Jump to content

User:Manorhe18/Harm reduction: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Manorhe18 (talk | contribs)
created
 
Manorhe18 (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Dashboard.wikiedu.org draft template/about this sandbox}}
{{Dashboard.wikiedu.org draft template/about this sandbox}}


=== Sex work and HIV [edited] Despite the depth of knowledge of HIV/AIDS, rapid transmission has occurred globally in sex workers.<ref name="pmid11251723">{{cite journal|author1=Hilton BA|author2=Thompson R|author3=Moore-Dempsey L|author4=Janzen RG|date=February 2001|title=Harm reduction theories and strategies for control of human immunodeficiency virus: a review of the literature|journal=J Adv Nurs|volume=33|issue=3|pages=357–70|doi=10.1046/j.1365-2648.2001.01672.x|pmid=11251723}}<cite id="CITEREFHilton_BAThompson_RMoore-Dempsey_LJanzen_RG2001" class="citation journal cs1" data-ve-ignore="true">Hilton BA; Thompson R; Moore-Dempsey L; Janzen RG (February 2001). "Harm reduction theories and strategies for control of human immunodeficiency virus: a review of the literature". ''J Adv Nurs''. '''33''' (3): 357–70. [[Doi (identifier)|doi]]:[[doi:10.1046/j.1365-2648.2001.01672.x|10.1046/j.1365-2648.2001.01672.x]]. [[PMID (identifier)|PMID]]&nbsp;[//pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11251723 11251723].</cite><span title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=J+Adv+Nurs&rft.atitle=Harm+reduction+theories+and+strategies+for+control+of+human+immunodeficiency+virus%3A+a+review+of+the+literature&rft.volume=33&rft.issue=3&rft.pages=357-70&rft.date=2001-02&rft_id=info%3Adoi%2F10.1046%2Fj.1365-2648.2001.01672.x&rft_id=info%3Apmid%2F11251723&rft.au=Hilton+BA&rft.au=Thompson+R&rft.au=Moore-Dempsey+L&rft.au=Janzen+RG&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fen.wikipedia.org%3AHarm+reduction" class="Z3988" data-ve-ignore="true"></span></ref> The relationship between these two variables greatly increases the risk of transmission among these populations, and also to anyone associated with them, such as their sexual partners, their children, and eventually the population at large.<ref name="pmid11251723" /> Many street-level harm-reduction strategies have succeeded in reducing HIV transmission in [[Injecting drug user|injecting drug users]] and sex-workers.<ref name="pmid16360791">{{cite journal|author=Rekart ML|date=December 2005|title=Sex-work harm reduction|journal=Lancet|volume=366|issue=9503|pages=2123–34|doi=10.1016/S0140-6736(05)67732-X|pmid=16360791}}<cite id="CITEREFRekart_ML2005" class="citation journal cs1" data-ve-ignore="true">Rekart ML (December 2005). "Sex-work harm reduction". ''Lancet''. '''366''' (9503): 2123–34. [[Doi (identifier)|doi]]:[[doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(05)67732-X|10.1016/S0140-6736(05)67732-X]]. [[PMID (identifier)|PMID]]&nbsp;[//pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16360791 16360791].</cite><span title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Lancet&rft.atitle=Sex-work+harm+reduction&rft.volume=366&rft.issue=9503&rft.pages=2123-34&rft.date=2005-12&rft_id=info%3Adoi%2F10.1016%2FS0140-6736%2805%2967732-X&rft_id=info%3Apmid%2F16360791&rft.au=Rekart+ML&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fen.wikipedia.org%3AHarm+reduction" class="Z3988" data-ve-ignore="true"></span></ref> HIV education, HIV testing, condom use, and safer-sex negotiation greatly decreases the risk to the disease.<ref name="pmid16360791" /><ref>{{Cite book|last=(Organization)|first=Human Rights Watch|url=http://worldcat.org/oclc/56024188|title=Thailand, not enough graves : the war on drugs, HIV/AIDS, and violations of human rights.|date=2004|publisher=Human Rights Watch|oclc=56024188}}<cite id="CITEREF(Organization)2004" class="citation book cs1" data-ve-ignore="true">(Organization), Human Rights Watch (2004). [http://worldcat.org/oclc/56024188 ''Thailand, not enough graves : the war on drugs, HIV/AIDS, and violations of human rights'']. Human Rights Watch. [[OCLC (identifier)|OCLC]]&nbsp;[//www.worldcat.org/oclc/56024188 56024188].</cite><span title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Abook&rft.genre=book&rft.btitle=Thailand%2C+not+enough+graves+%3A+the+war+on+drugs%2C+HIV%2FAIDS%2C+and+violations+of+human+rights.&rft.pub=Human+Rights+Watch&rft.date=2004&rft_id=info%3Aoclcnum%2F56024188&rft.aulast=%28Organization%29&rft.aufirst=Human+Rights+Watch&rft_id=http%3A%2F%2Fworldcat.org%2Foclc%2F56024188&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fen.wikipedia.org%3AHarm+reduction" class="Z3988" data-ve-ignore="true"></span></ref> Peer education as a harm reduction strategy has especially reduced the risk of HIV infection, such as in Chad, where this method was the most cost-effective per infection prevented.<ref name="pmid16360791" /> ===
== Article Draft ==
One of the first harm reduction models was called the “Mersey Harm Reduction Model <nowiki>''</nowiki> in 1980s Liverpool, and the success of utilizing outreach workers, distribution of education, and providing clean equipment to drug users was shown in the fact that an HIV epidemic did not happen in Mersey. This catapulted the model into International conferences on drug related harm in the midst of the AIDS epidemic. There was much connection between San Francisco (an epicenter of HIV/AIDS advocacy in the US) and Liverpool. Harm reduction slowly began to transform the action around drug use from an individualistic approach that mainstream US healthcare often relies on, towards a more holistic population-based approach.


