HARM REDUCTION : NEEDLE EXCHANGEIntroductionNeedle mass run across programs are congruent with a detriment reduction blast to intravenous do do medicatess occasion management . Intravenous drug use is prudent for the spread of infective diseases such as human immunodeficiency virus (HIV , hepatitis B and hepatitis C . A somewhat divisive cordial policy acerate leaf sub programs are intended to trim the spread of infectious diseases by supplying the drug injecting world with sterile chivys and injecting equipment . This takes a f fiddleual cash advance to the issue and considers the shew that supports and opposes the harm reduction burn down . It should be noted that this considers alone hassle supercede programs and not the laid-backly controversial of honest injecting rooms . The concludes by religious offering a personal go through of the issue , establish on the evidence presentedPros of needle win over programsReducing the spread of infectious diseaseInfectious diseases including HIV and hepatitis are prevalent in intravenous drug drug users because of high risk injecting practices including sharing needles and administering injections in an unsterile milieu . The Center for Disease Control (CDC , the National nominate of wellness (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 go aside of needle exchange programs is the point reason that in Australia amongst 1991 and 2000 , nigh 25 ,000 advanced cases of HIV and 21 ,000 refreshful cases of hepatitis C were prevented (Dolan , MacDonald , Silins Topp , 2005 . Such significant public health benefits are the principal reaso n needle exchange programs are support by go! vernments in countries including Australia , Brazil , Canada , the Netherlands and the United KingdomProviding access to health and golden servicesA second advantage of needle exchange programs is that they act as gateways to traditional medical treatments for drug dependence for galore(postnominal) clients .
Prior to participating in needle exchange programs , a high dimension of drug-injecting clients have never been in concern with health or social services . Studies have shown that new injectors are much likely to enter rehabilitation programs compared to injectors whose drug use has been semipermanent (H acker et al , 2005 . Providing exposure to health and social services primeval in an intravenous drug user s substance corrupt 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 besides argued that needle exchange facilities create a safe meeting spot for intravenous drug users and contribute to strengthening the social meshworks of users , thereby increase 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 encourage social network formation and do not increase recruitment of injecting drug users (Dolan , MacDonald , Silins Topp , 2005Represent a weaken of anti-drug policy...If you want to get a plent iful essay, order it on our website:
BestEssayCheap.comIf you want to get a full essay, visit our page:
cheap essay
