english 123 3.4 Assignment.docx

3.4 Annotating Your Sources Michelle Barnes Southern New Hampshire University ENG 123, English Composition II Professor Ashley Carranza November 12, 2023

1. Meeting people where they are: implementing hospital-based substance use harm reduction. Perera, Rachel Stephan, Louise Appa, Ayesha et al. Harm Reduction Journal, 19(1) 10.1186/s12954-022-00594-9 The source is a journal article that describes how hospital-based harm reduction programs can help people who use drugs and reduce the harms associated with substance use. The article provides evidence from a case study of a harm reduction program in a hospital in San Francisco, California, that offers services such as overdose prevention, naloxone distribution, syringe access, wound care, and linkage to treatment. The article supports the argument that harm reduction is an effective and compassionate approach to address the health and social needs of people who use drugs, and that hospitals can play a key role in implementing such programs. The source is credible because it meets the criteria of the C.R.A.A.P.O. test. It is current, as it was published in 2022. It is relevant, as it relates to the topic of substance use and harm reduction. It is authoritative, as it is written by experts from different institutions. It is accurate, as it is based on evidence-based data and research. It is purposeful, as it aims to inform and advocate for harm reduction practices. The source supports the key point that harm reduction programs can improve the health outcomes and quality of life of people who use drugs. It shows how the program reduced the rates of overdose, infection, and hospitalization among the participants, and how it increased their access to treatment and social services. It also mentions the opposing viewpoint that harm reduction programs can enable or encourage drug use. It addresses this concern by explaining

how the program does not promote or condone drug use, but rather respects the autonomy and dignity of the participants and provides them with options and support to reduce their risks. 2. Harm Reduction Is the Best Approach When Addicts Will Not Quit Using Tim Morrison Interventions , edited by Susan Hunnicutt, Greenhaven Press The source is an article by Tim Morrison that argues that harm reduction is the best approach when addicts will not quit using. The article provides examples of harm reduction programs, such as needle exchange, safe injection sites, and medication-assisted treatment, and explains how they can reduce the risks of overdose, infection, and crime. The article also addresses some common objections to harm reduction, such as enabling addiction, discouraging abstinence, and wasting resources. The article supports my argument that harm reduction is a more effective and humane way to deal with addiction than criminalization or moralization. The source is credible because it is written by a journalist who has covered addiction issues for several years, and it is published in a reputable book series that provides multiple perspectives on controversial topics. The source also cites evidence from scientific studies, government reports, and expert opinions to support its claims. The source supports my key point that harm reduction can save lives and improve public health by showing the benefits and challenges of different harm reduction strategies.

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

3. Andersen D, Järvinen M. Harm Reduction – Ideals and Paradoxes. Nordic Studies on Alcohol and Drugs. 2007;24(3):235-252. doi:10.1177/145507250702400301 The source is an article that discusses the concept of harm reduction, which is a public health approach that aims to reduce the negative consequences of drug use without necessarily eliminating drug use itself. The article examines the ideals and paradoxes of harm reduction, such as its pragmatic and humanistic values, its acceptance of drug users as they are, and its potential to challenge or reinforce the dominant drug policies and discourses. The article also analyzes the different perspectives and criticisms of harm reduction from various stakeholders, such as drug users, professionals, politicians, and researchers. The source is credible because it meets the criteria of the C.R.A.A.P.O. test. It is current, as it was published in 2007 and reflects the recent developments and debates on harm reduction. It is relevant, as it provides a comprehensive and critical overview of harm reduction that can inform my argument. It is authoritative, as it is written by two experts in the field of drug policy and addiction studies, who have published several peer-reviewed articles and books on the topic. It is accurate, as it is based on empirical evidence and theoretical analysis and acknowledges the limitations and controversies of harm reduction. It is purposeful, as it aims to contribute to the academic and public discussion on harm reduction. The source also acknowledges some of the common arguments against harm reduction, such as that it encourages or condones drug use, that it undermines personal responsibility or morality, or that it conflicts with the international drug conventions.