東華大學圖書館 |

Doctors and Addicts : = A Case Study of Demedicalization.

紀錄類型:	書目-電子資源 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	Doctors and Addicts :/
其他題名:	A Case Study of Demedicalization.
作者:	Charles, Catherine Ann.
面頁冊數:	1 online resource (228 pages)
附註:	Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 40-07, Section: A.
Contained By:	Dissertations Abstracts International40-07A.
標題:	Welfare. -
電子資源:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=8125260click for full text (PQDT)
ISBN:	9798660305733

Doctors and Addicts : = A Case Study of Demedicalization.
Charles, Catherine Ann.

Doctors and Addicts :A Case Study of Demedicalization. - 1 online resource (228 pages)

Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 40-07, Section: A.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Columbia University, 1979.

Includes bibliographical references

This dissertation is a historical study of the controversy within the American medical profession over the nature and control of narcotic drug addiction during the early twentieth century. By "nature" is meant the definition of the problem, the particular label attached to it. By control is meant the preferred means advocated, if any, for handling or resolving the problem. This historical question converges with a second conceptual issue of interest: the role of the medical profession in either advocating or resisting the process by which certain social problems or behaviors come to be redefined or relabelled as illness with treatment by physicians mandated as the preferred method of control. The medical controversy over addiction and its control is explored during the period 1900 to 1930. Specifically, the study focuses on the range of positions taken by different medical segments on these issues, changes in these positions over time, and the factors influencing the development of competing positions both at the individual and institutional level. The major theme is the alignment of certain medical segments, most notably the American Medical Association, with the prohibitionist policies of federal government agencies responsible for narcotic control and the role of these segments in contributing to the demedicalization of the problem of narcotic drug addiction during the early twentieth century. The medical controversy over addiction and its control evolved along two dimensions. The first, the "clinical" controversy, centered on the etiology and treatment of narcotic drug addiction. Some physicians (the "vice" advocates) defined addiction as a vice, favored restrictive narcotic legislation but also promoted cures. Other physicians (the "disease" advocates) defined addiction as a physiological disorder from which there was as yet no cure and favored narcotic legislation which would ensure the addict an adequate supply of narcotics. A psychological approach to addiction also developed after World War I which vied with and contained elements of the earlier vice approach. With the passage of the Harrison Act in 1914, intended to regulate the supply, manufacture, distribution, and consumption of narcotics in the United States, government agencies, in particular the Bureau of Internal Revenue responsible for enforcement of the Act, began to play an important role in narcotic control. The Bureau focused most of its efforts on eliminating the non-medical use of opiates and progressively delimiting the physician's treatment role in addiction. These events brought a new political dimension into the medical controversy as medical associations sought to interpret and respond to evolving government regulations. A Concern with the effects of evolving narcotic legislation on often competing professional interests was a major factor in accounting for variations across organized medical segments in levels of support and resistance to the government's policies. For a variety of reasons, following World War I, those physicians and medical associations opposing both a disease concept of addiction and the ambulatory treatment of addicts by physicians were able to mobilize sufficient resources to impose their definition of the problem and its solution on other medical segments with competing views. In terms of broader conceptual interests, the data from this study are used to sharpen the concepts of medicalization and demedicalization and to generate hypotheses about the conditions under which the medical profession or any of its segments will advocate or resist the medicalization of certain problems or behaviors. The data derive from primary and secondary sources with particular reliance on medical journals, books, committee reports and position papers written by physicians about the narcotic drug problem during the period under study.

