Pubdate: Tue, 30 Jan 2001
Source: Baltimore Sun (MD)
Copyright: 2001 The Baltimore Sun, a Times Mirror Newspaper.
Contact:  501 N. Calvert Street P.0. Box 1377 Baltimore, MD 21278
Fax: (410) 315-8912
Website: http://www.sunspot.net/
Forum: http://www.sunspot.net/cgi-bin/ultbb/Ultimate.cgi?action=intro
Author: Todd Richissin, Sun Staff

RESEARCH TALLIES PRICE OF ADDICTION

Study Finds Disparity In Money Spent On Problems, Treatment; 'it's An 
Upside-down Cake'; Critics Question Assumptions Made In Nationwide Report

Maryland has spent billions of dollars in the past several years on 
problems stemming from substance abuse while addicts remain on waiting 
lists for treatment, according to a major national study released yesterday.

The study sought to determine the complete cost of drug abuse to state 
budgets - not just dollars spent on treatment. It tallied money required 
for such derived costs as prison beds for addicts and special education 
programs for children with fetal alcohol syndrome, among other costs.

It found that in 1998, the state spent nearly $1.3 billion on 
addiction-related problems, while putting up about $35 million for 
prevention and treatment.

Maryland has nearly doubled the money allocated for treatment since then - 
setting aside $69 million in fiscal 2001 - but advocates for treatment say 
significantly more is needed.

The advocates have increasingly been trying to win funding by stressing the 
fiscal costs of addiction that accompany the human suffering, and 
yesterday's study was another step in that effort. Various national studies 
have concluded that for every dollar spent on drug and alcohol treatment, 
$5 to $7 is saved in medical, criminal justice and related costs.

Next week, a task force led by Lt. Gov. Kathleen Kennedy Townsend is 
expected to report that thousands of addicts in Maryland want help but 
cannot get it because of a continuing shortage of treatment programs. In 
Baltimore, hundreds of heroin addicts are on waiting lists seeking slots in 
methadone programs.

Yesterday's study said that like other states, Maryland spent far more 
money addressing problems caused by addiction than it did on prevention and 
treatment: Out of every dollar the state spent on addiction-related 
expenses, 97 cents went for prisons, schools programs, welfare and similar 
programs.

Less than three cents went toward treatment, and less than a penny was 
spent on prevention.

The study, by the National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at 
Columbia University, is the broadest of its kind, its authors said.

The study was based solely on state budgets and did not include federal 
dollars or losses to private businesses, which can come in the form of 
vandalism, increased insurance premiums and lost worker productivity.

Based on three years of research, the study determined that state 
governments across the country - along with the District of Columbia and 
Puerto Rico - spent more than $81 billion to deal with substance abuse and 
$3 billion on prevention, treatment and research.

"It's an upside-down cake of public policy to shovel all the money up into 
the wreckage and very little at the cause," said Joseph A. Califano Jr., 
chairman and president of the national center on addiction and a former 
secretary of health, education and welfare in the Carter administration.

"The numbers are there, and what they show is it's absolutely insane not to 
have more in the way of treatment and prevention," he added.

"It's worth it in terms of our kids, in terms of improving public health 
and over the long haul, it's worth it in the financial area."

Totals in the study are based on a number of assumptions, some of which 
critics questioned.

For example, the study determined that, nationwide, 81 percent of prison 
and jail inmates had a history of drug or alcohol abuse.

The authors then totaled the amount states spent on incarceration and 
attributed 81 percent - $487 million in Maryland and $29.8 billion 
nationally - to addiction.

"Estimating the cost of drug use is so complicated and requires so many 
difficult assumptions that it's almost useless," said Eric Wish, director 
of the Center for Substance Abuse Research at the University of Maryland.

"That said, it doesn't matter what the final cost is, because what we do 
know is that money spent on treatment and prevention, will, in the long 
run, save money and lives."

The study said that in Maryland in 1998, illegal drug and alcohol abuse 
cost taxpayers:

$63.6 million for juvenile justice, including incarceration, diversion 
programs and construction of facilities;

$167.5 million for elementary and secondary education, including special 
programs for learning disabilities associated with maternal alcohol and 
drug abuse, special facilities for substance-abusing children and insurance 
costs for staff who abuse drugs and alcohol;

$292 million in health care, including visits to emergency rooms and 
coverage of uninsured addicts.

"This study is another strong reason why treatment is worth funding," said 
Del. Dan K. Morhaim, a Baltimore County Democrat and a physician who was 
co-chairman of the lieutenant governor's task force on treatment.

"It's not surprising to me that there are a lot of big fiscal implications 
[to addiction] that we haven't fully defined. Of course, there's a lot of 
human costs, too, which don't have a price tag."

Susan Foster, the author of the study and the director of policy research 
and analysis at the national center on addiction, said researchers used 
conservative figures to determine how much money is being spent on problems 
stemming from drug and alcohol abuse.

"We know the number is much higher than we're reporting," she said. "This 
gives policy-makers the information they need to know to see that being 
tough on crime means not just holding people responsible but also requiring 
treatment."

The fiscal 2002 budget proposed by Gov. Parris N. Glendening includes an 
increase of $20 million for treatment and prevention.

Michael Sarbanes, director of policy and planning for the lieutenant 
governor, said the increases in the past few years show an awareness of the 
problems attributed to substance abuse.

"The record increases in treatment funding this year and proposed for 2002 
will make treatment more accessible and more effective and will fill gaps 
in service for our neediest population," he said.

"We're investing in treatment because we think it will pro-vide enormous 
dividends to our state."
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jo-D