------------------------------------------------------------------- Fraction of juveniles punished under alcohol law (The Associated Press says juvenile court judges throughout Oregon have largely nullified a state law that requires them to suspend the driving privileges of youths caught possessing alcohol. More than 11,000 juveniles throughout the state were arrested for possession of alcohol last year, but only 2,646 had their licenses suspended.) From: "Bob Owen @ WHEN, Olympia" (firstname.lastname@example.org) To: "-News" (email@example.com) Subject: Fraction of juveniles punished under alcohol law Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 19:32:49 -0700 Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Fraction of juveniles punished under alcohol law The Associated Press 10/10/98 4:27 PM Eastern SALEM, Ore. (AP) -- Juvenile court judges are not enforcing a state law that requires them to suspend the driving privileges of youths caught possessing alcohol. More than 11,000 juveniles throughout the state were arrested for possession of alcohol last year, but only 2,646 had their licenses suspended, state figures show. "I helped write this law. It's a real frustration to me," former state legislator Rod Monroe told the Statesman Journal. Monroe and other members of Gov. John Kitzhaber's Advisory Committee on Driving Under the Influence of Intoxicants voted Friday to send letters of concern to juvenile court judges in all 36 Oregon counties. The group is looking into ways to reduce teen-age drinking and alcohol-related crashes. Crowded juvenile court dockets may partially explain the lack of suspensions, but some members of the governor's panel say the problem has persisted for years. In many cases, they said, juveniles cited for alcohol possession simply don't show up for court proceedings. Typically, they face no consequences for failing to appear. "If you don't show up, there's nothing the courts can do to punish the kids. They don't issue bench warrants," said Debra Downey, manager for the Oregon Department of Transportation's impaired driver program. Statistics reflect varying levels of enforcement, depending on the county. Marion County recorded 309 court denials of juvenile driving privileges last year, the most in the state. Jackson County was next with 298, followed by Coos (203), Washington (157) and Yamhill (156). In contrast, the most populous county in the state, Multnomah, reported 59 denials of young people's driving privileges, one more than Polk County. Three counties -- Gilliam, Hood River, and Sherman -- recorded none. Kitzhaber's committee intends to contact state lawmakers as well as judges about the disparity. The panel also is recommending that the state toughen its drunken driving laws by: -- Establishing police roadblocks to check for drunken drivers. -- Expanding the definition of driving under the influence by including intoxicating substances besides alcohol. -- Creating a felony punishment for a third drunken-driving conviction. Current law treats all such convictions as misdemeanors; it only becomes a felony if someone is killed. The suggestions will be forwarded to the 1999 Legislature.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Sex And Drugs And The World's Richest Man (According to The Irish Independent, a new book about Microsoft founder Bill Gates of Seattle, "The Microsoft File - The Secret Case Against Bill Gates," by Wendy Goldman Rohm, says the squeaky-clean embodiment of the American dream has a taste for expensive prostitutes and cannabis.) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 12:34:45 -0700 From: email@example.com (MAPNews) To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: MN: US: Sex And Drugs And The World's Richest Man Sender: email@example.com Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: Martin Cooke (email@example.com) Pubdate: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 Source: Irish Independent (Ireland) Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org Website: http://www.independent.ie/ SEX AND DRUGS AND THE WORLD'S RICHEST MAN Renowned for its ruthless business practices, Bill Gates's Microsoft is embroiled in a long war against the US Justice Department, accused of using devious means to establish the global software empire . But in a new book the impossibly squeaky-clean embodiment of the American dream is shown to be human after all with a taste for expensive prostitutes and cannabis. Daniel Jeffreys reports from New York The Amsterdam bar was full of dark corners and small groups of people wreathed in pungent smoke. Most had eaten so many powerful marijuana cakes, legal in these `space clubs', that they no longer knew where they were. There was a feeling of anarchy in the air. It was September, 1992. In one corner sat an intense American man dressed like a poorly-paid bank clerk, squinting through thick glasses at a beautiful blonde. The couple behaved as if they had once had a sexual relationship which was now over. The man looked at his female companion wistfully. He had been in this situation many times before: falling in love with a attractive woman who was at first drawn to his intense intelligence, only to have her leave eventually for a man with looks more in her league. Uneasy at first, the couple soon began drifting off to faraway places in their minds as the drugs took effect. No one in the bar realised they were being joined in their narcotic haze by Bill Gates, billionaire chairman of the computer giant Microsoft, a company that had grown to dominate many facets of our everyday lives. He was with senior Microsoft employee Stephanie Reichel, deputy head of his German operations, with whom he had fallen deeply in love. She had just told Gates she was leaving him for Bill Neukom, the booming company's in-house lawyer, who had long had a stormy relationship with the computer mogul. The news made Gates sick inside in part because he was depending on Neukom to defend him against serious business malpractice charges that might include criminal indictments, yet could not bring himself to trust the man who was effectively his number two and knew where all the Gates skeletons were buried. More than that, Gates could not stand to be beaten not in love, not in business, not in sport and his friends were beginning to fear that his desire to win had moved from being a passionate trait to an unhealthy fixation. The Amsterdam scene is described in a fascinating new book about the man who bestrides the world's most important industry. The Microsoft File The Secret Case Against Bill Gates, by Wendy Goldman Rohm, reveals the dark side of computing's King Midas, rated by many as one of the most influential men of the century. Now 43, Gates is apparently happily married to a former employee, 34-year-old Melinda, with whom he has a three-year-old daughter. But in the early 80s, when he was trying to fry every competitor in sight by fair means or foul, his behaviour had all the trappings of a despotic potentate. Rohm's picture shows Gates to be a self-obsessed man who, after his love for Reichel was repulsed, would stop at almost nothing to defeat his business rivals, pausing from squashing the competition only to relax with high-priced prostitutes. In Rohm's account, Gates found his favourite hookers in Las Vegas, headquarters of America's computer trade shows. Rohm believes Gates's use of prostitutes is a key part of his character: he is a man who acknowledges no boundaries in morals or business, when it comes to getting what he wants, but who suffers from chronic insecurities about his appearance and lack of social graces. Although Rohm concedes that Gates built much of Microsoft's IEP70bn empire on his own genius, she also reveals for the first time how much may have been stolen from others, as he ruthlessly knifed competitors in the back while pretending to be their friend or potential partner. Gates treats business like war and sees his industry with the eyes of a dictator, as territory to be conquered at all costs, except that in place of deadly weapons he uses allegedly unfair business tactics, which all but strangle any potential competitors at birth. In the 21 years since he dropped out of Harvard, finding academic studies ``less relevant'' than starting Microsoft, William Henry Gates III has made the computer that secondary brain which so many of us now use think exactly like him, in the form of software he has designed to run the programs and tasks that make desktop PCs so valuable. Much of the way in which billions of people do their work is dictated by what Gates believes is the best way to organise information. It is now possible to see for the first time how this dominance was achieved, between 1990 and 1994 with a ruthlessness that would have appealed to Napoleon although, like Bonaparte, Gates made mistakes. These could still conceivably land him in jail if a US Justice Department case beginning next month can prove that Microsoft's founder lied, stole and bugged his way to America's second largest fortune. In 1990 there were many competing operating systems on the market and Microsoft's dominant product, Windows, had not yet been released. IBM had the biggest share of the personal computer industry and believed it was working with Bill Gates to develop a new operating system, the OS/2. Within a few months IBM's chief strategist, Jim Cannavino, heard rumours. Gates was telling IBM he had OS/2 as his main project but was telling customers he was concentrating on MS/DOS (Microsoft's own operating system) and Windows, which he told them would soon become the industry standard. Enormous stakes were involved. With personal computing just taking off, any company which had the lion's share of the software market would have a licence to turn base metal into gold. Cannavino convened a crisis meeting with Gates and Microsoft at a Las Vegas hotel. Businessmen who were there testified that there were two odd aspects to the event. One was Gates's use of call girls. No one ever observed Gates having sex with any of these prostitutes but, according to many witnesses, the girls were often his companions, in public and at more discreet meetings behind closed doors. By 1992, even as Gates looked for other forms of expansion, America's business police had homed in on Microsoft's core activities, claiming the firm had used commercial intimidation and predatory tactics to stifle competition. To keep Gates focused on obliterating competition and away from anxiety about Federal probes, Gates's senior staff began to increase the number of beautiful and paid young women they pushed his way. Company lawyer Bill Neukom and head of sales Steve Ballmer, Gates's closest friend, knew all about the billionaire's yen for women and made sure he was taken care of. At the same time Gates was conducting an affair with a low-level employee at Microsoft. Gates did not seem to mind that the women he was seen with were paid for. He was getting revenge for when, seeing him as a scruffy `computer nerd', lovely women would never give him a second look. Now he could drape them around himself like arm candy, sweet reminders that he could have any beautiful woman, except one. In April, 1992, Gates spotted Stephanie Reichel, her figure and silky blonde hair made more striking by a beautiful red suit. They were at a computer sales meeting in Monte Carlo and Reichel was part of a classic Gates strategy in Germany. Her job was to make the country's top computer manufacturer Vobis switch entirely to Microsoft as its operating system, then penalise it every time it used a competitor's product. At their first encounter Gates couldn't take his eyes off Reichel. He cancelled his flight back to the US for a chance to take her to out to dinner that evening. By August, at Microsoft's annual board meeting held in Britain at the Cliveden estate, famous for the Profumo scandal orgies, Reichel was on Gates's arm. They had met the day before at the Sheraton Heathrow Hotel, continuing to central London's Park Hyatt and taking in the show Miss Saigon before having dinner at one of Michael Caine's restaurants. Gates seemed to be in love. Reichel appeared more enamoured of the power than the man not surprisingly, as Gates treated her rudely in business meetings, despite having sent her a stream of e-mail love letters since their April introduction. He may have been distracted. The Federal investigators had discovered that Microsoft was shipping the computer equivalent of terrorist devices in its Windows software. If the programs were run on the company's MS-DOS operating system, they worked fine. If run on the competing DR-DOS system, they would frequently send up error messages, making the panicked operator think his computer was about to crash. As the investigators probed deeper, evidence began to emerge that Gates and others might have destroyed documents that could prove how Microsoft had sought to kill all companies who could remotely been seen as competitors, using industrial espionage to steal their secrets and Microsoft's huge market share to sell the stolen ideas at prices the competitors could never improve on. The US Justice Department is continuing its investigation of Microsoft, as Bill Gates in private dismisses its work, laughing at its recent attempts to fine him $1m a day and saying the government should realise he makes a million every 15 minutes. Microsoft also denounces claims that Gates used prostitutes as `fiction' but has made no attempt to sue Wendy Rohm or others who have repeated the story.
------------------------------------------------------------------- The California NORML Election Guide for 1998 (A list subscriber posts the URL for California voters looking for the inside scoop.) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 07:29:05 -0400 (EDT) From: Jo-D (email@example.com) To: DPFCA (DPFCA@drugsense.org) Subject: DPFCA: 1998 CA NORML Election Guide Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Reply-To: email@example.com Organization: DrugSense http://www.drugsense.org/dpfca/ the CA NORML Election Guide for 1998 is posted at: www.norml.org/canorml kudos to dale gieringer :) jo-d NORML/SLO NORML
------------------------------------------------------------------- Kubby Is Good Alternative (A letter to the editor of The San Jose Mercury News endorses Libertarian candidate Steve Kubby for governor, and refers readers to the web site for the medical marijuana patient/activist's candidacy.) Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 12:17:44 -0700 From: firstname.lastname@example.org (MAPNews) To: email@example.com Subject: MN: US CA: PUB LTE: Kubby Is Good Alternative Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Reply-To: email@example.com Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: Marcus/Mermelstein Family (firstname.lastname@example.org) Pubdate: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 Source: San Jose Mercury News (CA) Contact: email@example.com Website: http://www.sjmercury.com/ Author: James Merritt, Santa Cruz KUBBY IS GOOD ALTERNATIVE SOMETIMES, it seems that government today is about mastering, even herding the population. How else to explain the refusal of various branches of government to honor Proposition 215 on the one side of the political spectrum, and Propositions 209 and 227 on the other? >From all the debate and campaign rhetoric I've heard so far, gubernatorial candidates Gray Davis and Dan Lungren apparently believe that it is OK to compel people to obey, and to spend their money, on behalf of a ``good cause.'' Each simply favors different causes. I'm not satisfied, and apparently I'm not alone -- witness the recent Mercury News article declaring ``Valley electorate not sold on choices'' (Page 1A, Oct. 2). I'm relieved that we have another choice. Libertarian Steve Kubby realizes that the person best suited to know what is best for you, and to make choices for you, is you. Kubby pledges to work to reduce government's control of your life, leaving most choices up to you, and your hard-earned wages in your pocket. He has already demonstrated his commitment, as a leader of the successful Proposition 215 campaign. Despite being a serious candidate, Kubby is excluded from ``official'' gubernatorial debates. So, before November's election, please visit his Web site at http://www.kubby.com to judge Kubby's positions and proposals for yourself, and to learn where you can meet with him.