PUBH632: Ministerial Briefing Note on Injecting Centers Policy

This briefing note, prepared for the Minister of Health and Justice, analyzes the proposed policy of establishing additional injecting centers to address rising drug addiction rates among youths. The note highlights the need for rehabilitation centers, their positive impacts on individuals and communities, and discusses the social, economic, and financial implications of the policy. It presents three policy options: expanding existing centers, sharing costs between the government and society, and hiring qualified health practitioners. The advantages and disadvantages of each option are considered, along with recommendations for the Minister's approval, emphasizing the importance of addressing the issue through a multi-faceted approach that considers both financial and social factors. The document uses references to support its claims.

Running head: PUBLIC HEALTH LAW AND POLICY 1
Public health law and policy
Name
Institution

PUBLIC HEALTH LAW AND POLICY 2
TO MINISTER FOR HEALTH-FOR ACTION
FROM POLICY ANALYST
DATE 29TH SEPTEMBER 2019
SUBJECT STARTING UP ADDITIONAL INJECTING
CENTERS
1. Purpose of the note: The purpose of this note is to brief the minister of health and justice
on the proposed policy that is starting up additional injecting centers where drug addicts
will be rehabilitated.
Background information
2. The content of the briefing note presented to the ministry of health and justice is about
the policy change for starting up additional injecting centers within the society. The note
further addresses the need for starting up additional injecting centers in the community.
The need addressed by the note on the proposed policy is to help curb the rising cases of
drug addiction among the youths (Atun, et al., 2015).
3. Injecting centers are meant to provide medical service and a safe environment for drug
addicts in the society. These centers are known as the rehabilitation centers for the
addicted youths since they offer counselling and other services which will help them to
refrain from abusing drugs. These centers are beneficial to the community and the
government since they help to curb the rising cases of drug abuse and addiction among
the youth population (Ocloo & Matthews, 2016).

PUBLIC HEALTH LAW AND POLICY 3
4. Following the rising need for rehabilitation program for the drug addicts in the society,
members of the public have supported the movement of rehabilitation program within the
injecting centers to curb the rising case of drug abuse in the society thus ensuring sober
and healthy members of the society. Injecting centers has positively impacted the lives of
the youths who have been through the program as they have become productive members
of society. Security and immorality issues among the youths and addicted individuals in
the community has been declining since the start of the program as many of the addicted
members are being admitted to injecting centers for rehabilitation (World Health
Organization, 2015).
Issue
5. The policy of starting up additional injecting centers in different communities within the
country have imposed social, economic and financial impacts to the members of the
societies and the ministry of health and justice. The above-mentioned issues related to the
proposed policy are discussed in the context below.
6. Starting up an additional injecting center in various communities has positively impact
the lives and wellbeing of the society. Through rehabilitation of the drug-addicted youths,
ethical practices and codes in a community will be adhered to since most youths who
were involved in immoral actions like drug abuse and other criminal activities will be
rehabilitated thus improving the social being within the society (Reeves, McKee &
Stuckler, 2015).
7. Under the financial analysis of the proposed health policy that is starting up additional
injection centers for rehabilitating the drug addicts within the society, the project will
require a huge amount of capital to start-up and manage. Therefore, the government

PUBLIC HEALTH LAW AND POLICY 4
through the ministry of health and justice should come in to assist the society in building
such centers (Degeling, Carter & Rychetnik, 2015).
8. The cost involved in the proposed policy are building cost and operational cost. Such
centers will be managed by qualified personnel, therefore they should be paid for their
services offered to the society. Such costs are huge to be incurred by society alone and
therefore, there is a need for government intervention (MacCarthy, Reisner, Nunn, Perez-
Brumer & Operario, 2015).
9. Other related costs involves the cost of buying drugs to help the addicts in lowering their
urge for the drugs as some of them are deeply addicted to drugs and cannot survive
without them. To deal with such cases, there is a need for the drugs which are more
costly to the society to raise by their own hence they call for the government assistance
(Landrigan & Benbrook, 2015).
10. The proposed health policy of starting up an additional injecting center for the drug-
addicted people is culturally accepted and supported by individuals from different
communities since rehabilitation program will help to bring back ‘the lost young
generation' to the accepted norms and cultural practices of their community (Ioannidis,
2015).
11. Different communities are for the proposed health policy by offering their support to the
management of the injecting centers through charity activities like cleaning activities and
financial support through fundraising programs (Sinnenberg, et al., 2017).

