Since
1914, drug policy has been limited in scope to the effort of
governments to control and reduce psychoactive substance use. During
the 1970s, the U.S. introduced prohibition with the war on drug abuse that
became the war on drugs. As the U.S. Government shifted
towards a zero tolerance policy during the end of the Reagan
Administration, several European nations chose to defy the U.S.,
legalizing marijuana and other drugs. European harm reduction
policy resulted in a more permissive attitude. By the Clinton
administration, drug laws had become far too rigid. Drug policy
began to impact healthcare. With greater focus on drug abuse and
addiction, patients were being treated less for disorders they had and
more for disorders they did not have.
The Drug Use Education
Process Paradigm is a plan which restores drug policy to where it
should be as the cornerstone of healthcare. It begins with a POLICY
CORE based on Pro-Positive Public Policy Principles (P5) and Pro-Positive
Public Policy Planning Practices (P6), citing the need for Equal
Representation to include drug users. Because scattered
definitions the economy p rebel. During the Clinton
Administration, not only was there animosity from drug traffickers, but
the It is only logical that medical drug policy provide additional
functionality to guide a process that more fully ensures drug users
accessing drugs are those who need them. The Drug Use Education
Process Paradigm was designed to provide the most effective approach to
ensure that all patients are able to receive medication readily without
delay or the need for a new prescription.
The Policy Core consists of
an initial exercise to examine terminology. A preliminary
investigation reveals that edical tool that guides an entire process that
begins with the development of policy itself. Because drug
policy has been bastardized and politicized, one of the first calls to
action is an analysis of terminology and concepts. What we have
found is that terminology appears to be convoluted and misleading.
The terms "drug use" and "drug abuse" are often
synonymous even though both terms are antonymous. Too much drug use
is defined as "recreational" even though it is clearly
medical. For example, a white middle aged married woman with
children can obtain prescription Xanex because without it , she will
experience a CNS condition that is not normal, but when a gay man requests
Xanex from his doctor because he is experiencing a CNS disorder,
practitioners regard that at "drug-seeking behavior".
Unless there is consistency across standardized terminology, there will
never be a drug policy that is fair and objective.
There are various ways to
test terminology to determine if it is sufficient. The best to
interfere in the medical Such action detracts from the real value of drug
policy as a medical tool that prevents unnecessary use and abuse, and
protects the user's ability to access the right drug at the right
amount. When necessary, recovery should be a simple solution,
like access medication and even recover from it when
necessary. it as a means to end drug abuse and addiction. Drug
policy should be an effective approach for the medical
In 1970, the Controlled Substance Act set the foundation to diminish
|
For
the first time in the history of drug policy, the U.S. Government will be
providing services to the public rather than taking rights away from
citizens and intervening in the physician-patient partnership. What
the U.S. Government will be giving is the knowledge and discipline skills
that prevent drug abuse, and evaluations that prevent addiction.
Licensing prevents a medical drug user from being administered a
medication that triggers an allergic reaction. At the same time that
Education and Licensing are prevention services, they are also promotion
services for safe drug use practices.
On the Protection side,
there are steps which provide Access to medica

|