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Second Prison Probe (An Associated Press story in The San Jose Mercury News says that one day after five prison guards were charged with helping to arrange the rape of an inmate at maximum-security Corcoran State Prison, California Attorney General Dan Lungren on Friday announced an investigation at a second prison, High Desert State Prison near Susanville. Lungren, the Republican gubernatorial candidate, dismissed suggestions that the latest round of indictments at Corcoran was politically motivated. He also declined to comment on the powerful prison guards union's endorsement of his rival in the governor's race.) Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 10:20:06 -0700 From: firstname.lastname@example.org (MAPNews) To: email@example.com Subject: MN: US CA: Second Prison Probe Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Reply-To: email@example.com Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: Marcus/Mermelstein Family (firstname.lastname@example.org) Pubdate: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 Source: San Jose Mercury News (CA) Contact: email@example.com Website: http://www.sjmercury.com/ Author: John Howard Associated Press SECOND PRISON PROBE Alleged abuse investigated at Susanville SACRAMENTO -- A day after five prison guards were charged with helping to arrange the rape of an inmate at maximum-security Corcoran State Prison, Attorney General Dan Lungren on Friday announced an investigation at a second prison, High Desert State Prison near Susanville. Lungren said the Corcoran investigation was continuing, but he declined to provide specifics. Nor would he discuss details of the High Desert investigation. However, the Department of Corrections said six guards at High Desert were suspected of verbally intimidating an inmate and filing false reports. A prison spokesman said the officers had been placed on administrative leave. Lungren, the Republican gubernatorial candidate, dismissed suggestions that the latest round of indictments at Corcoran was politically motivated. He also declined to comment on the powerful prison guards union's endorsement of his rival in the governor's race. The Corcoran case received national attention this summer when the Los Angeles Times reported that guards deliberately placed a young inmate in the cell of a burly prisoner, a rapist known as the ``booty bandit,'' as retribution for kicking a female guard. The younger prisoner was raped repeatedly and was ignored by guards, despite pleas for help, the newspaper said. In April, eight officers at the maximum-security Corcoran facilities were indicted on federal charges of deliberately staging gladiator-style fights between prisoners. None of that group of officers was involved in Thursday's indictments.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Brutal Prison Guards Charged (A version in The Telegraph, in Britain) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 11:03:49 -0700 From: firstname.lastname@example.org (MAPNews) To: email@example.com Subject: MN: US: Brutal Prison Guards Charged Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Reply-To: email@example.com Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: Martin Cooke (firstname.lastname@example.org) Pubdate: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 Source: Telegraph, The (UK) Contact: email@example.com Copyright: (c) The Telegraph 1998 Author: John Hiscock, Los Angeles BRUTAL PRISON GUARDS CHARGED Five prison guards have been charged with conspiracy after prisoners complained they were disciplined by being put a cell with a 17-stone homosexual. In return for raping and beating the prisoners, convicted murderer Wayne Robertson was given extra food and tennis shoes, he told investigators. A grand jury was told that seven inmates at Corcoran State Prison in California, were killed during six years of terror by a gang of guards known as the Sharks.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Birchwood Bust Sets Pot Record Cops Harvest $2.2 Million (The Anchorage Daily News indicates city, state and federal prohibition agents confiscated almost 1,100 marijuana plants they valued at $2,000 each from a Birchwood home Thursday night, the largest Anchorage pot bust in memory.) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 11:08:19 -0700 From: firstname.lastname@example.org (MAPNews) To: email@example.com Subject: MN: US AK: Birchwood Bust Sets Pot Record Cops Harvest $22 Million Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Reply-To: email@example.com Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: firstname.lastname@example.org (Frank S. World) Pubdate: Saturday, October 10, 1998 Source: Anchorage Daily News (AK) Contact: email@example.com Website: http://www.adn.com/ Author: Peter Porco BIRCHWOOD BUST SETS POT RECORD COPS HARVEST $2.2 MILLION GARDEN Drug enforcement authorities confiscated almost 1,100 marijuana plants from a Birchwood home Thursday night, the largest Anchorage pot bust in memory, police said. Acting on a Crime Stoppers tip of a few weeks ago, officers from city, state and federal law enforcement agencies obtained a warrant to search the home, police said. The street value of the 1,097 plants is estimated at $2.2 million, said police Lt. Audie Holloway, commander of the city's Drug Enforcement Unit. Police are seeking three people, including the homeowner, Holloway said. A fourth person, whom Holloway described as a caretaker, was at the residence at the time of the search but was not arrested. Holloway declined to identify the suspects. No charges have been filed yet in the case. Investigators will dry and then weigh the plants before recommending charges to the district attorney's office, Holloway said. The process may take a week or two, he added. "We've never dried 1,000 plants before," he said. The property on Birchwood Loop Road consists of several buildings and other structures, Holloway said. The ground floor of a two-story house served as a starter room for marijuana seedlings, he said. Attached to the house is a 40-by-40-foot metal shed where officers found hundreds of mature plants. They found more plants in two 40-foot-long containers adjacent to the shed. Police also confiscated 77 lamps and other sophisticated growing equipment, and several weapons, they said. No large amounts of cash were found. Busts of pot growers, particularly in the Matanuska-Susitna valleys, are on the rise, Holloway said. "Alaskan indoor-grown marijuana has the highest THC content of any grown," said Holloway. THC - or tetrahyrocannibinol - is the plant's most active ingredient. Investigators believe most of what's grown in Southcentral Alaska is shipped Outside. "There's a good market for marijuana. But we can't track it to the sellers," Holloway said. "We assume it's being shipped." Daily News reporter Peter Porco can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.org.
