It is undoubtedly certain that drug control specifically that of illegal substances, plays an important role in each countries governmental infrastructure. The use and abuse of illicit substances can have a great effect on a countries people and it is therefore important for these drugs to be regulated and controlled. While countries have varied views and levels of strictness in their policy, there is a general consensus that the most dangerous drugs should be outlawed and that individuals in their possession should be prosecuted and/or treated for addiction. In particular, the government policies on illegal drugs in Sweden and Mexico have been shaped over time and currently reflect the countries concerns for the dangers of illicit substances.
[...] From the late 1600's well into the 1900's the state of medical profession regarding mental health paved an avenue for the eventual, more humane treatment of the mentally ill and a detachment from the archaic and religiously based doctrine of assessing illness. Nevertheless, this progress was not achieved without the accompaniment of often fatal, trial and error treatment. Improvement sufficed only to what the political, religious, linguistic, and societal norms allowed, thus greatly impeded by the subjectivity of those in power: the state under the watchful eye of the clergy. [...]
[...] a sign of is indicative of the extent to which people believed that natural and the moral law were moral law being the law of the church. (12). The final passage of Trosse's experience reveals, on a subconscious level, just how severe is his conviction that faith in God and illness are inherently one: If I did put on my Cloths, and ty'd them about me, then I thought I bound my self to the Devil: If I unloos'd, and put them off, then I fancy'd I unloos'd my self from God. [...]
[...] Even today, authority has a stranglehold on what constitutes morality, and up until the late 1900's the idea that one got sick either because they deserved it or it was a test from God of one's faith was a familiar trope. Madness was seen as punishment for one's sins and immoral lifestyle as enforced by the upper class. By implementing police who dictated who was mad and who was sane, authority was inherited to the rich who were outside the oppressiveness of this semi-jurisdiction. [...]
[...] Before falling to sleep Davis approaches Cruden telling him, “that seeing he was in a Madhouse, he must allow himself to be used as a Madman, and submit” to the supervision of the director. (53). Considering Cruden's story of his stay in Bethel- Green asylum, it's easy to understand how one, when relentlessly subjected to charges of insanity could potentially be driven to madness. The extreme interest conjured by Cruden's madness manifested in his neighbors (they attack him in the beginning), Wightman, and the doctors, impresses the idea of madness as a spectacle. [...]
APA Style reference
For your bibliographyOnline reading
with our online readerContent validated
by our reading committee
