Review of the following:  THOMAS SZASZ, OUR RIGHT TO DRUGS: THE CASE FOR A FREE MARKET. (Praeger 1992) [164 pp.] Notes, bibliography, name index, notes, preface, subject index. LC: 91-30378; ISBN: 0-275-94216-3. [Cloth $19.95. P.O. Box 5007, Westwood CT 06881-9990.

Frizzell, Jennifer L.

English

UNH Scholars' Repository

RISK: Health, Safety & Environment (1990-2002)Volume 3Number 3 RISK: Issues in Health & Safety Article 16June 1992Book ReviewJennifer L. FrizzellFollow this and additional works at: https://scholars.unh.edu/riskPart of the Pharmaceutical Preparations Commons, Pharmacy Administration, Policy andRegulation Commons, and the Substance Abuse and Addiction CommonsThis Book Review is brought to you for free and open access by the University of New Hampshire – School of Law at University of New HampshireScholars' Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in RISK: Health, Safety & Environment (1990-2002) by an authorized editor of University ofNew Hampshire Scholars' Repository. For more information, please contact ellen.phillips@law.unh.edu.Repository CitationJennifer L. Frizzell, Book Review, 3 RISK 281 (1992).Book ReviewErratumThe citation for this review is 3 RISK 259 (1992) in most commercial databases.This book review is available in RISK: Health, Safety & Environment (1990-2002): https://scholars.unh.edu/risk/vol3/iss3/16Book Reviews 281THOMAS SZASZ, OUR RIGHT TO DRUGS: THE CASE FOR AFREE MARKET. (Praeger 1992) [164 pp.] Notes, bibliography, name index,notes, preface, subject index. LC: 91-30378; ISBN: 0-275-94216-3. [Cloth $19.95.P.O. Box 5007, Westwood CT 06881-9990.]In his book, Dr. Szasz, Professor Emeritus of Psychiatry at SUNYHealth Science Center, Syracuse, and prolific spokesperson for civilliberties, traces the historical and philosophical roots of current drugpolicies in the U.S. In doing so, he attempts to explain why so manyinterest groups have lobbied over the past century for the closeregulation of medicinals and the prohibition of recreational drugs.Presenting fundamental arguments supporting individual rights, e.g., togrow and consume drugs for self-healing or other purposes, he also istrue to his title in advocating the repeal and restructuring of much of thecomprehensive set of laws governing virtually all drug use.From the founding of the American Colonies until theCivil War, marijuana was an important cash crop.... Thecolonists, including George Washington grew... "hemp"....[HIow many people know that hemp, coca, and opiumpoppy are ordinary plants, understand how they becametransformed into dreaded "dangerous drugs," and realize thatin losing our rights to them we have surrendered some ofour most basic property rights?Thus Szasz begins1 by asking questions that ought be asked whenwe face crises with regard to both health care and a "War on Drugs." Hefinishes by warning that our rights may further diminish if we allowpaternalism to expand. For example, Szasz observes that, rather thancustomers always being right, with regard to prescription drugs, it is thedoctor who is always right. More particularly, with regard to psychiatricdrugs, "'The Patient is always wrong': The psychiatrist decides whatdrug the mental patient 'needs' and compels him to consume it, byforce, if necessary." 2 Yet, as Szasz later notes, even doctors have givenup important rights. "Physicians cannot prescribe for pain as they usedto.... But they have become so accustomed to state control of drugs that1 Introduction, at xiii.2 At 18.3 RISK -Issues in Health & Safety 259 [Summer 1992]they never lay the blame.., where it belongs... ."3 Thus, on the onehand, physicians gain because limits on over-the-counter medicineshelps to assure them a never-ending stream of patients, many capable ofself diagnosis and treatment; on the other hand, they lose because theirability to prescribe is compromised by "fear of being apprehended byagents of the American drug-police state....,4In a democratic society, we recognize, indeed value, individualresponsibility. Inherent in freedom of choice is the ability to make thewrong choice and to suffer the consequences. Thus, Szasz clearlyfavors the right of citizens, e.g., to grow and consume marijuana ontheir privately owned property. But what of those who supply otherconsumers? He suggests that we do not, e.g., blame the obesity of fatpersons on people who sell them food. Why then do we blame thehabits of adult drug users/addicts on those who sell drugs?Szasz suggests that paternalistic-prohibitory drug laws are acceptedby citizens as a result of the distribution of disinformation about drugsand human responsibility. He has attempted to tell the other side. Ifnothing else, it will help us, as citizens, to evaluate what we are told andto consider carefully the rights we surrender.Jennifer L. Frizzellt3 At 127.4 At 128.t Ms. Frizzell received her B.A. (Political Science) from the University of NewHampshire and has federal administrative and regulatory experience in Washington,DC. She is now completing her legal studies at Franklin Pierce Law Center.

Book Review

https://scholars.unh.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1104&context=risk

Book Review

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

UNH Scholars' Repository