The Morality of Maintenance Programs for Addicts

The drug addiction pandemic has led to some governments adopting social maintenance programs for drug addicts. The UK government, for instance, has implemented programs since the 1970s designed to curb problems associated with drug addiction. Needle exchange policies and methadone replacement programs are just some of the examples of such programs designed to prevent infections among users. The government has also leveraged the methadone replacement programs to help opioid addicts. Since UK healthcare is supported by taxation, any drug addict can freely access these addiction maintenance programs. An additional reason to continue these programs is to curb crime by availing drugs to addicts instead of them having to commit crimes such as theft to get money to finance their habits. Despite the benefits the maintenance programs offer, there are concerns that the government supports physically and morally harmful behavior.

According to Ruggiero (2015), actions are right or wrong based on the level of happiness they bring to an individual based on the utilitarian perspective. The UK government’s drug maintenance program is acceptable based on the utilitarian perspective because it helps addicts cope with rehabilitation. If drug addicts quit instantly, in what is famously known as ‘cold turkey,’ they are likely to experience painful withdrawal symptoms. To help them cope, the government offers them alternative drugs through the addiction maintenance program that improves happiness levels among recovering addicts. Crime rates have reduced significantly since the government started implementing the addiction maintenance program. Addicts can access replacements or additional dosages of the drugs they use; hence, they have no motivation to engage in theft, murder, and other crimes to get resources to sustain their addiction habit. From a utilitarian perspective, an action is moral if its benefits outdo its shortcomings. Despite the concerns that the programs may worsen addiction, they are largely beneficial for society and addicts. Therefore, based on the utilitarian perspective on morality, addiction programs are justified because they benefit society and individual addicts.

Moreover, ethics of care can be used to justify the government’s decision to give people with addiction replacements and additional drugs to help them stay under control. Ethics of care seek to improve relationships by enhancing the welfare of caregivers and care receivers in a network of social relationships. Care ethics are derived from the motivation to care for the vulnerable and the needy. To that end, human beings are collectively responsible for supporting needy individuals (Ruggiero, 2015). In this case, drug addicts are needy individuals. It is incumbent upon the entire population to facilitate the rehabilitation of these individuals by availing resources to aid the recovery process. Since opioid maintenance treatment and other addiction maintenance programs are tax-funded, it means that the citizens of the UK have embraced the collective responsibility of caring for addicts. Notably, the program is not only for short-term detoxification purposes since it facilitates long-term abstinence and curbing instances of substance overdose. The cooperative act involving people coming to assist addicts is benevolent, aligning with the ethics of care that gives humans the collective responsibility of caring for the vulnerable.

Despite the benefits that accrue from addiction maintenance programs, critics raise legitimate ethical concerns, casting the programs as immoral. One of the key ethical concerns raised in opposition to the program is that it does more harm by worsening addiction issues. For instance, methadone, which is used as a replacement for drug addiction, is deemed to lead to more dependence compared to the very drugs an addict is recovering from. This is partly true, especially if the addicts do not receive adequate clinical support as they embark on their quitting journey. Apart from the likelihood that some replacement drugs may be more addictive than what is being fought, there are still positive metrics attained as a result of the programs. One of the undeniable benefits linked to the program is the reduced HIV infection due to sharing needles. Also, as noted earlier, crime rates have significantly reduced since the programs were adopted. To that end, healthcare providers should keenly supervise the recovery process and implement necessary moderation to avert addiction to replacement drugs.

Conclusion

Overall, the UK government’s addiction maintenance program is morally justifiable. Based on the utilitarian perspective of morality, the maintenance program is moral because it reduces the pain caused by withdrawal symptoms among addicts by providing healthy substitutes and controlled dosages of drugs. Besides, the program has contributed to the reduction of HIV infection cases and crime rates. On the other hand, the program is supported by ethics of care, which aver that people have a collective responsibility to help the vulnerable. However, critics argue that some of the substitutes are more addictive than the drugs themselves. Considering the many benefits the addiction maintenance programs bring to society and individual addicts, the program should be retained. Healthcare workers are advised to implement necessary moderation to avert addiction and attain complete abstinence.

References

Ruggiero, V. R. (2015). Thinking critically about ethical issues (9th ed.). Mcgraw-Hill Education.

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

We’ll write everything from scratch

Case Analysis 7

For the final case analysis, compose an 800-word written analysis in which you identify the moral issue(s) and the parties involved. Take a balanced moral position offering a recommendation or a policy resolution. Please draw on any three approaches to ethics from utility, duty, rights, virtue, or care. Choose from:

• Thinking Critically About Ethical Issues, Case 11, p. 189 or Case 16, p. 181
  

  The Morality of Maintenance Programs for Addicts

CHOOSE ONE OF THE FOLLOWING:
Case 11:

• Anticipating the possibility that their soldiers may one day be captured by the enemy, some modern armies include in their basic training exposure to torture techniques. That is, they subject their own troops to mild forms of torture in order that they may learn how to resist it. Is this practice justifiable morally? If you believe it is justifiable only under certain conditions, specify the conditions.

OR

Case 16: 

• Some countries, notably Great Britain, have initiated maintenance programs for drug addicts. Merely by signing up, an addict becomes entitled to free drugs in doses sufficient to stabilize and maintain his or her habit. Such programs reduce the incidence of drug-related crimes and facilitate research into the phenomenon of addiction. Some critics, however, claim that these programs are immoral because they approve and support physically and emotionally harmful behavior. Is this criticism ethically valid?

Textbook:

• Ruggiero, Vincent. Thinking Critically About Ethical Issues. McGraw-Hill Higher Education. Kindle Edition.
  • Ninth Edition