AJPH
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


AJPH First Look, published online ahead of print Jan 2, 2008
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
AJPH.2006.103747v1
98/2/231    most recent
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Beletsky, L.
Right arrow Articles by Burris, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Beletsky, L.
Right arrow Articles by Burris, S.
©
American Journal of Public Health, 10.2105/AJPH.2006.103747


Government, Politics, and Law

The Law (and Politics) of Safe Injection Facilities in the United States

Leo Beletsky 1*, Corey S. Davis 2, Evan Anderson 1, Scott Burris 1

1 Temple University Beasley School of Law
2 University of Pennsylvania, Prevention Point Philadelphia

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: leob{at}temple.edu.


   Abstract

Safe injection facilities (SIFs) have shown promise in reducing harms and social costs associated with injection drug use. Favorable evaluations elsewhere have raised the issue of their implementation in the United States. Recognizing that laws shape health interventions targeting drug users, we analyzed the legal environment for publicly authorized SIFs in the United States. Although states and some municipalities have the power to authorize SIFs under state law, federal authorities could still interfere with these facilities under the Controlled Substances Act. A state- or locally-authorized SIF could proceed free of legal uncertainty only if federal authorities explicitly authorized it or decided not to interfere. Given legal uncertainty, and the similar experience with syringe exchange programs, we recommend a process of sustained health research, strategic advocacy, and political deliberation.

Key Words: Community Health, Health Care Facilities/Services, Health Law, Health Policy, HIV/AIDS, Urban Health







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
Copyright © 2008 by the American Public Health Association