Pubdate: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 Source: News Tribune, The (Tacoma, WA) Copyright: 2007 Tacoma News Inc. Contact: http://www.thenewstribune.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/442 Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/find?159 (Drug Courts) Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/meth.htm (Methamphetamine) Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/rehab.htm (Treatment) PROMETA EXPERIMENT: MEND IT, DON'T END IT The addiction treatment known as Prometa has a knack for spawning nasty disputes and nastier ethical problems. Pierce County -- home of a major experiment with Prometa -- is seeing plenty of both. The County Council has voted to suspend funding for the pilot project. Executive John Ladenburg has threatened to override that vote with his veto. Rather than wrangling with the council, he should be working to fix the problems that have undermined the program's credibility. One of those problems has to do with the initial claims of success that came from the Pierce County Alliance, the nonprofit agency using Prometa to treat meth addicts on behalf of the drug court. As The News Tribune's Sean Robinson reports in today's newspaper, the Alliance sloppily and perhaps naively overstated the number of addicts clearly benefited by Prometa. The nonprofit asserted that 86 percent of Prometa clients -- drug offenders or addicts denied custody of their children pending treatment -- were drug-free during a 14-month trial. A recent assessment by county auditors came up with a different number: 50 percent. Part of the discrepancy stems from the fact that the Alliance didn't count drug relapses prior to the last 60 days of the program; the auditors did. The 60-day standard is questionable: The Pierce County drug court itself requires 90 days of clean tests before a client is cleared. So does the King County drug court. The drug courts of Snohomish and Thurston counties require 180 days. Even using the Alliance's generous definition of "drug free," there's another question: How many clients were clean before joining the pilot project? Looking at the records of 19 of the program's 35 clients, it turned out that 12 of those 19 had been drug-free for 61 to 270 days prior to starting Prometa. None of this means the Alliance was cooking the books. The agency has struggled to heal addicts for many years; if its staff is guilty of anything, it's guilty of believing too much in a long-hoped-for breakthrough treatment. Its 14-month trial was never meant to be a rigorous scientific study. It started as a simple inquiry into whether an expanded Prometa program was worth pursuing. Still, the results were used to win as much as $900,000 in county and state funding. And Hythiam -- the pharmaceutical company that licenses Prometa -- has been featuring the Alliance's "success" in Pierce County in its marketing promotions. That commercial entanglement is especially troubling in light of the fact that the Alliance's executive director, Terree Schmidt-Whelan, owned some stock in Hythiam -- astonishingly, with the blessing of her board. That may have been legal, but it created the impression of a conflict of interest that has undermined the Alliance's credibility on this issue. We think the experiment with Prometa is worth continuing, pending the rigorous scientific studies now being conducted on its effectiveness. Society has few options for treating methamphetamine addiction; if this is even a little successful -- and there are some indications that it might be -- it could save a fortune for treatment programs and the criminal justice system. But if the Pierce County experiment is to continue, it has to operate by different ground rules. The Alliance is receiving public money to run the program, and it must be accountable to the public. First and foremost, anyone connected with the Alliance must be forbidden from owning Hythiam stock or having any other personal interest in the company. Nor should the Alliance let itself be used by Hythiam as a marketing gimmick. Those preliminary and very rough early numbers should not be represented by anyone as scientific findings. Ladenburg -- who unwisely bought Hythiam stock himself and has since sold it -- ought to be busy reforming the program's ground rules. If its credibility can be restored, he'll have no need to threaten vetoes. - --- MAP posted-by: Richard Lake