases in the U.S. are found among IDUs (“Needle Exchanges” 112). HIV, the blood-borne virus that causes AIDS, is often spread among this population through the sharing of syringe needles. The virus can then be spread to the general population through sexual transmission. NEPs are regarded as a possible way to deal with this problem. The idea is that IDUs will learn “harm reduction” practices, even if they are unable to quit using intravenous drugs. However, NEPs are controversial because drugs are illegal and many people refuse to be tolerant toward drug addicts in any way. The opponents of NEPs believe that needles are a form of drug paraphernalia and should thus be banned, not openly exchanged.
Despite this point of view, there are several arguments in favor of NEPs. First, there is a great deal of empirical evidence showing that such programs are effective. The introduction of NEPs in Australia, for example, resulted in a dramatic decrease in HIV infections between 1991 and 2000 as well as a substantial decrease in national healthcare costs (Loff & Wodak 1403). An international study commissioned by the Australian Commonweal...
... middle of paper ...
...nal Inmates: Transmission, Burden, and an Appropriate Response.” American Journal of Public Health 96(6), June 2006, 974-978.
Kelley, Margaret S., Sheigla Murphy, and Howard Lune. “A Cultural Impact of Needle Exchange: The Role of Safer-Injection Mentors.” Contemporary Drug Problems 28(3), Fall 2001, 485-507.
Loff, Bebe, and Alex Wodak. “Needle Exchange Programmes Beneficial in Australia.” The Lancet 360, November 2, 2002, 1403.
“Most Exchange Participants Aren’t Sharing Needles.” Alcoholism & Drug Abuse Weekly 13(13), March 26, 2001, 7.
“Needle Exchanges Do Not Boost Drug Use, Study Says.” AIDS Alert 18(9), September 2003, 112-114.
Nelson, Roxanne. “Syringe Exchange Programmes Lower HIV Risk.” The Lancet 360, November 16, 2002, 1570.
“Research Shows Needle Programs Cut HIV Rates.” AIDS Alert 15(7), July 2000, 76.
By providing clean needles to drug addicts, are we causing another issue such as increased drug
Perhaps one of the most pressing concerns is health and the assumption that to a certain degree criminalization is justified by preserving health. Illicit drugs are, in reality, not as hazardous to public health as accustomed views present- particularly in relation to certain recreational activities that are legal. Of the 25,000 illegal drug use-induced fatalities the National Institute on Drug Abuse has brought to light, the majority is more correctly due to drug prohibition than consumption. Also, some 14,300 of the casualties are a result of diseases like AIDS, transferred (generally) because of contaminated drug injection needles. Needle exchange programs for sterile needles are encouraged by the World Health Organization, amongst many other international organizations, as it is considered as possibly the greatest innovation for the health improvement of users. However, the federal government disallows the appropriation of its funds to these programs because the possession and sale of syringes still remain largely illegal. Furthermore, - as I explain later on- between the sellers and producers, there is no real confidence in the contents and hence, dangerousness of a given street drug. Considering the already growing level of consumption, imagine the gains of, for example, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) supervising illicit drugs, parallel to their work on food and
Semaan, S., Fleming, P., Worrell, C., Stolp, H., Baack, B., & Miller, M. (2011). Potential role of safer injection facilities in reducing HIV and Hepatitis C infections and overdose mortality in the United States. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 118, 100-110.
Two main arguments for needle exchange programs include that the needle exchange would help prevent the spread of disease and that they are key to fighting HIV and in turn saving lives. Since, the needle exchange programs don’t really force people to get off the substance they are abusing, a lot of users will actually choose to do the treatment programs on their own because they don’t feel pressured into doing so. Not only do the needle exchange programs supply sterile needles they also supply counseling and therapy for those that not only want some help in the guidance of getting off their substance, but mental and life assistance to help them to reestablish their lives. By doing so the previously addicted can reestablish relat...
The rise of HIV cases in certain parts of the United States has caused some policymakers to re-evaluate the benefits of these programs. In Indiana, there is a rise in poverty and employment, and a rise in the number of HIV cases. Since these programs have been proven to be effective at reducing HIV transmission, The Harm Reduction Coalition encouraged governor Mike Pence to issue an emergency 30-day needle exchange program (Alcoholism & Drug Abuse Weekly, 2015). Although their current plan is to have this program for only 30 days, it does show that politicians are realizing the importance of these
However, these disadvantages are not without criticism, with many suggesting that their ought to be differing terminology, with ‘reduction of harm’ referring to anything that reduces the harm of drug use, and ‘harm reduction’ referring to “specific measures which prevent the baleful consequences of drug use without setting out to achieve this by interfering with drug consumption” (Wodak and Saunders, 1995: 269). Furthermore is the debate as to whether ‘harm reduction’ refers to policies and official programmes designed to reduce the negative effects of drug consumption, such as needle exchange, or whether it can be considered to encompass other aspects of reduction of harm, such as the influence of peers. The risk when introducing broader definitions is then being able to differentiate between
One of the major problems of our society nowadays is the rapid growth of drug addicts. This is because people misused and abused drugs, which can lead to addiction and dependent on drugs. In addition, the most abused drugs are psychotropic drugs such as cocaine and heroin, which can change the way people thinks, acts and feels. Today, there are many programs that are established to help drug users and prevent the spread of diseases. Needle exchange program (NEPs) is one of the programs, which has goal to reduce harm to drug users and innocent people. Moreover, implementing of needle exchange programs has become an argument because it cannot help drug users but instead it encourages them to use more drugs. In fact, needle exchange programs are ineffective at reducing the spread of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and other infectious diseases; therefore, needle exchange programs should be abolished.
