Alternatives to criminalizing public intoxication

This view of intoxication centres on the notion of harm: the inebriate harming him or herself; the inebriate harming those around him; and the harm presented by the act of inebriation to social values and norms.3 This criminal-justice view centres on the notion of intoxication as an individual choice, resulting in harm. [...] This promoted the decriminalization of intoxication along with the introduction of a range of supports in an effort to both prevent the occurrence of and decrease the impact of public intoxication across Europe, North America, and Australia.4 As an example, the U. S. Uniform Alcoholism and Intoxication Treatment Act of 1971 notes that “because alcoholism is an illness, a homeless alcoholic could n [...] The recommendations of the commission were the impetus for decriminalizing public intoxication and the establishment of sobering centres in many states.7 In light of the uneven impact of police arrests of Aboriginal people, many Australian sobering-up centres focus on Aboriginal communities in rural areas.8 In the U. K., sobering centres are also present as part of the health response to intoxicat [...] Information is, in certain cases, provided to the family and friends of the client.15 In terms of core services, the Australian evidence suggests a number of common features, as well as notable differences; these are relevant across the models reviewed in the U. K. and North America as well. [...] These individuals are held instead in police cells for their safety and the safety of staff.40 In a review of the Miinosa House Sobering Centre, in the Australian city of Campbell, the following guidelines are outlined with respect to client safety: An intoxicated person is free to leave the Shelter at any time.