Pubdate: Sun, 31 Mar 2002 Source: Herald-Sun, The (NC) Copyright: 2002 The Herald-Sun Contact: http://www.herald-sun.com Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/1428 Author: Carl W. Kenney II RULING REINFORCES DOUBLE STANDARD: WHEN DRUGS ARE THE ISSUE, THE POOR GET HARSHER TREATMENT Whose fault is it if a person living in the same house is involved in narcotics? According to the Supreme Court, the entire household is at fault. On Tuesday, the court backed rules that permit evictions of families of federally subsidized housing if any family member or guest is involved in drugs. Public housing directors can evict entire families for drug use by one member, regardless of whether the use was on public housing property or if anyone else knew about it. The last time I checked, the only person who should be punished is the one who does the crime. In some rare cases it's appropriate to slap a parent or other family member on the hand for letting things get out of hand under their noses. Should grandma and baby Jane be forced to find a new place to live because of the knucklehead who sleeps in the same house? The court has endorsed a rule that further divides those who live in public housing from the general population. The rules are different because the residents are receiving government assistance. Their rights to live in decent housing are pulled from underneath them if a person has used drugs. What would it look like if we applied that same principle to persons not living in public housing? Couldn't it be argued that a family should be evicted when a person in the household gets stopped for a DWI? Why not? Shouldn't we blame everyone in the house? Does it matter if no one knows about the drug involvement? According to the court, it doesn't matter. People in public housing don't get the benefit of the doubt. Since the home environment was such that a person in the home used drugs, the entire household will be punished. The court ruling follows a new trend in the way people look at the substance abuse problem. It has long been understood that drug addiction is a disease. Despite the research to justify the need for more substance abuse treatment facilities, the few services offered to addicts are being closed. Insurance companies are making it harder for people to get treatment for addiction. Those who are addicted and in search of a way to change their lives are finding it harder to locate a place to get help. Now the court has taken things to another level. Not only do we refuse to help you with your problem, we're going to punish your family because of you. It was bad enough when addicts were forced to contend with society's refusal to support them in the recovering process. Now their families have to endure further pain as a result of their addiction. The opinion of the court failed to take into account the nature of addiction and the impact the disease has on the entire family. Four California senior citizens received eviction notices because of drug use by relatives or caregivers. The court ruled in favor of the decision to kick grandma out because of the habit of another person. The saddest thing is the senior citizens didn't know about the drug use. Things have progressed to another level. Before, the answer to the drug problem was to lock up everyone we can. Since that hasn't worked we'll try a different approach: Kick out everyone in the family. Let's find everyone in public housing using drugs and kick the entire family out. Don't ask any questions. Don't worry about conducting an intervention to help treat the problem. The high court had to make a tough decision. It is true that substance abuse has become one of the biggest problems facing public housing residents. Something has to be done to curtail the use and sales of drugs in these communities. No one needs to turn his or her back on the problem. I'm in support of taking a tough line. Go after all the hoods. Go ahead and punish those who are doing the crime, but leave grandma and the children alone. There is a double standard in the way we deal with the poor. The issue of substance abuse touches all of us. The bad news is we think differently about the way to approach the issues based on the income of the persons involved. Last year, President Bush's underage daughters were caught trying to buy alcohol in a Texas restaurant, and his niece, the daughter of Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, was admitted to a drug treatment center in February after being arrested on a prescription drug charge. Most would agree that their problems are not to be blamed on the president or Jeb Bush. It would be foolish to assert that the president should vacate the White House. We can't hold him responsible for what happens under his nose. Why? Because he doesn't live in public housing. Carl W. Kenney II is pastor of Orange Grove Missionary Baptist Church in Durham. His e-mail address is --- MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom