Drugs and human rights: Private palliatives, sacramental freedoms and cognitive liberty

International Journal of Human Rights

Volumn 14, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 425-441

  Walsh, Charlotte ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEICESTER   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Cognitive liberty; Drug discrimination; European convention on human rights; Misuse of drugs act 1971; Religious freedom; Self medication

Indexed keywords

EID: 79956245908     PISSN: 13642987     EISSN: 1744053X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/13642980802704270     Document Type: Review

References (68)

1. Misuse of Drugs Regulations 2001.
2. Select Committee on Science and Technology, Cannabis, the Scientific and Medical Evidence (London: Select Committee on Science and Technology, 1998), ch. 2.
3. Ibid.
4. Select Committee on Science and Technology, Therapeutic Uses of Cannabis (London: Select Committee on Science and Technology, 2001), para. 25.
5. Government Reply to the Report of the House of Lords Select Committee on Science and Technology, Cannabis, the Scientific and Medical Evidence (London: House of Lords, 1999), para. 22.
6. T. Szasz, Pain and Pleasure: A Study of Bodily Feelings (London: Tavistock Publications Ltd, 1957), 3.
7. L. Driscoll, Reconsidering Drugs: Mapping Victorian and Modern Drug Discourses (New York: Palgrave, 2000), 5.
8. Ibid., 66.
9. D. Moore, 'Erasing Pleasure from Public Discourse on Illicit Drugs: On the Creation and Reproduction of an Absence', International Journal of Drug Policy 19, no. 5 (2007): 357.
10. T. Csordas and A. Kleinman, 'The Therapeutic Process', in Medical Anthropology, eds T. Johnson and C. Sargent (New York: Praeger, 1996), 18.
11. [2005] EWCA Crim 1415.
12. Ibid., para. 54.
13. T. Szasz, Ceremonial Chemistry: The Ritual Persecution of Drugs, Addicts, and Pushers (Syracuse: University Press, 2003), 66.
14. R v. Quayle [2005] EWCA Crim 1415, para. 69.
15. Ibid., para. 77.
16. [2006] EWCA Crim 7.
17. Ibid., para. 24.
18. A. Ashworth, 'Case Comment: Defence of Necessity: Possession of Class B Drug - Drug Used as Pain Relief Strategy', Criminal Law Review July (2006): 633-5.
19. Csordas Kleinman, 'The Therapeutic Process'.
20. M. Hayry, 'Prescribing Cannabis: Freedom, Autonomy, and Values', Journal of Medical Ethics (2004): 335.
21. Ibid., 336.
22. R. Forte, ed., Entheogens and the Future of Religion (San Fransisco, CA: Council on Spiritual Practices, 1997), 8.
23. [2002] 1 Cr App R 37.
24. Ibid., para. 10.
25. D. Bewley-Taylor, 'Challenging the UN Drug Control Conventions: Problems and Possibilities', International Journal of Drug Policy (2003): 177.
26. 346 US 418 (2006).
27. American Indian Religious Freedoms Act 1978.
28. 955 P.2d. 133 (1988).
29. P. Edge, 'Religious Drug Use in England, South Africa and the United States of America', Religion and Human Rights 1 (2006): 170.
30. P. Cohen, 'The Drug Prohibition Church and the Adventure of Reformation', International Journal of Drug Policy 14 (2003): 214.
31. W. James, The Varieties of Religious Experience (New York: Longmans, 1925), 31.
32. 2007 WL 1551069 (FCA).
33. J. Bakalar and L. Grinspoon, Drug Control in a Free Society (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984), 32.
34. T. McKenna, 'Psychedelic Society', in Entheogens and the Future of Religion, ed. R. Forte (San Fransisco, CA: Council on Spiritual Practices, 1997), 61.
35. [2007] 1 Cr App R (S) 37.
36. A. Weil, The Natural Mind: An Investigation of Drugs and the Higher Consciousness (Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1998), 140.
37. Ibid.
38. Ibid., 139.
39. Foresight, Drug Futures 2025, (London: Office of Science and Technology, 2005), 26.
40. Lewes Crown Court, 13 January 2005, 3.
41. Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, preamble.
42. Ibid., s. 1(2).
43. House of Commons Science and Technology Committee, Drug Classification: Making a Hash of It? (London: House of Commons, 2006), 3.
44. D. Nutt et al., 'Development of a Rational Scale to Assess the Harm of Drugs of Potential Misuse', The Lancet 369 (2007): 1047-53.
45. Ibid., 1052.
46. Government Reply to the Fifth Report from the House of Commons Science & Technology Committee, Drug Classification: Making a Hash of It? (London: House of Commons, 2006), p. 24.
47. M.L. King, Letter from a Birmingham Jail (1963), http://www.africa.upenn.edu/Articles_Gen/Letter_Birmingham.html (accessed November 12, 2008).
48. D. Husak, Drugs and Rights (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992), 2.
49. T. Szasz, Ceremonial Chemistry, 11.
50. I. Stengers, Power & Invention: Situating Science (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1997), 223.
51. H. Brook and R. Stringer, 'Users, Using, Used: A Beginner's Guide to Deconstructing Drugs Discourse', International Journal of Drug Policy 16 (2005): 317.
52. Driscoll, Reconsidering Drugs, 94.
53. [2007] 1 Cr App R (S) 37, para. 8.
54. R. Strassman, DMT: The Spirit Molecule (Victoria: Brumby Books, 2001).
55. Lewes Crown Court, 6 January 2005, Abuse of Process/Human Rights Arguments.
56. For further detail see: http://www.maps.org/research/cluster/psilo-lsd/ (accessed November 13, 2008).
57. Hove Crown Court, 22 April 2005, Judge's Sentencing Remarks.
58. Certoriari Petition for Leave to Appeal to the House of Lords, 8 August 2006, para. 202.
59. Criminal Justice Act 2003, Schedule 21, para. 6.
60. Sentencing Guidelines Council, Sexual Offences Act 2003: Definitive Guideline (London: Sentencing Guidelines Council, 2007).
61. [2005] EWCA Crim 1943.
62. Szasz, Ceremonial Chemistry, 188-189.
63. Hardison [2007] 1 Cr App R (S) 37: para. 9.
64. Driscoll, Reconsidering Drugs, 58.
65. Husak, Drugs and Rights, 2.
66. G. Beck, 'Human Rights Adjudication Under the ECHR: Between Value Pluralism and Essential Contestability', European Human Rights Law Review 2 (2008): 237.
67. Ibid., 223.
68. Ibid., 216.