=== Lead ===
The history of harm reduction is closely tied to the stigma around sex work as well as the AIDS epidemic.


'''New Section: Harm Reduction in Mainstream US Healthcare'''
=== Article body ===

The debate and perceptions around drug use within the US is impacted by healthcare wider socio-political movements: namely, the War on Drugs and the HIV/AIDS epidemic/activism. Addiction has long been considered a poor behavioral choice or an “irresponsible hedonistic lifestyle”. Within healthcare, Drug abuse and rehabilitation was segregated from mainstream healthcare It was because of these social perceptions of drug use that rehabilitation has been segregated from mainstream health care and is often relegated to privatized institutions- substance abuse treatment was not covered by insurance until the Affordable Care Act in 2010. Patients are stigmatized, segregated, and marginalized both within politics and public perceptions, but also often within the institutions that they seek care in 12.

Within the Obama Administration, although the rhetoric and criminal frameworks of the War on Drugs was lessened, there was still twice as much money going into criminalizing drugs in the justice system than was going to drug treatment and prevention 11. This is the framework and perception in which we see Free Clinics enter into. The effects of the War on Drugs (which, arguably, never completely ended) is the wide stigmatization and social rejection of drug users, and prevents individuals from seeking addiction treatment and utilizing harm reduction, according to the Drug Policy Alliance.  Within education, there is also an overwhelmingly abstinence-only approach to drugs which further contributes to proliferating the problem of substance abuse 10.


=== References ===
=== References ===

Revision as of 20:04, 26 April 2021

Sex work and HIV [edited] Despite the depth of knowledge of HIV/AIDS, rapid transmission has occurred globally in sex workers.[1] The relationship between these two variables greatly increases the risk of transmission among these populations, and also to anyone associated with them, such as their sexual partners, their children, and eventually the population at large.[1] Many street-level harm-reduction strategies have succeeded in reducing HIV transmission in injecting drug users and sex-workers.[2] HIV education, HIV testing, condom use, and safer-sex negotiation greatly decreases the risk to the disease.[2][3] Peer education as a harm reduction strategy has especially reduced the risk of HIV infection, such as in Chad, where this method was the most cost-effective per infection prevented.[2]

One of the first harm reduction models was called the “Mersey Harm Reduction Model '' in 1980s Liverpool, and the success of utilizing outreach workers, distribution of education, and providing clean equipment to drug users was shown in the fact that an HIV epidemic did not happen in Mersey. This catapulted the model into International conferences on drug related harm in the midst of the AIDS epidemic. There was much connection between San Francisco (an epicenter of HIV/AIDS advocacy in the US) and Liverpool. Harm reduction slowly began to transform the action around drug use from an individualistic approach that mainstream US healthcare often relies on, towards a more holistic population-based approach.


New Section: Harm Reduction in Mainstream US Healthcare

The debate and perceptions around drug use within the US is impacted by healthcare wider socio-political movements: namely, the War on Drugs and the HIV/AIDS epidemic/activism. Addiction has long been considered a poor behavioral choice or an “irresponsible hedonistic lifestyle”. Within healthcare, Drug abuse and rehabilitation was segregated from mainstream healthcare It was because of these social perceptions of drug use that rehabilitation has been segregated from mainstream health care and is often relegated to privatized institutions- substance abuse treatment was not covered by insurance until the Affordable Care Act in 2010. Patients are stigmatized, segregated, and marginalized both within politics and public perceptions, but also often within the institutions that they seek care in 12.

Within the Obama Administration, although the rhetoric and criminal frameworks of the War on Drugs was lessened, there was still twice as much money going into criminalizing drugs in the justice system than was going to drug treatment and prevention 11. This is the framework and perception in which we see Free Clinics enter into. The effects of the War on Drugs (which, arguably, never completely ended) is the wide stigmatization and social rejection of drug users, and prevents individuals from seeking addiction treatment and utilizing harm reduction, according to the Drug Policy Alliance.  Within education, there is also an overwhelmingly abstinence-only approach to drugs which further contributes to proliferating the problem of substance abuse 10.

References

  1. ^ a b Hilton BA; Thompson R; Moore-Dempsey L; Janzen RG (February 2001). "Harm reduction theories and strategies for control of human immunodeficiency virus: a review of the literature". J Adv Nurs. 33 (3): 357–70. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2648.2001.01672.x. PMID 11251723.Hilton BA; Thompson R; Moore-Dempsey L; Janzen RG (February 2001). "Harm reduction theories and strategies for control of human immunodeficiency virus: a review of the literature". J Adv Nurs. 33 (3): 357–70. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2648.2001.01672.x. PMID 11251723.
  2. ^ a b c Rekart ML (December 2005). "Sex-work harm reduction". Lancet. 366 (9503): 2123–34. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(05)67732-X. PMID 16360791.Rekart ML (December 2005). "Sex-work harm reduction". Lancet. 366 (9503): 2123–34. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(05)67732-X. PMID 16360791.
  3. ^ (Organization), Human Rights Watch (2004). Thailand, not enough graves : the war on drugs, HIV/AIDS, and violations of human rights. Human Rights Watch. OCLC 56024188.(Organization), Human Rights Watch (2004). Thailand, not enough graves : the war on drugs, HIV/AIDS, and violations of human rights. Human Rights Watch. OCLC 56024188.