Drug treatment courts are an increasingly important tool in reducing the census of those incarcerated for non-violent drug offenses; medication assisted treatment (MAT) is proven to be an effective treatment for opioid addiction. However, little is known about the availability of and barriers to MAT provision for opioid-addicted people under drug court jurisdiction. Using an online survey, we assessed availability, barriers, and need for MAT (especially agonist medication) for opioid addiction in drug courts. Ninety-eight percent reported opioid-addicted participants, and 47% offered agonist medication (56% for all MAT including naltrexone). Barriers included cost and court policy. Responses revealed significant uncertainty, especially among non-MAT providing courts. Political, judicial and administrative opposition appear to affect MAT's inconsistent use and availability in drug court settings. These data suggest that a substantial, targeted educational initiative is needed to increase awareness of the treatment and criminal justice benefits of MAT in the drug courts.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3602216 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jsat.2012.10.004 | DOI Listing |
Indian J Psychiatry
November 2024
National Drug Dependence Treatment Centre, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
Drug courts are specialized programs from the courts that aim to offer a chance to individuals with substance-related problems encountering law enforcement to take treatment rather than face incarceration. The aim of this debate is to critically debate the utility, applicability, and feasibility of drug courts in India. This is a theoretical debate based on the existing evidence and considerations of ground realities in the country.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFJ Law Med
November 2024
Barrister, Castan Chambers, Melbourne, Australia; Professor of Law and Professorial Fellow in Psychiatry, University of Melbourne; Honorary Professor of Forensic Medicine, Monash; Adjunct Professor, Southern Cross University.
This editorial reviews the changes over two decades in the United States and Australia in relation to the law governing access to drugs enabling medical termination of pregnancy. It also scrutinises three contentious decisions by the United States Supreme Court between 2022 and 2024 in relation to abortion. It argues that the receptive environment in the United States Supreme Court, as it is currently constituted, to challenges to the lawfulness of terminations of pregnancy and abortion medications is likely to inspire comparable challenges as part of the "Abortion Wars" in other countries, including Australia.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFCells
December 2024
Centre for Health and Life Sciences, Coventry University, Coventry CV1 5FB, UK.
The adenosine A1 receptor (AR) is a promising target for pain treatment. However, the development of therapeutic agonists is hampered by adverse effects, mainly including sedation, bradycardia, hypotension, or respiratory depression. Recently discovered molecules able to overcome this impediment are the positive allosteric modulator MIPS521 and the A1R-selective agonist BnOCPA, which are both potent and powerful analgesics with fewer side effects.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFPLoS One
January 2025
Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Department of Infectious Diseases, Amsterdam Infection and Immunity Institute, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Introduction: Oral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) prevents Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) acquisition. In the Netherlands, PrEP is accessible through the national PrEP program (NPP) or general practitioners (GP). Still, some men who have sex with men (MSM) entering HIV care indicated having PrEP experience prior to diagnosis.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFBreastfeed Med
December 2024
Division of Neonatology, Evanston, Hospital, Endeavor Health, Evanston, Illinois, USA.
Recent litigation against the two major U.S. formula manufacturers regarding their products liability, in Gill v Abbott Laboratories and Watson v Mead Johnson, juries in two U.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFEnter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!