Electronic reproduction.
Ann Arbor, Mich. :
ProQuest,
2023

Mode of access: World Wide Web

ISBN: 9798660305733Subjects--Topical Terms:

3543853
Welfare.
Index Terms--Genre/Form:

542853
Electronic books.

Doctors and Addicts : = A Case Study of Demedicalization.
LDR:05041nmm a2200313K 4500 001 2365427
005 20231213130717.5
006 m o d
007 cr mn ---uuuuu
008 241011s1979 xx obm 000 0 eng d
020 $a 9798660305733
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI8125260
035 $a AAI8125260
040 $a MiAaPQ $b eng $c MiAaPQ $d NTU
100 1 $a Charles, Catherine Ann. $3 3706282
245 1 0 $a Doctors and Addicts : $b A Case Study of Demedicalization.
264 0 $c 1979
300 $a 1 online resource (228 pages)
336 $a text $b txt $2 rdacontent
337 $a computer $b c $2 rdamedia
338 $a online resource $b cr $2 rdacarrier
500 $a Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 40-07, Section: A.
500 $a Publisher info.: Dissertation/Thesis.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--Columbia University, 1979.
504 $a Includes bibliographical references
520 $a This dissertation is a historical study of the controversy within the American medical profession over the nature and control of narcotic drug addiction during the early twentieth century. By "nature" is meant the definition of the problem, the particular label attached to it. By control is meant the preferred means advocated, if any, for handling or resolving the problem. This historical question converges with a second conceptual issue of interest: the role of the medical profession in either advocating or resisting the process by which certain social problems or behaviors come to be redefined or relabelled as illness with treatment by physicians mandated as the preferred method of control. The medical controversy over addiction and its control is explored during the period 1900 to 1930. Specifically, the study focuses on the range of positions taken by different medical segments on these issues, changes in these positions over time, and the factors influencing the development of competing positions both at the individual and institutional level. The major theme is the alignment of certain medical segments, most notably the American Medical Association, with the prohibitionist policies of federal government agencies responsible for narcotic control and the role of these segments in contributing to the demedicalization of the problem of narcotic drug addiction during the early twentieth century. The medical controversy over addiction and its control evolved along two dimensions. The first, the "clinical" controversy, centered on the etiology and treatment of narcotic drug addiction. Some physicians (the "vice" advocates) defined addiction as a vice, favored restrictive narcotic legislation but also promoted cures. Other physicians (the "disease" advocates) defined addiction as a physiological disorder from which there was as yet no cure and favored narcotic legislation which would ensure the addict an adequate supply of narcotics. A psychological approach to addiction also developed after World War I which vied with and contained elements of the earlier vice approach. With the passage of the Harrison Act in 1914, intended to regulate the supply, manufacture, distribution, and consumption of narcotics in the United States, government agencies, in particular the Bureau of Internal Revenue responsible for enforcement of the Act, began to play an important role in narcotic control. The Bureau focused most of its efforts on eliminating the non-medical use of opiates and progressively delimiting the physician's treatment role in addiction. These events brought a new political dimension into the medical controversy as medical associations sought to interpret and respond to evolving government regulations. A Concern with the effects of evolving narcotic legislation on often competing professional interests was a major factor in accounting for variations across organized medical segments in levels of support and resistance to the government's policies. For a variety of reasons, following World War I, those physicians and medical associations opposing both a disease concept of addiction and the ambulatory treatment of addicts by physicians were able to mobilize sufficient resources to impose their definition of the problem and its solution on other medical segments with competing views. In terms of broader conceptual interests, the data from this study are used to sharpen the concepts of medicalization and demedicalization and to generate hypotheses about the conditions under which the medical profession or any of its segments will advocate or resist the medicalization of certain problems or behaviors. The data derive from primary and secondary sources with particular reliance on medical journals, books, committee reports and position papers written by physicians about the narcotic drug problem during the period under study.
533 $a Electronic reproduction. $b Ann Arbor, Mich. : $c ProQuest, $d 2023
538 $a Mode of access: World Wide Web
650 4 $a Welfare. $3 3543853
655 7 $a Electronic books. $2 lcsh $3 542853
690 $a 0630
710 2 $a ProQuest Information and Learning Co. $3 783688
710 2 $a Columbia University. $3 571054
773 0 $t Dissertations Abstracts International $g 40-07A.
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=8125260 $z click for full text (PQDT)