Jump to content

The Legislation of Morality

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Legislation of Morality is a 1970 book by sociologist Troy Duster that explored the relationship of law and morality in the context of drug policy in the United States. It is noted for its historical analysis of the effects of the Harrison Narcotics Tax Act (1914) and study of the sociology of deviance.

Historical analysis

[edit]

According to Duster, consumption of household remedies and pharmaceutical concoctions containing morphine was mostly associated with upper and middle-class women. The physical dependence caused by opiates was easily managed with tonics and syrups purchased directly from pharmacies. Opiate addiction was considered a physical health problem without significant moral implications. [1][2] It's likely many who became addicted did not know what the syrups and concoctions contained because there were no labelling requirements until the Pure Food and Drug Act (1906).[3]

After the Harrison Narcotics Tax Act (1914) was passed unregistered persons (non-distributors) could only buy products containing opiates with a prescription. Almost overnight the Harrison Narcotics Tax Act (1914) turned opiate use into a crime.[2] Hundreds of thousands of persons became dependant on physicians to prescribe the drug for them.[4] The Supreme Court in Webb v. United States (1919) permitted the criminal prosecution of physicians who prescribed narcotics for the maintenance of an existing physical addiction.[5][2]

Duster asserts that until 1914 most drug users were middle-aged white women.[6][7] By 1920 medical journals were claiming that a majority of drug addicts were from the "unrespectable" parts of society.[6] He says this vulnerable group was the target of the legislative changes noting that "the law drastically altered conditions that produced the shifts in these categories".[8][9]

Sociological analysis

[edit]
Main article: Sociology of deviance

Duster wrote that empirical and sociological studies of the national drug problem allowed observations to be made about the relationship between drug laws and morality:[10]

More than any other form of deviance, the history of drug use contains and abundance of material on both questions of legislation and morality, and of the relationship between them.

He is among a group of sociologists including Alfred R. Lindesmith, Joseph Gusfield, Howard S. Becker, Donald Dickson and Charles E. Reasons who studied variations of the public image of drug users that ideologically guided the development of policies to define and control deviance.[11] Reasons noted that "little systematic investigation has been made of the nature and effect of images of drugs and users in the mass media". He says that Duster and other scholars have presented a general discussion about "myths concerning the nature and effects of drugs" without systematic investigation of the popular image of the "dope fiend" as an ideological construct.[12] James D. Orcutt says:[11]

Previous macro sociological studies of the politics of drugs and alcohol have focused on the role of ideological factors in the formation of social policies toward deviance (Becker; Dickson; Duster; Gusfield, a,b). This line of inquiry has been useful in understanding broad patterns of change and conflict in the definition and control of deviance, but less well-equipped to deal with problems of interpersonal perception and labeling of deviants by social audiences.

Duster concluded it was easier for middle America to direct its moral hostility "toward a young, lower-class Negro male than toward a middle-aged white female".[13] Harold Finestone says it is "an important assumption of the author's position that middle-class people do not tend to stigmatize behavior common in their own class".[14]

Sociologists Jennifer Friedman and Marisa Alicea note that the masculinized public image of the "willful, hedonistic, and deceitful" addict observed by Duster is the dominant public image of heroin users. They say that women engaging in the now defeminized act of opiate use may view it as an act of empowerment or rebellion against traditional images of femininity.[15]

Park says that Duster shows how the "labeling" of deviants works as a process in institutional settings suggesting that "a moral climate can be created by men who are at the center of power" but "fails to answer the question of why certain behaviors are considered problems".[16] Janet Hankin said Duster's "analysis of the consequences of this typification and of the permanence of the stigma upon the addicts self-image seems to lack impact".[17]

Effectiveness of legislation

[edit]

Duster explores whether morality can be effectively legislated. He concludes that attempts to change the moral order by legislation are more effective when there are visible and measurable properties like a complaining victim or plaintiff and a public behavior that can be controlled.[18][9]

References

[edit]
  1. ^ Hicks 1973, p. 314.
  2. ^ a b c Henkin 1971, p. 263.
  3. ^ Duster 1970, p. 7.
  4. ^ Duster 1979, p. 14-5.
  5. ^ Hicks 1973, p. 315.
  6. ^ a b Hagan 1980, p. 614.
  7. ^ Tate & Randolph 2019, p. 231.
  8. ^ Duster 1970, p. 21.
  9. ^ a b Park 1971, p. 777.
  10. ^ Harris 2016, p. 70.
  11. ^ a b Orcutt 1976, p. 420-34.
  12. ^ Reasons 1976, p. 134.
  13. ^ Brownstein & Korgen 2017, p. 420.
  14. ^ Finestone 1971, p. 207.
  15. ^ Friedman, Alicea & 1995, p. 437.
  16. ^ Park 1971, p. 778.
  17. ^ Hankin 1971, p. 263.
  18. ^ Duster 1970, p. 27.

Sources

[edit]
  • Brownstein, Henry H. (2017). "Sociological Perspectives on Illicit Involvement with Drugs". In Korgen, Kathleen Odell (ed.). The Cambridge Handbook of Sociology. Cambridge University Press.
  • Duster, Troy (1970). The Legislation of Morality: Law, Drugs, and Moral Judgment. New York: Free Press. ISBN 978-0-02-908680-3.
  • Finestone, Harold (1972). "Review". The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. 400.
  • Friedman, Jennifer; Alicea, Marisa (1995). "Women and Heroin: The Path of Resistance and Its Consequences". Gender and Society. 9 (4).
  • Kennedy, Ian (2023). The Unmasking of Medicine: A Searching Look at Healthcare Today. Taylor & Francis. ISBN 9781003822950.
  • Hagan, John (1980). "The Legislation of Crime and Delinquency: A Review of Theory Method and Research". Law & Society Review. 14 (3).
  • Harris, Phil (2016). An Introduction to Law. Cambridge University Press.
  • Henkin, Janet (1971). "Book Reviews". Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology. 62 (2): 263.
  • Hicks, Joe H. (1973). "Review". Journal of Church and State. 15 (2).
  • Orcutt, James D. (1976). "Ideological Variations in the Structure of Deviant Types: A Multivariate Comparison of Alcoholism and Heroin Addiction". Social Forces. 55 (2).
  • Park, Peter (1971). "Review". American Journal of Sociology. 76 (4).
  • Reasons, Charles E. (1976). "Images of Crime and the Criminal: The Dope Fiend Mythology". Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency. 13 (2).
  • Tate, Gayle; Randolph, Lewis A. (2019). The Black Urban Community: From Dusk Till Dawn. Palgrave Macmillan.
[edit]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Legislation_of_Morality&oldid=1242433132"