Pubdate: Fri, 21 Mar 2008
Source: Cavalier Daily (U of VA Edu)
Copyright: 2008 The Cavalier Daily, Inc.
Contact:  http://www.cavalierdaily.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/550
Author: Ross Lawrence

DRUG USERS NEED HEALTH CARE, NOT HANDCUFFS

IMAGINE a world where people addicted to cigarettes,  alcohol or even
prescription painkillers were plucked  from society and treated as
criminals. Sound like an  invasion of privacy, a waste of resources or
simply a  bad idea? Current U.S. drug policy, which is mirrored  by
many countries throughout the world, dictates that  illicit drug
abusers are often treated in this way.

Granted, this analogy -- like any other -- isn't  perfect. Different
substances require different  policies. Nonetheless, it is high time
that the United  States turns a critical eye towards its own
strategies  for tackling drug use. While wholesale legalization  might
yield the best results, the government doesn't  need to necessarily go
that far; simply emphasizing a  public health approach over a criminal
justice one  could save money and have a positive effect on our
communities.

For a sweeping reform of the current system, extensive  legalization
is one option. And this would certainly  have enormous positive
outcomes. The United Nations  estimated in 2005 that illegal drug
trade is worth  about $321 billion annually. For those willing to
accept the risks, this industry is a potential gold  mine, lining the
pockets of criminals, terrorists and  corrupt public officials.
Regulating this business  would not only make it safer but could line
governments' accounts with billions in tax revenue.  Countries could
certainly put this money to far better  use than these illegitimate
"narco-states" could.

Of course, the problem with outright legalization is  that no one can
reliably predict what the results will  be. This is especially
dependent on which substances  are legalized. If the use of cocaine,
for example,  significantly increased, all of the positives mentioned
above could easily be overshadowed by a public health  crisis.

The problem with absolute prohibition is, quite simply,  that it
doesn't work. While the goal is noble and  well-intentioned, a
"drug-free world" simply isn't  realistic. Ethan Nadelmann, founder
and executive  director of the Drug Policy Alliance, argued this point
  in a Foreign Policy magazine article appearing last  year. He pointed
out a telling fact: in 1998, a U.N.  General Assembly Special Session
on drugs committed to  "eliminating or significantly reducing the
illicit  cultivation of the coca bush, the cannabis plant, and  the
opium poppy by the year 2008." A decade later, the  production of and
demand for these substances are  essentially the same, Nadelmann says.

While the heated debate over legalization rages on,  something can be
done in the meantime to ease the ill  effects of this stalemate. By
concentrating less  resources on enforcing the criminalization aspect
of  drug policy, such as the cost of imprisonment, the  United States
can devote more funding to demand  reduction and harm reduction programs.

While curbing demand for anything is extremely  difficult, it has been
done successfully. Take the case  of smoking. Beginning in 1965,
public service campaigns  determined to highlight the risks of
cigarette smoking  hit the airwaves. Since then, smoking rates have
been  cut in half. Certainly some of the credit for this  belongs to
demand reduction efforts.

The harm reduction piece of the equation comes in the  form of both
prevention and rehabilitation.  Syringe-exchange programs, the
availability of  antidotes and medication, and the expanded use of
drug  treatment facilities all are supported by groups such  as the
American Medical Association. Additionally, the  expansion of these
programs generally saves taxpayer  money, as they are more economical
front-end methods of  spending that reduce back-end spending such as
criminal  justice and health care costs.

While such measures have been taken in the United  States, they have
also been slow in overcoming  political inertia. The stigma associated
with drug use  and the power of social conservatism have made it
politically advantageous to cling to the "War on Drugs"  rhetoric, and
treat substance abuse as a moral sin that  must be eradicated. As a
result, programs that seek to  help addicts rather than punish them
have had a  difficult time getting enacted.

The repercussions of this should not be written off.  According to
Mathea Falco, the president of Drug  Strategies, a nonprofit research
institute, "Federal  support for demand reduction is now about one
third of  the total drug budget, and treatment is available for  only
one in three of those who need help."

While adopting more public health strategies won't come  close to
ending the problems of drug abuse, it is a  step in the right
direction, and one that is long  overdue.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Derek