The Real Cost of Prisons Weblog

OP ED
Sun, Feb. 20, 2005
Focus on meth labs alone won't solve the problems

CAROL L. FALKOWSKI

I know a lot about drug abuse, but a politician I'm not, which explains my surprise as I listened to the Minnesota Senate Judiciary Committee receive testimony last week about a proposal to restrict access to over-the-counter cold products that contain ephedrine and pseudo-ephedrine. I'm not saying it is a bad idea.

My trouble is not about what was said, but rather about what was left unsaid at the hearing.

The committee heard how meth is made with ephedrine and pseudoephedrine products that are purchased or stolen from pharmacies or grocery stores and how this endangers people living nearby or under the same roof, including children. We saw the horrific slides and heard the tragic stories.

We heard how these small-time clandestine meth labs contaminate surrounding buildings, groundwater, land and air. We heard how costly lab clean-up exacts a toll on the economic and social fabric of rural life, and how law enforcement and correctional institutions strain to keep up.

We heard how meth addicts do almost anything to obtain their drug, including deviant, dangerous and hurtful behaviors that they may have never considered before their addiction ‹ violent crimes and unimaginable acts. Meth addicts pose a unique threat to the public safety.

The committee learned about Oklahoma, where the number of meth labs fell by 78 percent after the state adopted legislation similar to what Minnesota is considering. Life is safer there now. They "stopped the drug before it was made."

What was not said at the hearing:

This is why restricting ephedrine sales is only part of the solution. How big a part? Decide for yourself.

The sole meth addict who testified said meth "made me feel like Superman." With an endorsement like that, it is hard to imagine this drug will disappear.

Also strangely absent was a discussion of increased law enforcement. Assuming meth abuse will continue, we still need more law enforcement to attend to associated crime, even if officers' time is freed up with no more meth labs to bust.

And treatment? It was mentioned mostly in the context of "not working" for meth addicts. The false but widespread belief that "treatment for meth addicts doesn't work" is alive and well.

For those of us in the addiction field, this statement is sadly reminiscent of what people said about crack addicts in the 1980s, or about alcoholics during Prohibition. Yet, it is simply not the case.

A more accurate assessment: Treatment is not as accessible as it should be, especially for meth addicts, most of whom have lost their jobs, assets, homes, families and their health. With meth addicts, an adequate length of treatment is necessary in order to determine which psychiatric disorders are pre-existing and which are associated with meth use. Multiple treatment episodes are not uncommon.

We need treatment in our communities and prisons followed by supported, transitional, sober housing. We need to ensure when we imprison meth addicts that we don't let them out until they've completed treatment.

Addiction, after all, is what drives this epidemic, not the 20 percent of the total meth supply that comes from meth labs.

We must address the disease, not just meth labs, if we are to advance at all. We must look beyond the corner drug store and accept that we cannot arrest our way out of this problem without arresting the disease that underlies it.

Again, I don't know about politics, but I do know a lot about drug abuse. I know we need a comprehensive, well-informed approach with adequate resources for addiction treatment and additional law enforcement, and precursor limitations. Only then can we make a lasting dent in our growing meth problem.

Considering that every dollar spent on treatment saves up to $12 in averted health, social and criminal justice costs, it seems worth the investment.
--
Falkowski is director of research communications at the Hazelden Foundation. She has monitored drug abuse trends in Minnesota for nearly 20 years as part of an on-going epidemiological drug abuse surveillance network of the National Institute on Drug Abuse.
http://www.twincities.com/mld/twincities/news/editorial/10937652.htm