------------------------------------------------------------------- NH Growers way ahead of narcs (A Boston Globe article about marijuana cultivation in New Hampshire says police estimate about 3,000 plants are found there every year, while another 20,000 or more go undiscovered. But only about 10 percent of the marijuana sold on the streets is grown within the state. "A lot more is used than anyone wants to know or anyone wants to admit," said Sandown Police Chief J. Scott Currier. More marijuana is grown in Maine and Vermont, police said, because those states are more rural than New Hampshire.) From: "Bob Owen @ WHEN, Olympia" (email@example.com) To: "-News" (firstname.lastname@example.org) Subject: NH Growers way ahead of narcs Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 20:48:58 -0700 Sender: email@example.com Newshawk: firstname.lastname@example.org Source: Boston Globe Pubdate: 10/11/98 Online: http://www.boston.com NH Growers way ahead of narcs CONCORD, N.H. (AP) - Police say illegal cultivators of marijuana are way ahead of pot's legal harvesters. Police estimate that about 3,000 marijuana plants are found in New Hampshire each year while about another 20,000 or more go undiscovered. ``A lot more is used than anyone wants to know or anyone wants to admit,创 said Sandown Police Chief J. Scott Currier in whose town a patch of pot was found recently. ``I think a lot of people would be surprised if they knew some of the people who were using it,创 he said. For each crop of marijuana, police say there are different types of growers, from occasional smokers to people who make a business of it. Marijuana is popular not only among teen-agers, but with adults of all backgrounds, including serious drug addicts who make it a part of their drug regime, police say. Last year, an 80-year-old man was arrested in Meredith for growing marijuana. ``It runs the spectrum,创 said Jerry Graffam, an agent in the New Hampshire office of the federal Drug Enforcement Administration. ``From husband and wife, to kids to old people,创 he said. Most of what is grown in the state stays in New Hampshire, but it only makes up about 10 percent of the marijuana sold on the streets, police estimate. Marijuana growers take advantage of New Hampshire's rural and secluded areas to plant the pot, though usually not on their own land, said Lt. Michael Hureau, of the State Police Narcotics Unit. ``They磍l put (the plants) on a neighbor磗 property,创 he said. Last week, Merrimack police found a crop of 219 plants worth $450,000. On Sept. 18, Newton police found 35 marijuana plants on vacant land and on Sept. 14, Sandown police found 38 plants near a busy road. The police departments are still trying to find the growers. ``It would have to be someone local,创 Currier said. ``It takes a lot of time. You have to check them weekly. I don磘 think it is some high school kid who read a book and decided to give it a try. I think it was someone who knew what they were doing.创 Graffam said he has seen people growing it in pots on back yard decks, in flower gardens, inside homes and hidden among other crops. People who raise three to five plants usually grow them for their own use. Above that, they are probably selling it, Graffam said. Quality homegrown marijuana can be profitable. While Mexican and California marijuana sells for $1,000 to $1,500 per pound, homegrown can bring $2,000 to $4,000 per pound. A good hybrid of homegrown marijuana has a higher percentage of the active ingredient tetrahydrocannabinol or THC. Growers harvest the plants between mid-August and mid-October, when the plants are as tall as 14 feet and are most visible to passersby. Luckily for police, harvest season coincides with hunting season. Many reports of marijuana crops come from hunters, like the Merrimack plants found by a bow and arrow hunter. More marijuana is grown in Maine and Vermont, police said, because those states are more rural than New Hampshire. Slightly less is grown in Massachusetts, Hureau said, ``but there is no town that is immune to it.创
------------------------------------------------------------------- Ex-Chief Could Get Up To 50 Years In Drug Conviction (The Houston Chronicle says Robert Sanger, the former chief of police in Premont, Texas, was found guilty by a federal jury Thursday on one count of possession with intent to distribute marijuana, one count of conspiring to distribute about a ton of marijuana, and one count of knowingly accepting gifts while acting as chief.) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 16:00:38 -0700 From: email@example.com (MAPNews) To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: MN: US TX: Ex-Chief Could Get Up To 50 Years In Drug Conviction Sender: email@example.com Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: email@example.com Pubdate: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 Source: Houston Chronicle (TX) Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org Copyright: (c) 1998 Houston Chronicle Website: http://www.chron.com/ Author: Associated Press EX-CHIEF COULD GET UP TO 50 YEARS IN DRUG CONVICTION CORPUS CHRISTI, Texas (AP) -- He used to put people behind bars, but now a former Premont police chief faces up to 50 years in prison after being convicted on drug charges. Robert Sanger, who has been suspended without pay, will remain in custody until his Dec. 16 sentencing. A federal jury found Sanger guilty Thursday on one count of possession with intent to distribute marijuana, one count of conspiring to distribute about a ton of marijuana, found at the Falfurrias Border Patrol checkpoint, and one count of knowingly accepting gifts while acting as chief. Jurors found him innocent on a fourth count -- lying to investigators. "The defendant's position in law enforcement required him to have fidelity to an oath, and that oath was to obey the law," said U.S. District Court Judge Hayden W. Head Jr. "He is lucky the jury did not convict him of the fourth count. He clearly made a false statement." Sanger, who served as chief of Premont in Jim Wells County for five years, was indicted May 13. An associate of his, Roger Lopez, pleaded guilty in the case and was sentenced to seven years. On Monday, Lopez testified he used cocaine with Sanger and gave him several gifts, including $280 and motel accommodations. David Gonzalez, a Corpus Christi police officer assigned to work with a Drug Enforcement Administration task force, testified that phone records show 191 calls between Sanger and Lopez in 1996 and several more calls in 1997. Lopez also said Sanger gave him information about drug interdiction operations. Other co-conspirators already sentenced in the case include Ernest Huerta, who received seven years; Michael Junk, who was sentenced to 4 years; and Patricia Marie Gongora, who received five years probation. Premont is a town of about 3,000 people, about 50 miles southwest of Corpus Christi.
