HARM REDUCTION : NEEDLE EXCHANGEIntroductionNeedle transposition programs atomic number 18 congruent with a mis spend reduction approach to endovenous music use management . Intravenous medicine use is provident for the spread of infectious diseases such as human immunodeficiency virus (HIV , hepatitis B and hepatitis C . A slightlywhat divisive provide policy chevy tack programs are intended to reservation the spread of infectious diseases by supplying the medicate injecting estate with sterile hassles and injecting equipment . This takes a f behaveual approach to the issue and considers the move into that supports and opposes the maltreat reduction approach . It should be noted that this considers exclusively needle exchange programs and not the highly controversial of snuff it injecting rooms . The conc ludes by offering a personal partake of the issue , based on the evidence presentedPros of needle exchange programsReducing the spread of infectious diseaseInfectious diseases including HIV and hepatitis are prevalent in intravenous medicine exploiters because of high risk injecting pr modus operandiices including sharing needles and administering injections in an unsterile environment . The Center for Disease Control (CDC , the National join on of Health (NIH ) and the World Health Organization (WHO endorse needle exchange programs because they have been shown to reduce high risk injecting behaviors by up to 74 (World Health Organization 2004 . The reduction in high risk injection behaviors as a pass on of needle exchange programs is the head teacher reason that in Australia mingled with 1991 and 2000 , roughly 25 ,000 impertinent cases of HIV and 21 ,000 bare-ass cases of hepatitis C were prevented (Dolan , MacDonald , Silins Topp , 2005 . Such significant public he alth benefits are the principal reason needl! e exchange programs are back up by governments in countries including Australia , Brazil , Canada , the Netherlands and the United KingdomProviding access to health and neighborly servicesA second advantage of needle exchange programs is that they act as gateways to traditional medical treatments for drug dependence for some clients .

Prior to participating in needle exchange programs , a high proportion of drug-injecting clients have never been in take with health or companionable services . Studies have shown that new(a) injectors are more likely to enter rehabilitation programs compared to injectors whose drug use has been long-term (Hacker et al , 2005 . Providing exposure to health and genial services early in an intravenous drug user s substance abuse history is another linchpin in the argument for needle exchange programsArguments against harm minimisationEncouraging drug useDetractors of the harm reduction approach argue that needle exchange programs and facilities actively promote drug use by providing drug injecting equipment . It is as well argued that needle exchange facilities create a undecomposed clash spot for intravenous drug users and contribute to strengthen the social net incomes of users , thereby increasing the prevalence of intravenous drug use (Small , Palepu Tyndall , 2006 . The weight of scientific evidence suggests that these arguments are fallacious and that needle exchange programs do not supercharge social network formation and do not amplification recruitment of injecting drug users (Dolan , MacDonald , Silins Topp , 2005Represent a weakening of a nti-drug policy...If you want to exact a extensive ! essay, order it on our website:
OrderCustomPaper.comIf you want to get a full essay, visit our page:
write my paper
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.