推动药物或挑战极限:与过量处方鸦片类药物有关的医生的起诉

Deborah Hellman
{"title":"推动药物或挑战极限:与过量处方鸦片类药物有关的医生的起诉","authors":"Deborah Hellman","doi":"10.13021/G8PPPQ.282008.118","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"When a doctor writes prescriptions in his office, following consultation with a patient, and receives no compensation other than the normal fee for service, can this still be drug trafficking? Recent court judgments have emphatically held that it can, but in so doing courts wrongly impose criminal liability on doctors for trusting patients.","PeriodicalId":82464,"journal":{"name":"Report from the Institute for Philosophy & Public Policy","volume":"28 1","pages":"7-12"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Pushing Drugs or Pushing the Envelope: The Prosecution of Doctors in Connection with Over-Prescribing of Opium-Based Drugs\",\"authors\":\"Deborah Hellman\",\"doi\":\"10.13021/G8PPPQ.282008.118\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"When a doctor writes prescriptions in his office, following consultation with a patient, and receives no compensation other than the normal fee for service, can this still be drug trafficking? Recent court judgments have emphatically held that it can, but in so doing courts wrongly impose criminal liability on doctors for trusting patients.\",\"PeriodicalId\":82464,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Report from the Institute for Philosophy & Public Policy\",\"volume\":\"28 1\",\"pages\":\"7-12\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2008-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Report from the Institute for Philosophy & Public Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.13021/G8PPPQ.282008.118\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Report from the Institute for Philosophy & Public Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.13021/G8PPPQ.282008.118","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

当一名医生在与病人会诊后在他的办公室开处方,除了正常的服务费外没有得到任何补偿时,这是否仍然是贩毒?最近的法院判决已经强调了这一点,但是这样一来,法院就错误地将医生信任病人的刑事责任强加给了医生。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Pushing Drugs or Pushing the Envelope: The Prosecution of Doctors in Connection with Over-Prescribing of Opium-Based Drugs
When a doctor writes prescriptions in his office, following consultation with a patient, and receives no compensation other than the normal fee for service, can this still be drug trafficking? Recent court judgments have emphatically held that it can, but in so doing courts wrongly impose criminal liability on doctors for trusting patients.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信