------------------------------------------------------------------- 102 Accused Of Supplying Crack To White-Collar NY Workers (A New York Times article in The Dallas Morning News says 102 members of five gangs were indicted Friday for selling millions of dollars' worth of crack cocaine to white-collar workers in midtown Manhattan during the last decade. The five gangs involved apparently shunned confrontation to avoid drawing police attention. To avoid warfare, dealers declared a truce and worked out a shift schedule among themselves, officials said.) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 16:00:38 -0700 From: email@example.com (MAPNews) To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: MN: US NY: 102 Accused Of Supplying Crack To White-Collar NY Workers Sender: email@example.com Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: email@example.com Pubdate: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 Source: Dallas Morning News (TX) Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org Copyright: (c) 1998 The Dallas Morning News Website: http://www.dallasnews.com/ Author: New York Times News Service 102 ACCUSED OF SUPPLYING CRACK TO WHITE-COLLAR NY WORKERS 10/10/98 NEW YORK - Officials announced the indictments Friday of 102 members of a drug operation that sold millions of dollars' worth of crack cocaine to white-collar workers in midtown Manhattan. Authorities said that the dealers from five gangs largely sold their drugs indoors, rarely fought over territory and catered to their most-cherished customers, what the dealers called the "S and T crowd" - the suit and tie crowd. The sales were made over the course of a decade. Officials said the gang members' practice of selling drugs indoors and the fact that they shunned firearms indicated the adaptability of the drug trade. They said a continuing demand for drugs fueled the operation. Half of its $5 million in annual sales were made to white-collar workers, investigators said. Walter Arsenault, assistant Manhattan district attorney, said the white-collar workers "bought big and they paid twice as much." The five gangs involved apparently shunned confrontation to avoid drawing police attention. To avoid warfare, dealers declared a truce and worked out a shift schedule among themselves, officials said. Dealers from different gangs shared customers and drug supplies and even warned each other when police approached, investigators said. Gang disputes were settled by slashings and stabbings, not by gunbattles. Gang members told the police that they no longer carry guns because they fear that they will be stopped by police enforcing the city's crackdown on low-level crimes, authorities said. The lucrative operation ended after a rival gang from Boston tried to move in, law-enforcement officials said. A shooting in January drew the attention of the police and eventually led to Friday's indictments.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Myopic About Marijuana (A letter to the editor of The Washington Post says recent news about the analgesic properties of cannabis should motivate voters to endorse Initiative 59, the Washington, DC, medical marijuana ballot measure.) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 15:31:52 -0700 From: email@example.com (MAPNews) To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: MN: US DC: PUB LTE: Myopic About Marijuana Sender: email@example.com Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: email@example.com Pubdate: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 Copyright:: (c) 1998 The Washington Post Company Source: Washington Post (DC) Page: A21 Contact: http://washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/edit/letters/letterform.htm Website: http://www.washingtonpost.com/ Author: Marc Brandl Myopic About Marijuana The Sept. 28 news story "Taking a Leaf From Marijuana's Effect" reports on new scientific evidence that the active ingredients in marijuana "kill pain without producing the side effects of morphine." Unfortunately, patients who are currently smoking marijuana to treat their pain can be arrested and sent to prison. Now that science has again indicated that patients who smoke marijuana are indeed getting a therapeutic effect, it is time to stop treating them like criminals. Seriously ill people in the District face a six-month jail sentence for smoking marijuana. Fortunately, D.C. voters will have the opportunity to change these inhumane laws on Nov. 3 by voting "yes" on Initiative 59. It's time to stop punishing patients for taking their doctors' advice. Marc Brandl
------------------------------------------------------------------- Myopic About Marijuana (A second letter to the editor of The Washington Post, by Paul Armentano of NORML, says General Barry McCaffrey's zeal to probe the private lives of NBA players by instituting random drug tests for marijuana is misguided and unnecessary. The NBA is not a law enforcement agency, and it is inappropriate to force players who are not even suspected of using drugs - and whose job performance is satisfactory - to "prove" their innocence through this degrading procedure.) Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 22:12:31 -0700 From: firstname.lastname@example.org (MAPNews) To: email@example.com Subject: MN: US: PUB LTE: Myopic About Marijuana Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Reply-To: email@example.com Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: firstname.lastname@example.org Pubdate: Saturday, October 10, 1998 Copyright: (c) 1998 The Washington Post Company Source: Washington Post (DC) Contact: http://washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/edit/letters/letterform.htm Website: http://www.washingtonpost.com/ Section: Page A21 Author: Paul Armentano MYOPIC ABOUT MARIJUANA Barry McCaffrey's zeal to probe the private lives of NBA players by instituting random drug testing for marijuana is misguided and unnecessary ["A Clean and Sober NBA," op-ed, Sept. 30]. Marijuana is clearly not a performance-enhancing drug, and it is inappropriate to force players who are not even suspected of using drugs - and whose job performance is satisfactory - to "prove" their innocence through this degrading procedure that violates personal privacy. The NBA is not a law enforcement agency, and the burden of enforcing criminal sanctions for the recreational use of marijuana should not fall upon its shoulders. If anything, the evidence that many NBA players use marijuana simply reflects that marijuana smoking remains common among a significant segment of Americans despite more than 60 years of criminal prohibition. Rather than calling for more drug testing, federal officials should begin to question the rationality of criminalizing otherwise law-abiding citizens who smoke marijuana privately. Paul Armentano The writer is director of publications for the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws Foundation.
------------------------------------------------------------------- CIA Said To Ignore Charges Of Contra Dug Dealing In '80s (The New York Times version of Thursday's news on the Central Intelligence Agency's ongoing re-evaluation of what constitutes plausible deniability.) Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 17:19:24 EDT Errors-To: email@example.com Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org Originator: email@example.com Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org From: Remembers@webtv.net (Genie Brittingham) To: Multiple recipients of list (email@example.com) Subject: CIA admits subversive black ops against US! From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Dr.KEV) Date: Sun, Oct 11, 1998 Subject: CIA admits subversive black ops against US! *** CIA SAID TO IGNORE CHARGES OF CONTRA DRUG DEALING IN '80s THE NEW YORK TIMES October 10, 1998 http://www.nytimes.com/yr/mo/day/news/world/cia-drugs By JAMES RISEN WASHINGTON -- Despite requests for information from Congress, the CIA repeatedly ignored or failed to investigate allegations of drug trafficking by the anti-Sandinista rebels of Nicaragua in the 1980s, according to a newly declassified internal report. In a blunt and often critical report, the CIA's inspector general determined that the agency "did not inform Congress of all allegations or information it received indicating that contra-related organizations or individuals were involved in drug trafficking." Beginning in 1986, the subject of contra drug trafficking became a focus for critics of the Reagan administration's policy toward Nicaragua who charged that the CIA was shielding drug smugglers to protect its anti-Communist covert action program in Nicaragua. That year Congress imposed a fund cutoff for any contra group that had members involved in drug trafficking. Despite that ban, the CIA failed to tell Congress about allegations it had received against at least eight individuals with contra ties. During the time the ban on funds was in effect, the CIA informed Congress only about drug charges against two other contra-related people. In addition, the agency failed to tell other executive branch agencies, including the Justice Department, about drug allegations against 11 contra-related individuals or entities. The report quotes many active and retired CIA officers who served in Central America as saying they either did not hear or did not believe allegations of drug trafficking involving the contra rebels, with whom they worked closely. It also makes clear that the agency did little or nothing to investigate most of the drug allegations that it heard about the contras and their supporters. In April 1987, the acting director of central intelligence, Robert Gates, wrote in a memorandum that it was "absolutely imperative that this agency and our operations in Central America avoid any kind of involvement with individuals or companies that are even suspected of involvement in narcotics trafficking." The CIA investigation that began almost a decade later, however, found no evidence that the memorandum was distributed to anyone other than Gates' deputy for operations, Clair George. The new study is the second volume of the CIA's internal investigation prompted by a 1996 series of articles in The San Jose Mercury-News, which claimed that a "dark alliance" between the CIA, the contras and drug traffickers had helped finance the contra war with millions of dollars in profits from drug smuggling. The series also alleged that this network was the first to introduce crack cocaine into South Central Los Angeles. The first volume of the CIA inspector general's report, issued in January, dealt primarily with the specific allegations raised by the Mercury-News series and dismissed the newspaper's central findings. But the second volume is the result of a broader inquiry into long-unresolved questions about the contra program and drug trafficking. In all, the inspector general's report found that the CIA had received allegations of drug involvement by 58 contras or others linked to the contra program. These included 14 pilots and two others tied to the contra program's CIA-backed air transportation operations. The report indicates that information linking the contras to drugs began to emerge almost as soon as the contras came into existence - and before it became publicly known that the CIA was supporting their effort to overthrow the Marxist-led government in Managua. In September 1981, as a small group of rebels was being formed from former soldiers in the National Guard of the deposed Nicaraguan dictator, Anastasio Somoza Debayle, a CIA informant reported that the leadership of the fledgling group had decided to smuggle drugs to the United States to support its operations. Eight months later, another report indicated that one prominent leader of the group, Justiniano Perez, was a close friend of a known trafficker. The agency's response also set something of a pattern. "No information has been found to indicate any action to follow up or corroborate the allegations," the report said. " Similarly, it said, it found no information that the CIA followed up on FBI information about the Perez matter. The omissions of information were often glaring. In 1986, for example, Alan Fiers, then chief of the CIA's Central American task force dealing with the contras, responded to questions raised by Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., about specific contra members and contra-related companies. According to the report, Fiers responded to Kerry's questions about a contra logistics coordinator named Felipe Vidal by providing a sheet of information about his convictions for illegal possession of firearms in the 1970s, but without any mention of Vidal's arrests and conviction for drug trafficking. The report said that in at least six instances, the CIA knew about allegations regarding individuals or organizations but that knowledge did not deter it from continuing to employ them. In some other cases, the agency decided the allegations were not substantiated. Copyright 1998 The New York Times Company
------------------------------------------------------------------- Parity For Mental Illness, Disparity For The Mental Patient (Psychiatrist Thomas Szasz writes in The Lancet, in Britain, that recent legislation in the United States mandating insurance parity for patients with medical illnesses and psychiatric illnesses is inconsistent with the disparity in their legal status. Patients with sarcoma are assumed to remain in possession of their mental faculties, but patients with schizophrenia are not. Medical patients are treated as contracting moral agents, while mental patients are commonly treated as if they are minors or unconscious, and are often institutionalized against their will and/or forced to take toxic medications. The Patient Self-Determination Act makes it mandatory for healthcare providers receiving Medicare or Medicaid payments to "inform patients of their existing rights under state law to refuse treatment and prepare advance directives." The problems that mental patients pose for themselves, their families, and society can be resolved if the familiar advance directive or "living will" is adapted to the circumstances of psychiatric patients and their carergivers.) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1998 21:08:23 -0800 From: email@example.com (MAPNews) To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: MN: UK: Lancet: Szasz: Parity For Mental Illness, Disparity For The Sender: email@example.com Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: Peter Webster (email@example.com) Pubdate: 10 Oct 1998 Source: Lancet, The (UK) Volume: 352, Number 9135 Pages: 1213-15 Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org Website: http://www.thelancet.com/ Copyright: Lancet, The (UK) Author: Thomas Szasz MD Department of ethics PARITY FOR MENTAL ILLNESS, DISPARITY FOR THE MENTAL PATIENT SUNY Health Science Center, 750 East Adams Street, Syracuse, NY 13210, USA (Prof T Szasz MD) The core concept of mental illness--to which the vast majority of psychiatrists and the public adhere--is that diseases of the mind are diseases of the brain; in other words, that mental diseases and brain diseases are the same kinds of diseases.1 It is now widely accepted that "the overwhelming weight of medical research has demonstrated that mental illnesses are biologically based".2 The equating of mental disease with brain disease, supported by the authority of a large body of neuroscience literature, is used to rationalise the drug treatment of mental illness and justify the demand for parity in insurance coverage for medical and mental disorders. Reflecting the influence of these ideas and their implications, on Sept 26, 1997, President Clinton signed the Mental Health Parity Act of 1996 (PL 104-204), which took effect on Jan 1, 1998). "This landmark law", according to the National Alliance for the Mentally Ill (NAMI), "begins the process of ending the long-held practice of providing less insurance coverage for mental illnesses, or brain disorders, than is provided for equally serious physical disorders". (See the NAMI website--http://www.nami.org ) Many states have enacted similar legislation.2 Congress enacted, 7 years earlier, the Patient Self-Determination Act, another important piece of legislation with potentially far-reaching implications for mental patients. It has apparently gone unnoticed that the rhetoric of parity in insurance status for patients with medical or mental illness is inconsistent with the reality of disparity in their legal status. This disparity is usually justified on the ground that medical diseases, unlike mental diseases, are unlikely to impair the patient's competence to elect or reject treatment. Patients with sarcoma are assumed to remain in possession of their mental faculties, but patients with schizophrenia are not. Thus, medical patients are treated as contracting moral agents, and