Arguments for and against caffeine nicotine prohibition and legalization

Drugs

What argument can you make for either the prohibition of or the continued legalization of caffeine and nicotine? What are some of the implications of either move?

Both caffeine and nicotine are legal drugs, and they should remain legal just as all drugs of all types should be legal. Caffeine is a "psychoactive stimulant drug," and it can be found in common foods and beverages such as coffee and soft drinks (p. 274). Nicotine is described as a "toxic, dependence-producing psychoactive drug found exclusively in tobacco," (p. 254). Although caffeine and especially nicotine are not necessarily healthy substances, using these drugs is a matter of personal choice. Similarly, using alcohol, cannabis, and doctor-prescribed medications is also a matter of personal choice and should be so. The implications of keeping caffeine and nicotine legal include allowing people to enjoy delicious beverages like coffee, which has a long and entrenched cultural history. Caffeine also "relatively benign" even if signs of dependency can be shown in clinical trials and in case study (p. 274). There is no reason to ban caffeine, any more than there is a reason to ban alcohol. Nicotine might be more harmful than caffeine due to the fact that the most common intake method for nicotine is cigarettes, which also contain tar, carbon monoxide, and other toxins. Banning nicotine is not the best method to create a healthier society; awareness and the trend towards making smoking socially unacceptable is a far more effective means of promoting public health. Prohibition of drugs and alcohol has proven to be ineffective, and until all drugs are legalized, there will continue to be contradictory politics and programs related to addictions. Addiction is treated both as a mental health issue and a criminal justice issue, and if caffeine and nicotine were added to the list of controlled substances, most of the American population would be in prison.

Should a pregnant woman who uses them be guilty of "fetal abuse" as she might be in the case of alcohol or illicit drug use?

Criminalizing drug use and addiction is the worst possible approach toward problems like pregnant women using drugs. Pregnant women are guilty, on some level, of what can be called "fetal abuse," but that behavior needs to be treated as a mental health issue and not as a criminological issue. With smoking cigarettes (or using nicotine in another manner), the risks for the fetus include "low birth weight and physical defects," (p. 259). These risks should be brought to the attention of females even before they are of childbearing age. The problem is that too many women smoke before they have children, and have become dependent by the time they get pregnant. "The best option, of course, is never to start in the first place," (p. 267). Drug counseling might help the pregnant mother to cease smoking, and so might other types of interventions. Accusing a pregnant woman of "fetal abuse," and prosecuting her is only going to damage the child even more by taking away its mother or stigmatizing her for years. This could lead to the perpetuation of poverty if the mother was already struggling financially. With regards to caffeine, it is barely dangerous at all for pregnant women and children. There can be "potential problems later in pregnancy," but only with high levels of caffeine intake (p. 284). Research shows that high caffeine consumption "more than three or four cups of coffee a day" during the first trimester may be linked to low birth weight, and "more than six cups a day" may cause miscarriage (p. 284). It is not common for any person to be drinking that much coffee. With both nicotine and caffeine, personal responsibility, public health awareness, and social pressure from friends and family should play an important role in minimizing drug use in pregnant women -- not criminalization.