In an effort to tackle the exceptionally high level of alcohol consumption in the Northern Territory (NT) of Australia, there are a suite of alcohol policies and new legislation that have been introduced. These include restricted purchasing and consumption for certain individuals. In 2017, the Banned Drinker Register (BDR) was (re)introduced – a policy that involves placing persons who consume alcohol at harmful levels to themselves or others onto a register which prohibits the purchase of alcohol from take‐away liquor outlets. As a result, there is an incentive for banned drinkers to obtain alcohol through friends, family, and through the black market – referred to as secondary supply. Though the phenomenon of secondary supply is not new, the recent evaluation of the BDR highlighted a number of challenges of tackling the secondary supply of alcohol. Informed by Head's framework for assessing ‘wicked’ policy problems, this policy analysis uses data from interviews with stakeholders undertaken as part of two studies on alcohol policy and services. The findings present the limitations of the policy design and implementation context in preventing secondary supply of alcohol to banned drinkers. The paper concludes with implications for policy and research that better recognise the implementation context.

Introduction and Aims The Northern Territory Government has recently planned and implemented an extensive suite of alcohol harm minimisation policies, including the reintroduction of the Banned Drinker Register (BDR). It is an explicit alcohol supply reduction measure that places persons who consume alcohol at harmful levels onto a register, prohibiting the purchase of alcohol from take‐away liquor outlets. This paper explores industry stakeholders' perspectives regarding the extent to which the BDR is meeting its objectives to improve community health and safety by reducing alcohol‐related harms. Design and Methods Interviews and one focus group were conducted with 66 alcohol industry stakeholders from urban and remote locations. Focusing on outcomes both central (crime and safety) and peripheral (health and therapeutic support) to the stakeholders' interest, the authors used inductive thematic analysis to examine participants' perceptions about the effectiveness of the BDR. Results Analysis revealed mixed views about the effectiveness of the BDR. There is a tension between the objective to address public amenity and decrease crime, as expressed by the participants, compared to the health‐focused approach to therapeutic services and referrals identified in other sources. Discussion and Conclusions Drawing on these findings, alongside other relevant sources, the authors argue there is a need for a more effective communication strategy to the public and professional community to enhance the capacity of the BDR to meet its goals. The authors recognise the limitations of alcohol industry stakeholder views and identify the need for a comprehensive evaluation approach that includes multiple stakeholder perspectives.

Faced with the limitations of currently available mainstream medical treatments and interventions, parents of children with neurodevelopmental disorders often seek information about unproven interventions. These interventions frequently have undetermined efficacy and uncertain safety profiles. In this article, we present a general background and case vignettes that highlight the use of hyperbaric oxygen chambers and stem cells in cerebral palsy, the leading cause of pediatric physical disability. We then review the current evidence about these interventions as exemplars of unproven therapies. Building on the background and cases, we explore and review two important questions related to unproven interventions: (1) How should clinicians respond to requests for innovative and alternative interventions? (2) What should clinicians keep in mind when such requests come from online sources? © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Dev Disabil Res Rev 2011; 17:19–26.

No abstract