The Medical journal of Australia · 2015
The Alcohol Mandatory Treatment Act: evidence, ethics and the law.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Lander Fiona, Gray Dennis, Wilkes Edward
Аннотация
The Northern Territory Alcohol Mandatory Treatment Act 2013 (AMT Act) permits mandatory residential alcohol rehabilitation for up to 3 months. International guidelines and human rights law confirm that mandatory rehabilitation should only be used for short periods. Evidence concerning the efficacy of long-term mandatory alcohol rehabilitation is lacking, and minimal data concerning the efficacy of the scheme have been released. Specific legal issues also arise concerning the AMT Act, including its potentially discriminatory application to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. The program only permits referral by police, despite the fact that it is ostensibly a medical intervention. Use of a treatment as a method of effectively solving a public intoxication problem is highly dubious, and should be of concern to the medical community. Given that more cost-effective and proven measures exist to combat alcohol dependence, the utility of the AMT Act is questionable.