Nonconsensual Dose Reduction Mandates are Not Justified Clinically or Ethically: An Analysis

Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 48 (2):259-267 (2020)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This manuscript describes the institutional and clinical considerations that apply to the question of whether to mandate opioid dose reduction in patients who have received opioids long-term. It describes how a calamitous rise in addiction and overdose involving opioids has both led to a clinical recalibration by healthcare providers, and to strong incentives favoring forcible opioid reduction by policy making agencies. Neither the 2016 Guideline issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention nor clinical evidence can justify or promote such policies as safe or effective.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,990

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The Epidemic as Stigma: The Bioethics of Opioids.Daniel Z. Buchman, Pamela Leece & Aaron Orkin - 2017 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 45 (4):607-620.

Analytics

Added to PP
2020-07-07

Downloads
12 (#1,094,538)

6 months
7 (#592,073)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Introduction: Opioid Controversies: The Crisis — Causes and Solutions.Robert M. Sade - 2020 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 48 (2):238-240.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Add more references