PUBLIC HEALTH LAW AND POLICY 5
Policy options
Option 1
12. The first option to be considered by the ministry of health and justice regarding the
proposed policy of starting up additional injecting centers is to expand the existing
centers in terms of space and infrastructures to save on the cost of building new injecting
centers. This option will be beneficial to the community as it will take less time to expand
the existing centers as compared to building new injecting centers (Conklin, Morris &
Nolte, 2015).
Option 2
13. The government through the ministry of health and justice can resort to incur
management cost while society to incur the cost of building additional centers. This
option will be favorable to the society and the ministry since they will share the cost
associated with the proposed health policy.
Option 3
14. The ministry of health and justice should consider hiring qualified health practitioners in
the existing injecting centers to meet the need of the growing population within injecting
centers.

PUBLIC HEALTH LAW AND POLICY 6
Advantages
a) aid in rehabilitating drug addicts within the community
b) Improves the social welfare within the society as the drug addicts youths are
rehabilitated to productive members of the society.
Disadvantages
a) High cost of starting up new injecting centers.
b) Lack of qualified personnel to run the injecting centers.
Recommendations
a) The ministry of health and justice should consider the proposed health policy of starting
up additional injecting centers.
b) The ministry should consider the three policy option for starting up additional inject ting
centers.
c) The ministry should consider sharing the cost of starting up additional, centers with the
society by either incurring management cost or building cost.
That the minister approve. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Prepared by Policy analyst
Approved by Secretary

PUBLIC HEALTH LAW AND POLICY 7
References
Atun, R., De Andrade, L. O. M., Almeida, G., Cotlear, D., Dmytraczenko, T., Frenz, P., ... & De
Paula, J. B. (2015). Health-system reform and universal health coverage in Latin America.
The Lancet, 385(9974), 1230-1247.
Conklin, A., Morris, Z., & Nolte, E. (2015). What is the evidence base for public involvement in
health‐care policy?: results of a systematic scoping review. Health Expectations, 18(2), 153-
165.
Degeling, C., Carter, S. M., & Rychetnik, L. (2015). Which public and why deliberate?–A
scoping review of public deliberation in public health and health policy research. Social
Science & Medicine, 131, 114-121.
Ioannidis, J. P. (2015). Stealth research: is biomedical innovation happening outside the peer-
reviewed literature?. Jama, 313(7), 663-664.
Landrigan, P. J., & Benbrook, C. (2015). GMOs, herbicides, and public health. New England
Journal of Medicine, 373(8), 693-695.
MacCarthy, S., Reisner, S. L., Nunn, A., Perez-Brumer, A., & Operario, D. (2015). The time is
now: attention increases to transgender health in the United States but scientific knowledge
gaps remain. LGBT health, 2(4), 287-291.
Ocloo, J., & Matthews, R. (2016). From tokenism to empowerment: progressing patient and
public involvement in healthcare improvement. BMJ Qual Saf, 25(8), 626-632.
Reeves, A., McKee, M., & Stuckler, D. (2015). The attack on universal health coverage in
Europe: recession, austerity and unmet needs. The European Journal of Public Health,
25(3), 364-365.

PUBLIC HEALTH LAW AND POLICY 8
Sinnenberg, L., Buttenheim, A. M., Padrez, K., Mancheno, C., Ungar, L., & Merchant, R. M.
(2017). Twitter as a tool for health research: a systematic review. American journal of
public health, 107(1), e1-e8.
World Health Organization. (2015). World report on ageing and health. World Health
Organization.