Subscribe to the
Drug War Chronicle Newsletter!
Show your support
with a single click
Already have a FastAction account? Log in
By clicking "Log in," I confirm that I agree with the FastAction terms of service and privacy policy.
Show your support
with a single click
Don't have a FastAction account yet? Sign up
By clicking "Sign up," I confirm that I agree with the FastAction terms of service and privacy policy.
Show your support
with a single click
Already have a FastAction account? Log in
By clicking "Log in," I confirm that I agree with the FastAction terms of service and privacy policy.
Show your support
with a single click
Don't have a FastAction account yet? Sign up
By clicking "Sign up," I confirm that I agree with the FastAction terms of service and privacy policy.
Comments
So, no cigarettes or coffee
So, no cigarettes or coffee during the olympics?
Interesting
I've always felt that the only way a prohibition policy could ever work would be under an authoritarian government that dispenses with civil liberties and privacy rights in its quest to stop drug use. People complain about the United States in these terms, but really it could be much worse (cue: China).
So, I'm interested to see how this plays out. If China fails in this, it basically says what we already know and then some: that a policy of Prohibition has zero chance of success in controlling drug use, even if its laws are emphatically enforced without any respect for individual liberty.
Databases for democracies too!
In case anyone was thinking that authoritarian governments and one-party states have the monopoly on drug user databases then think again!
Victoria, Australia's second most populous State, has a head start on China by more than two decades and counting! The 'Poisons and Controlled Sustances Act' provides for the mandatory reporting (similar to that required of teachers suspicious of student domestic abuse or neglect) by medical practitioners and nurses of patients considered to be 'drug dependent persons'. Victoria is the last state in Australia to have maintained such a database with others having removed similar instruments or otherwise reformed relevant legislation.
Whilst the stated aim of such reporting is to facilitate the "co-ordination of the patientâs drug treatment and safe prescribing of drugs", the data can be made available to medical practitioners, pharmacists and as "otherwise required by law", which potentially covers a wide statutory oversight including law enforcement of drug offences. In addition, despite the lack of complaint provisions within the legislation or even to allow for the removal of entries related to persons no longer requiring the prescription of such substances or no longer drug dependent, both anecdotal and state Ombudsman patient reports of adverse medical treatment following practitioner access to the database continue to arise.
Indeed this is the subject of the minor thesis I am completing for the masters course and as such it will hardly prove inspirational to compare Victoria and China in this regard!
Masters Student - Policy and Human Services
RMIT School of Social Science and Planning
Melbourne Victoria Australia
Add new comment