medical hospitals and physicians are never accused of imprisoning them. Mental patients, however, are commonly treated as if they are minors or unconscious, and mental hospitals and psychiatrists are often accused of imprisoning them.3 Note that the truth or falsity of the claim that mental diseases are brain diseases is largely irrelevant to the disparity in legal status between the patient with psychiatric illness and the patient with neurological illness. Before World War II, when neurosyphilis was still common, most patients with paresis (general paralysis of the insane)-- unlike most patients with other neurological ailments, such as Parkinsonism and multiple sclerosis--were confined in mental hospitals against their will. There was a good reason for this policy. Patients with paresis, like other "insane" people, commonly exhibited "disordered" thoughts, feelings, and behaviours, whereas most patients with other brain diseases did not. In short, mental patients (the "mad" or "insane") were confined against their will primarily because they misbehaved, not because they were sick. This continues to be the case. The contention that confining people against their will is an accepted part of the mental hospital's social function is starkly illustrated by the 1997 Supreme Court ruling in Kansas v Leroy Hendricks (No 95-1649) upholding a law that "states have a right to use psychiatric hospitals to confine certain sex offenders once they have completed their prison terms, even if those offenders do not meet mental illness commitment criteria".4,5 Despite the characterisation of this ruling as an "abuse" of the mental health system by Psychiatric News, the American Psychiatric Association's official newspaper,6 traditional social-psychiatric custom leads directly to such abuses. As the diagnosis of bodily illness justifies a physician's admission of a willing patient to the hospital, so the diagnosis of mental illness justifies a judge's (and a psychiatrist's) admission of an unwilling patient to a mental hospital. Failure to acknowledge this fact precludes genuine reforms in psychiatric policy. The Patient Self-Determination Act makes it mandatory for healthcare providers receiving Medicare or Medicaid payments to "inform patients of their existing rights under state law to refuse treatment and prepare advance directives".7 The Act requires healthcare providers in hospitals and other healthcare settings: To develop written policies concerning advance directives; To ask all new patients whether they have prepared an advance directive and to include this information in the patient's chart; To give patients written materials describing the facility's policies on advance directives and the patient's right (under applicable state law) to prepare such a document; and To educate staff and the community about advance directives.8 The mandate of the Act reflects the US political commitment to the value of the patient's autonomy as an integral part of the right to personal liberty. Although nothing in the Act suggests that the term "patient" does not include those treated by psychiatrists, prevailing mental health practices clearly fail to comply with the mandates--for example, involuntary psychiatric hospitalisation, and involuntary drug treatment of mental patients living in psychiatric facilities as well as the community. The treatment of people without their consent, and even against their will, happens far more often with mental patients than with medical patients. Rare but dramatic dilemmas of involuntary treatment involving patients on life support, such as the much-publicised case of Nancy Cruzan,9 capture the interest of the public. Most people can imagine themselves on life support against their will. By contrast, routine cases of involuntary treatment--typically involving the admission to hospital of people who disturb the peace--appear uncontroversial and hold little interest for the public. Most people either cannot see themselves in such a predicament or believe that, in such a situation, medical judgment ought to over-ride the patient's choice. These reactions reflect the intuitive understanding, albeit unarticulated, experienced by most people who feel that there really is a difference between medical and mental disease. I hope that the increasing emphasis on patient responsibility and self-determination in medicine will have a knock-on effect on patient responsibility and self-determination in psychiatry. Indeed, I believe that the so-called medical model of mental illness holds out more promise for clarifying the mental patients' legal status than for understanding their malady. In any case, we have to confront the marked disparity in legal status between these two kinds of patients. The evidence that psychiatric practices fail to conform to the requirements of the Patient Self-Determination Act is so abundant that the assertion hardly requires documentation. A single example should suffice. Investigators studied about 350 admissions to three acute psychiatric inpatient units in Virginia. 45 of the patients tried to refuse treatment. None succeeded: "Psychiatrists exercised their discretion to promptly treat all patients who refused treatment. Nonetheless, these patients suffered more morbidity than compliant patients. This study suggests that the negative sequelae of an inhospital treatment refusal cannot be eliminated by rapid treatment".10 The investigators candidly acknowledge that "refusers were prescribed higher doses of antipsychotic medications than were compliant patients". Patients who refused treatment, according to this study, "had negative attitudes toward past, present, and future treatment at the time of admission"; it was felt that such attitudes may be "generated by prior coercive treatment". The dilemmas that mental patients pose for themselves, their families, and society can be resolved if the familiar advance directive or "living will" is adapted to the circumstances of psychiatric patients and their carers. I proposed such an advance psychiatric directive--or, as I called it, "psychiatric will"--in 1982, crafting it especially for the needs of mental patients who face the prospect of future involuntary treatment.11 The intent of the directive was to transcend the problems created by psychiatric crises or emergencies--situations in which the patients' involuntary treatment is justified by their being deemed dangerous to themselves or others. Modelled on the last will that comes into force after death, the psychiatric will becomes operative only after the person's legal status has undergone the change he or she anticipates. As the last will becomes effective only after the testator is officially declared dead, the psychiatric will would become effective only after the person was officially declared a mental patient (dangerous to himself or others). Executing such a document would be of special interest to individuals who have undergone an episode of involuntary psychiatric treatment; they would have first-hand experience of the interventions they might want to request or reject in the future, should they be deemed to require psychiatric care. Like the last will, the psychiatric will would be valid only if executed by people considered legally competent at the time of its signing. This criterion is met, by definition, by individuals who have been discharged from psychiatric hospitals, because they are deemed capable of living on their own. Generally, mental patients not declared legally incompetent are covered because, in the USA, adults are presumed to be competent until declared incompetent, just as defendants are presumed to be innocent until proven guilty. So far, the idea of a psychiatric will has aroused more interest in Europe, especially Germany, than it has in the USA. Some may object that if people who are committable by current criteria were left at liberty, because that is what they requested in their psychiatric will, they might harm themselves or others, imposing financial and personal costs on families, insurance companies, or the government. Although this is true, involuntary psychiatric interventions also entail significant financial and personal costs, and it is not at all clear which option would be the costliest in the long run. In any case, in Anglo-American political philosophy, there is not supposed to be a price on the freedom of the individual. As for the possibility of such people harming others, their psychiatric will deals