Making addicts: critical reflections on agency and responsibility from lawyers and decision makers

References

• Alcoff, L. (2018). Rape and resistance. Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders DSM-5. Washington: American Psychiatric Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bacchi, C. (2009). Analysing policy: What is the problem represented to be? Pearson.
   Google Scholar
• Barad, K. (2007). Meeting the universe halfway: Quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Brook, H., & Stringer, R. (2005). Users, using, used: A beginner’s guide to deconstructing drugs discourse. International Journal of Drug Policy, 16(5), 316–325. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2005.05.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brownmiller, S. (1975). Against our will: Men, women and rape. Simon and Schuster.
   Google Scholar
• Bunn, R. (2019). Conceptualising addiction as disability in discrimination law: A situated comparison. Contemporary Drug Problems, 46(1), 58–77. https://doi.org/10.1177/0091450918819519
   Google Scholar
• Burt, M. (1980). Cultural myths and support for rape. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38(2), 217–230. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.38.2.217
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Butler, J. (1990). Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Butler, J. (1993). Bodies that matter: On the discursive limits of ‘sex’. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Campbell, N. (2010). Toward a critical neuroscience of ‘addiction’. BioSocieties, 5(1), 89–104.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carter, A., Mathews, R., Bell, S., Lucke, J., & Hall, W. (2014). Control and responsibility in addicted individuals: What do addiction neuroscientists and clinicians think? Neuroethics, 7(2), 205–214. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12152-013-9196-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Courtwright, D. (2010). The NIDA brain disease paradigm: History, resistance and spinoffs. BioSocieties, 5(1), 137–147. https://doi.org/10.1057/biosoc.2009.3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Department of Human Services (2003). Episode of care review. Drugs Policy & Services Branch. http://docs.health.vic.gov.au/docs/doc/E5080F7ABF9549E0CA25789B00089C58/$FILE/eoc-review03.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Duff, C. (2013). The social life of drugs. The International Journal on Drug Policy, 24(3), 167–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2012.12.009
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duff, C. (2016). Assemblages, territories, contexts. The International Journal on Drug Policy, 33, 15–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2015.10.003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Farrugia, A. (2017). Gender, reputation and regret: The ontological politics of Australian drug education. Gender and Education, 29(3), 281–298. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540253.2016.1156655
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flacks, S. (2021). Law, drugs and the politics of childhood. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Fomiatti, R., Moore, D., & Fraser, S. (2019). The improvable self: Enacting model citizenship and sociality in research on ‘new recovery’. Addiction Research and Theory, 27(6), 527–538.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fraser, S. (2015). A thousand contradictory ways: Addiction, neuroscience and expert autobiography. Contemporary Drug Problems, 42(1), 38–59. https://doi.org/10.1177/0091450915570308
   Google Scholar
• Fraser, S. (2016). Articulating addiction in alcohol and other drug policy: A multiverse of habits. The International Journal on Drug Policy, 31, 6–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2015.10.014
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fraser, S., & Seear, K. (2011). Making disease, making citizens: The politics of hepatitis C. Ashgate.
   Google Scholar
• Fraser, S., & Valentine, k. (2008). Substance and substitution: Methadone subjects in liberal societies. Palgrave.
   Google Scholar
• Fraser, S., & Moore, D. (eds.). (2011). The Drug Effect: Health Crime and Society. Melbourne: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fraser, S., Moore, D., & Keane, H. (2014). Habits: Remaking addiction. Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Heim, D. (2014). Addiction: Not just brain malfunction. Nature, 507(7490), 40. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1038/507040e
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karasaki, M., Fraser, S., Moore, D., & Dietze, P. (2013). The place of volition in addiction: Differing approaches and their implications for policy and service provision. Drug and Alcohol Review, 32(2), 195–204. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1465-3362.2012.00501.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keane, H. (2002). What’s wrong with addiction? Melbourne University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Mol, A. (2002). The body multiple: Ontology in medical practice. Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Moore, D., & Fraser, S. (2013). Producing the ‘problem’ of addiction in drug treatment. Qualitative Health Research, 23(7), 916–923.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reinarman, C. (2011). Cannabis in culture and legal limbo: Criminalisation, legalization and the mixed blessing of medicalization in the USA. In S. Fraser & D. Moore (Eds.), The drug effect: Health, crime and society (pp. 171–188). Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Room, R. (2003). The cultural framing of addiction. Janus Head, 6(2), 221–234. https://doi.org/10.5840/jh2003628
   Google Scholar
• Savic, M., Dilkes-Frayne, E., Carter, A., Kokanovic, R., Manning, V., Rodda, S. N., & Lubman, D. I. (2018). Making multiple ‘online counsellings’ through policy practice: An evidence-making intervention approach. The International Journal on Drug Policy, 53, 73–82.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seddon, T. (2007). Drugs and freedom. Addiction Research & Theory, 15(4), 333–342. https://doi.org/10.1080/16066350701350262
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sedgwick, E. (1993). Epidemics of the will. In E. Sedgwick (Ed.), Tendencies (pp. 130–142). Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Seear, K., & Fraser, S. (2016). Addiction veridiction: Gendering agency in legal mobilisations of addiction discourse. Griffith Law Review, 25(1), 13–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/10383441.2016.1164654
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seear, K. (2015). Making addiction, making gender: A feminist performativity analysis of Kakavas v Crown Melbourne Limited. Australian Feminist Law Journal, 41(1), 65–85. https://doi.org/10.1080/13200968.2015.1031932
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seear, K. (2017). The emerging role of lawyers as addiction ‘quasi-experts’. The International Journal on Drug Policy, 44, 183–191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2017.05.008
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seear, K. (2020). Law, drugs and the making of addiction: Just habits. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Seear, K., & Fraser, S. (2010). Ben Cousins and the “double life”: Exploring citizenship and the voluntarity/compulsivity binary through the experiences of a “drug addicted” elite athlete. Critical Public Health, 20(4), 439–452. https://doi.org/10.1080/09581591003653132
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• West, R. (2001). Theories of addiction. Addiction (Abingdon, England), 96(1), 3–13. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1360-0443.2001.96131.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar