DRUG POLICY SHIFT

Treatment For All, But How And Where?

Pushing more drug-addicted criminals into treatment has been a dream of
many San Diego County officials ever since local studies began showing that
60 to 80 percent of suspected criminals were on drugs when arrested.

But the county never had the money to do more than pilot projects -- until now.

Ironically, a county where most officials opposed Proposition 36, the
voter-approved initiative that mandates treatment for nonviolent drug
offenders, will use the money the initiative provides for large-scale case
management and treatment of every nonviolent offender with drug or alcohol
problems.

In the system now being developed, each offender's substance abuse problems
will be diagnosed in detail. Drug testing will be frequent. Monitoring by
probation officers and addiction specialists will increase. And treatment
will be available to all who need it.

At least, that's the plan. The biggest question is whether enough treatment
really will be available. Another is whether it will be the most
therapeutic treatment, or just the most politically feasible.

This county's recent history of collaboration among public agencies and
nonprofit groups portends eventual success.

The biggest change will be casting a much wider net over misdemeanor drug
offenders, not just felons. When it comes to drug crimes, the difference
between misdemeanors and felonies often isn't significant. An addict who
buys drugs, consumes them immediately and gets arrested for being under the
influence has committed a misdemeanor. If he gets arrested before he
consumes the drugs and is carrying anything more than a small amount,
that's a felony. The new system will be based on an offender's level of
addiction and past criminal history, not on the crime for which he's arrested.

That's a very sound principle.

But will San Diego County provide enough treatment for the 5,000 to 6,000
new Proposition 36 offenders? It's estimated that 35 percent will only need
drug education. But for the rest, the county projects it will need 400 to
500 new residential treatment beds and more than 4,000 new outpatient
treatment slots.

Officials say they can get 150 residential beds and 2,000 outpatient slots
from existing treatment providers who contract with the county. But that
will mean taking treatment slots away from other recovering addicts. For
example, a provider with 50 beds might currently allot 35 to criminal
justice clients and 15 to the public or other referrals. Under the new
plan, the county might contract for all those beds. It could become harder
for an addict who decides on his own that he needs treatment to actually
get it.

New treatment centers will be necessary. But county supervisors and other
politicians have made it clear they don't like residential treatment
centers because some of their constituents wrongly fear they will degrade
their neighborhoods. Residential treatment often works better than
outpatient treatment, especially for hard-core addicts. Favoring outpatient
treatment over residential treatment because of political expedience would
be bad public health policy, and threatens the success of this excellent
collaborative effort.