with this contingency by requesting that their "treatment" consist of the punishment prescribed by law for their particular offence. Another objection, also stemming from the fear of the mental patient's dangerousness, might run like this. When a medically ill person--such as one with a progressive brain tumour--loses his "mind", it is reasonable to respect his advance request that he be given no further treatment since his choice harms only himself. However, when a mentally ill person, such as one with schizophrenia, loses his "mind", many people feel it is unreasonable to respect his advance request that he be given no further treatment because his choice may harm others as well. This misgiving is intrinsic to our concept of mental illness. We do not know, however, whether so-called mental patients would commit more or less violence against others if those who elect to be punished for legal transgression were to be "treated" by the legal sanctions they prefer rather than by the psychiatric sanctions they reject. Curiously, writers on advance directives rarely consider the situation of psychiatric patients; when they do consider it, it is to promote the patients' consent to treatment rather than to protect their right to refuse it. For example, a recent treatise by an attorney on the mental patient's right to refuse treatment makes no reference to the Patient Self-Determination Act or to the psychiatric will. The attorney takes the view that when the psychiatrist's decision is to treat, the patient's refusal is suspect: "When the objection is to a therapeutic intervention--hospitalization or conventional treatment--recommended by the patient's therapists, there also may be reason to at least question whether the refusal of such treatment might be antitherapeutic and inconsistent with their welfare".12 He goes on to say that the use of such instruments by mental patients may be "therapeutically advantageous". Such prejudgment destroys the usefulness of the advance directive as a device for protecting the mental patient's right to self-determination. In psychiatry, unlike in other medical specialties, tradition sanctions the use of involuntary treatment. Hence, the principal use of advanced directives in psychiatry must be to help patients to avoid unwanted interventions. In a setting where enlightened voices claim that patients diagnosed as mentally ill ought to be treated like patients diagnosed as medically ill, and where laws guarantee "parity" with respect to insurance coverage, differential treatment of the two groups with respect to their right to refuse treatment is particularly troubling. We must beware lest these latest efforts at psychiatric reform result in greater parity between psychiatric and non-psychiatric physicians, but greater disparity between psychiatric and non-psychiatric patients. Adoption of an advance mental-health directive or psychiatric will would help patients, physicians, and lawyers alike to cut psychiatry's Gordian knot--namely, the conflation of (mental) illness and (legal) incompetence. The Patient Self-Determination Act requires that the law afford the same rights to accept or reject treatment to the competent medical patient and to the competent (ex)mental patient. The psychiatric will, supported by the proper application of the Act to psychiatry, would thus protect mental patients from involuntary treatment in the event that, at some future time, they are deemed to be in need of such treatment, but, because of (mental) illness, are thought to be unable to make sound decisions about their own welfare. (If such persons break the law, they ought to be charged with a crime and tried for it; if not, they ought to be left alone.) Psychiatric practice would then conform to the requirements of the Act, and Americans, as patients as well as citizens, would be guaranteed equal protection under the law. I thank Alice Michtom and Roger Yanow for their help in the preparation of this paper. References 1 Szasz T. The meaning of mind: language, morality, and neuroscience. Westport, CT: Praeger, 1996: 115-38. 2 Anon. Campaign moves Congress and the nation forward. Campaign Spotlight: The Quarterly NAMI Review 1997; 1: 2. 3 Associated Press. Psychiatric hospital accused of holding patients captive in Fla. Arizona Republic, Dec 14, 1996: A9. 4 Anon. Excerpts from opinions on status of sex offenders. New York Times, June 24, 1997: B11. 5 Collins J. Throwing away the key. Time, July 7, 1997: 29. 6 Hausman K. Court ruling opens door to abuse of mental health system. Psychiatric News 1997; 32: 1. 7 Editorial. The Patient Self-Determination Act. JAMA 1991; 266: 410-12. 8 Greco PJ, Schulman KA, Lavizzo-Mourey R, Hansen-Flaschen J. The Patient Self-Determination Act and the Future of Advance Directives, Ann Intern Med 1991; 115: 639-43. 9 Cruzan v Director, Missouri Department of Health, 110 S Ct 2841, 1990. 10 Kasper JA, Hoge SK, Feucht-Haviar T, Cortina J, Cohen B. Prospective study of patients' refusal of antipsychotic medication under a physician discretion review procedure. Am J Psychiatry 1997; 154: 483-89. 11 Szasz T. The psychiatric will: a new mechanism for protecting persons against 'psychosis' and psychiatry. Am Psychol 1982; 37: 762-70. 12 Winick BJ. The right to refuse mental health treatment. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 1997: 398-99. [Visit The Thomas S. Szasz Cybercenter for Liberty and Responsibility at http://rdz.acor.org/szasz]
------------------------------------------------------------------- Controlled Heroin Distribution Given The Nod (An Associated Press story in The Australian says Switzerland's experimental heroin maintenance program is set to be extended after Swiss lawmakers yesterday gave the go-ahead for doctors to prescribe heroin to long-term addicts on a permanent basis.) Subj: Switzerland: Controlled Heroin Distribution Given The Nod URL: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v98.n886.a11.html Pubdate: 10 Oct 1998 Source: Australian, The (Australia) Contact: email@example.com Website: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/ Author: Associated Press CONTROLLED HEROIN DISTRIBUTION GIVEN THE NOD SWITZERLAND'S experimental drug-distribution program is set to be extended after Swiss lawmakers yesterday gave the go-ahead for doctors to prescribe heroin to long-term addicts on a permanent basis. The upper house of parliament approved the measure by 30 votes to four, following approval by the lower house the previous day. The move is expected to increase from 800 to some 2000 or more the number of addicts who can receive controlled distribution. It comes into effect Saturday. Until now, the daily supply of nominally priced heroin to addicts who had rejected all forms of therapy was on an experimental basis. Switzerland's experiment with drug distribution began in 1994 with the first government-authorised distribution of heroin, morphine and methadone. A three-year study last year said the project had slashed crime, misery and death associated with the hard-core drug scene. In September 1997, voters overwhelmingly endorsed the Government's liberal drug policies, including the distribution program. In a referendum, nearly 71 per cent threw out a proposal which would have clamped down on drugs use. Immediately after the vote, the health ministry announced plans to put State provision of heroin to long-term addicts on a permanent legal footing. Interior Minister Ruth Dreifuss told lawmakers that passing the measure to extend the program could help save lives. Some 150 addicts are on the waiting list, she said. -------------------------------------------------------------------
The articles posted here are generally copyrighted by the source publications. They are reproduced here for educational purposes under the Fair Use Doctrine (17 U.S.C., section 107). NORML is a 501 (c)(3) non-profit educational organization. The views of the authors and/or source publications are not necessarily those of NORML. The articles and information included here are not for sale or resale.
Comments, questions and suggestions.Reporters and researchers are welcome at the world's largest online library of drug-policy information, sponsored by the Drug Reform Coordination Network at: http://www.druglibrary.org/
Next day's news
Previous day's news
to the 1998 Daily News index for October 8-14
to the Portland NORML news archive directory
to 1998 Daily News index (long)
This URL: http://www.pdxnorml.org/981010.html