Syringe Services Program Legal Restrictions Are Counter to Public Health and the Experience of People Who Use Drugs.

IF 1.3 4区 哲学 Q2 ETHICS
Journal of Law Medicine & Ethics Pub Date : 2026-01-01 Epub Date: 2026-04-16 DOI:10.1017/jme.2026.10233
Amy Lieberman, Corey Davis, Alison Newman
{"title":"Syringe Services Program Legal Restrictions Are Counter to Public Health and the Experience of People Who Use Drugs.","authors":"Amy Lieberman, Corey Davis, Alison Newman","doi":"10.1017/jme.2026.10233","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Drug overdose and drug-related harm are major sources of preventable injury and death in the United States. The criminalization and stigmatization of people who use drugs continues to inform law and policy that is ineffective at preventing this harm. While harm reduction interventions such as syringe services programs (SSP) have been widely adopted, the laws that govern these programs often impose restrictions that make SSP operation more difficult and less effective. For example, 23 state permit SSPs to operate only if they receive authorization from state or local government officials, and 5 states continue to adhere to some version of a \"one for one\" exchange model. This article presents data on these and other state laws that impede the work of SSPs. It also highlights ways the experience and expertise of people who use drugs can be integrated into the creation and implementation of SSP operational models. Removing barriers to these life-saving programs is critical to decreasing drug-related harm.</p>","PeriodicalId":50165,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Law Medicine & Ethics","volume":"54 S1","pages":"49-53"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2026-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Law Medicine & Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/jme.2026.10233","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/4/16 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Drug overdose and drug-related harm are major sources of preventable injury and death in the United States. The criminalization and stigmatization of people who use drugs continues to inform law and policy that is ineffective at preventing this harm. While harm reduction interventions such as syringe services programs (SSP) have been widely adopted, the laws that govern these programs often impose restrictions that make SSP operation more difficult and less effective. For example, 23 state permit SSPs to operate only if they receive authorization from state or local government officials, and 5 states continue to adhere to some version of a "one for one" exchange model. This article presents data on these and other state laws that impede the work of SSPs. It also highlights ways the experience and expertise of people who use drugs can be integrated into the creation and implementation of SSP operational models. Removing barriers to these life-saving programs is critical to decreasing drug-related harm.

注射器服务计划的法律限制与公共卫生和吸毒者的经历背道而驰。
在美国,药物过量和与药物有关的伤害是可预防的伤害和死亡的主要来源。对吸毒者的定罪和污名化继续影响着无法预防这种伤害的法律和政策。虽然诸如注射器服务计划(SSP)之类的减少伤害干预措施已被广泛采用,但管理这些计划的法律往往施加限制,使SSP的操作更加困难和效率降低。例如,23个州允许ssp只有在获得州或地方政府官员的授权后才能运营,5个州继续坚持某种版本的“一对一”交换模式。本文介绍了这些和其他阻碍ssp工作的州法律的数据。它还强调了如何将吸毒者的经验和专门知识纳入战略方案业务模式的创建和实施。消除这些拯救生命项目的障碍对于减少与毒品有关的危害至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Law Medicine & Ethics
Journal of Law Medicine & Ethics 医学-医学:法
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
4.80%
发文量
70
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Material published in The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics (JLME) contributes to the educational mission of The American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics, covering public health, health disparities, patient safety and quality of care, and biomedical science and research. It provides articles on such timely topics as health care quality and access, managed care, pain relief, genetics, child/maternal health, reproductive health, informed consent, assisted dying, ethics committees, HIV/AIDS, and public health. Symposium issues review significant policy developments, health law court decisions, and books.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书