The purpose of this essay is to indicate how the needle and syringe program in prisons will benefit the Australian government as well as the wider Australian community. As well as the maintenance of NSPs can be maintained while acknowledging concerns of those against it. Needle and syringe programs (NSP) are aimed at intravenous drug users, so as to prevent and limit blood borne diseases like HIV/AIDS and hepatitis. These NSP programs help drug addicts by supplying needles and also through referrals and provide education among other services. All these efforts are made to control the spread of blood borne diseases like Hepatitis and AIDS in Australian population with 872 Blood Borne viruses reported 4th quarter 2013(Quarterly Surveillance Report Notifiable Sexually Transmissible Infections and Blood-borne Viruses in Western Australia, Government of Western Australia, Department of health period ending Volume11(1) 31st of December 2013). Blood borne diseases being a major concern all around the globe and prisons being a hub for these diseases its best that NSPs are introduced in prisons.
Although needle exchange programs have been successful, they have had some criticism. One of the main goals in the needle exchange program is to prevent or to reduce the rate of transmission of any infectious diseases, such as the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) or hepatitis C by distributing sterile syringes. The intended group that this program is trying to focus on is injecting drug users, since they have a high rate of either repeatedly using a contaminated syringe or sharing the same syringe with others. These programs do not only focus on distributing syringes to those who choose to accept them, some of the programs provide different services such as, counseling groups, education classes about the risk of using contaminated syringes, free medical visits, and HIV testing. On the other hand, some people may be against these types of programs because they are allowing injection drug users to continue to use drugs. Another reason why people may not be as accepting of the needle exchange programs is due to the fact that these programs are government funded.
Implications of implementing this approach may be “to reduce the dangers of drug use for the community and the individual, and to shift the focus of illegal drugs as primarily a criminal justice of medical issue to a social and/or public health iss...
In addressing the prevention of the spread of the HIV virus in prisons, we have seen a rush to develop and implement prevention measures. Much attention has centered on such controversial issues as compulsory or voluntary blood testing, isolation versus integration of HIV infected inmates into the prison mainstreams, provision of condoms and disposable needles, and effective educational measures for specific groups within the prison.
Many people believe that the only way to receive HIV and AIDS is through sexual intercourse. Although it can be spread through sexual intercourse without proper protection, there is a bigger issue at hand. Not only can HIV and AIDS be transferred through sex, it can be transferred through the sharing of needles. A large number of people forget that drugs are becoming a popular trend in today’s society. The spread of HIV and AIDS has increased because of the sharing of needles between drug users.Not only is it an STD (Sexually Transmitted Disease) it is a bloodborne pathogen. This is why needle exchange programs are a must have in communities like Licking County, today. Needle exchange programs are extremely helpful because it decreases the spread of HIV and AIDS.
...ick, AlexH. Kral, ElizabethA. Erringer, JamesG. Kahn, Collateral damage in the war on drugs: HIV risk behaviors among injection drug users, International Journal of Drug Policy, Volume 10, Issue 1, 1 February 1999, Pages 25-38
Drug legalization is an enduring question that presently faces our scholars. This issue embraces two positions: drugs should not be legalized and drugs should be legalized. These two positions contain an array of angles that supports each issue. This brief of the issues enables one to consider the strengths and weakness of each argument, become aware of the grounds of disagreement and agreement and ultimately form an opinion based upon the positions stated within the articles. In the article “Against the Legalization of Drugs”, by James Q. Wilson, the current status of drugs is supported. Wilson believes if a drug such as heroin were legalized there would be no financial or medical reason to avoid heroin usage; therefore, anybody could afford it (367). Wilson stated that during 1960’s, British physicians were allowed to prescribe heroin to addicts until the number of addicts increased fivefold. He argued that cocaine is not a “victimless crime.” Addicts victimize children by neglect and spouses by not providing (370). Wilson upholds that illegality of drugs increases crime because users need to pay for their habit (372). He believes the benefit of illegal drugs is it forces patients who enter under legal compulsion to complete their treatment due to the pressure and drug-education programs in the schools (374). Wilson is convinced the difference between nicotine and cocaine is that while tobacco shortens one’s life, cocaine debase it and destroys the addicts humanity (375). Wilson’s argument is strong because he demonstrates his knowledge of the subject and supports it with many clear, scientific facts and historical examples of drug usage. He interprets facts differently by seeing “logical fallacy and factual error” (371) in what other perceive as being a true. He also acknowledges his opposition by addressing how the advocates of legalization respond to his position. Wilson recognizes that that he may be wrong about his conclusions of drug legalization. Yet he states if he is wrong, money will be saved, while if he is right, and the legalizers prevail, then millions of people, thousands of infants and hundreds of neighborhoods will live a life of disease (377-8). In the article “Drug Policy and the Intellectuals,” by William J. Bennentt, drug legalization was not supported. Bennett wants to address the “root causes” of drugs by means of...
The public health model differs from traditional health practices, as its focus is on the health of the public instead of one patient. It uses a “3 prong approach to prevention and intervention” “known as the agent, host, and the environment.” This is because threats to public health require a susceptible host, an infectious agent, and a supportive environment that allows the spread of infection. By doing this, professionals are able to develop preventions against issues of public health. This would include teaching children to say no to drugs at a young age in order to prevent addiction in the future, as they are susceptible hosts to becoming addicts. Also making drugs illegal to keep the agent from being accessible to people who could become addicts. The approach is useful in all areas of public health, and has been proven to intervene in the likeliness that something will become