Annotated Bibliography Assignment

By Richard Vaca

How can decriminalizing of all drugs help users through the means of societal

acceptance and seeking medical attention?

Ferreira, Susana. “Portugal’s radical drugs policy is working. Why hasn’t the world copied it?”

The Guardian, 5 Dec.2017. Guardian Media Group.

https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/dec/05/portugals-radical-drugs-policy-is-working-why-

hasnt-the-world-copied-it. Accessed 9 Mar. 2019

This independent journalism is part of the Guardian’s, long-read edition. The Guardian is

a British news source that covers news all over the world and the long read section is a longer read

that uses reports, data and previous information. Susana gives good feedback on Portugal’s opioid Commented [SL1]: Good job on the background of your
source, but I may give a little background on who the author
is as well
crisis in the 1980’s. After the military coup in 1972 Portugal now had more access to the world

market, therefore lead to a dramatic usage in drugs. The drugs were affecting everybody not just

the minorities or the poor. Politicians and the public described the event as a drug epidemic where

every family was being affected regardless of what social class they were in. Specifically, the use of

heroin was largely being consumed and it lead to an increase of health problems such as HIV and

other illnesses caused by unsanitary usage of needles. Since heroin requires a syringe, many of the Commented [SL2]: Any mental problems associated with
the rise of heroin or just physical health issues?
users were using used syringes or using them in an impropriate manner that caused lethal diseases. Commented [SL3]: Good transition from describing the
epidemic to getting in the specifics with Portugal
Portugal was the number one nation in the EU who had the most heroin consumers in the 1980’s

and needed to desperately do something about it. Portugal’s state of panic leads them to compose Commented [SL4]: lead not leads

the policy of decriminalization of drugs. The overarching idea is to treat drug addicts as patients

where they can seek addiction treatment or obtain a drug kit, that has a clean needles and other

equipment to avoid any unsanitary illnesses. So instead of users going to court rooms or jail, they

will have to go to clinics, pay a fine or given a course on drugs. The author tells us that the

statistics show that Portugal has been able to combat drugs through lowering incarcerated rates,

decreases in HIV deaths, and a decrease drug-related deaths.

However, I like how the author points out that the policy was not necessarily the turning

point, but rather the cultural shift on how society view drugs was key in combatting drugs. I

thought it was neat how the author points out the idea, because she provides stories of how people

within the community had tried to help addicts without the help of the law. People like Pereira a

doctor who treated users with methadone without government approval or pharmacist, Ferreira

who started an unofficial needle-exchange, making drug dealers and authorities mad. People

within the community pushed forward centers of rehabilitation rather than advocating for stricter

punishment for users. On the other hand, the author does demonstrate some bias views for

example she never talks about any negative drawbacks of the policy or the people who oppose the

policy. It is a persuasive article that wants to grab the attention of others nations and consider this

policy as an option. Despite the bias content the article provides, the article definitely enriches my

question towards decriminalization of drugs and has given me a clearer approach in talking about

one drug instead of all, because there’s too much content to cover for all drugs. The author

introduced me to Portugal’s background to give me a better sense of how this policy came about
and I can compare and contrast this information with other nations to see if decriminalization is a

potential option for others. Commented [SL5]: Great overall assessment of article

Chand, Kailash and Califano, Joseph. “Should drugs be decriminalizing?” British Medical

Journal; London Vol. 355, ISS 7627 8 Nov. 2007. ProQuest.

https://searchproquestcom.librarylink.uncc.edu/docview/1777655756/fulltextPDF/97DB

D510204942F0PQ/1?accountid=14605. Accessed 8 Mar. 2019

In the scholarly article the vice president of the British Medical Association, Dr. Kailash

shares his views on why decriminalizing can be an option to help drug users and society. On the Commented [SL6]: I would introduce Kailash’s
background and reasons before introducing Califano.
contrary Joseph A. Califano Jr, Chairman of The National Center on Addiction and Substance

Abuse at Columbia University, explains how decriminalization is not the answer to help drug

related problems. These two authors are very avid individuals in their communities, Dr. Kailash

has contributed 35 years of his life in improving public health at local, regional and national level

in the UK. Joseph Califano is a former secretary for US health, education, and welfare as well as

chairman of (NCASA). These two individuals have been in schooling for several years and have

been both involved in the law and medical fields where drugs are a very relevant problem.

Therefore, I recognize these two perspectives as reliable sources I can refer to in my extended Commented [SL7]: Repetitive use of ‘These two’

inquiry project.

Dr. Kailash, explains that prohibition on drugs has failed. The example he gives is that US Commented [SL8]: No comma necessary

has hundreds of thousands of people in jail and there’s billions of pounds funding drug agencies
and policies, but there’s still a drug market flourishing. He indicates, with decriminalization there Commented [SL9]: No comma necessary

will be less crime, addicts can now be seen as patients, a more stabilize economy with governmental

control of drugs, less incidents of HIV, and aiding users to be employed. Kailish also concludes

that the people that are more prone to drug use are the lower class, so if decriminalization takes in

affect these group of individuals will also benefit. Kailish uses the example on Netherlands

decriminalization policy on heroin, that addicts are viewed as patients and there hasn’t been newly

registered addicts prior to decriminalization. On the other hand, Califano provides a counter Commented [SL10]: ‘On the other hand’ is not needed
since you later say ‘counter example’
example by saying Switzerland attempted to allow addicts to use heroin in a small area in Zurich

and ended up being a tourist attraction for other users. Califano suggests there needs to be severe

prohibition policies, because there will be more access to drugs, therefore more users and more

civilproblems. The example I could really relate to that Califano brings up is even if drugs were

regulated like tobacco and alcohol the underage will still find a way to obtain drugs, just like

underage collage students with alcohol today. Both individuals show very good arguments with

good evidence from other countries who have or have tried decriminalizing. The article has

broaden my understanding in the two sides of the spectrum on decriminalizing drugs. The article

definitely complicates the answer to my inquiry question, because the two different views tend to

contradict each other. But this is good because I will be able to prepare a even more stronger

answer by including the different views. However, the only mutual conclusion I got from both

Kailish and Califano is the fact that there’s need to be more funding on rehabilitation and

education on drugs. I know that this also a very important part towards my question because both

individuals agree with it, therefore this conclusion for certain can strengthen my answer. As I am Commented [SL11]: Good job on pointing out on why
this article can help with your final paper.
reading more and more sources I am realizing that there’s so much that goes towards my question

and is persuading me to make a more specific question to get a more precise answer.