ADHS Archives

October 2010

ADHS@LISTSERV.MIAMIOH.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
David Fahey <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Alcohol and Drugs History Society <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 29 Oct 2010 10:21:30 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (120 lines)
In the mid-nineteenth century Ohio banned the sale of alcohol to
habitual drunkards (more precisely, to persons who were intoxicated or
in the habit of becoming intoxicated).  I suspect other American
states had similar laws.

On 10/29/10, Robin G W Room <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>
> Listmates --
>
>  Below you will find an initiative by the government of
> the Northern Territory of Australia to institute a person-specific bans on
> drinking.
>  There is an interesting cross-national piece to be done about
> the prehistory of such measures, and I would be interested in corresponding
> with ohters interested in this. In temperance times, there were various
> initiatives to "blacklist" heavy drinkers, often at the call of family
> members. It can be seen as part of the move in the Progressive Era to have
> the state intervene in the family on behalf of the weak against the strong
> (cf. for the US Tony Platt, _The Child-Minders_). The supervisor of the
> Temperance Boards in Sweden in 1940 described them as a defense for the
> family against "petty domestic tyrants" (quoted from memory from the
> Helsinki ICAA conference proceedings). Margaretha Jaervinen did an article
> in _Contemporary Drug Problems_ around 1991 about the Finnish alcohol
> monopoly sending out inspectors to investigate where a woman seemed to have
> been buying too much alcohol -- but not necessarily cutting her off if it
> turned out she was buying for her husband as a way of limiting his drinking
> -- i.e., using the wife as an agent of the state's social control. The book
> _Punched Drunk _mentions the LCBO in Ontario cutting off drinkers (putting
> them on what was known as the "Indian list", in an era of Prohibition for
> nonassimilated Aboriginal Canadians) in the 1950s at the request of wives
> and other family members, although the statistics show clearly that this
> request was often not accepted by the LCBO. There are still US states with
> state liquor stores (Ohio, as I remember) where it is theoretically
> possible for the family to ask the stores to blacklist drinkers.
> Particularly where there had been a period of Prohibition, the alcohol
> control laws in the 1920s-1950s often included these individually-oriented
> controls, which were abandoned nearly everywhere in the 1950s-1960s as
> seeming too much of an intrusion on emerging standards of "privacy". (Part
> of the background of the "purple book", Bruun et al. 1975, was the argument
> by civil-libertarian sociologists in a Finnish context that universal
> control measures such as price and hours of sale could be effective without
> these individual-oriented measures). Now, with the emergence of ASBOs under
> Tony Blair and similar individually-oriented behaviour controls, we are
> back to the future.  The historically-oriented piece should take a look at
> how effective such measures seem to have been. One clear signal of their
> potential effectiveness is the large rise in cirrhosis mortality after the
> abandonment of the Swedish alcohol rationing system in 1955, studied by
> Thor Norstroem.  Robin
>
> -------------------------
>  some detailes from
> the attachedfact-sheet:
>
> _INDIVIDUAL AND THIRD-PARTY REFERRALS TO THE
> AOD TRIBUNAL_
>
> It is anticipated that other people, such as the police,
> family members and health workers, will be able to ask
>
> the Tribunal to
> make orders against someone. For example, if one of your family members has
> a drinking
>
> problem and is causing harm, you would be able to go to the
> Tribunal and ask them to make an order banning
>
> your family member from
> purchasing take away alcohol. The AOD Tribunal would look at what has been
>
>
> happening and your family member would be assessed by a professional.
>
> A
> person with an alcohol problem could choose to get themselves banned so
> they can more easily deal with
>
> their alcohol or drug problem.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: CCH Parliament
> [mailto:[log in to unmask] [1]]
> Sent: Thursday, 28 October 2010 3:33
> PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Political Alert - Draft Alcohol
> Bills Tabled in Parliament (NT)
>
> Please find attached:
>
> DRAFT ALCOHOL BILLS
> TABLED IN PARLIAMENT (NT)
>
> The Minister for Alcohol Policy, Delia Lawrie,
> released two key pieces
> of draft legislation that detail the most
> comprehensive alcohol reforms
> in the Territory's history. The draft Bills,
> the Prevention of
> Alcohol-Related Crime and Substance Misuse Bill and the
> SMART Court Bill
> were tabled in the Northern Territory Parliament.
>
>
>
>
> Links:
> ------
> [1] mailto:[log in to unmask]
>


-- 
David M. Fahey
Professor Emeritus of History
Miami University
Oxford, Ohio 45056
USA

ATOM RSS1 RSS2