ACCOUNTABILITY

Addicts Need Treatment And Jail Time

Everybody has heard the word "denial" used in connection with drug
addiction. It means the addict denies he has a problem. It's a symptom of
the disease.

Professionals in the drug treatment field agree most addicts need some sort
of coercion in the early phases of recovery to break through the wall of
denial. Whether it's intervention by family and friends, the threat of
losing a job or a pending jail sentence, addicts won't get clean unless
faced with serious consequences for continuing to use drugs.

Proposition 36, the drug decriminalization initiative on the November
ballot, removes the consequences for addicts by banning jail time for
nonviolent drug offenders. And that's why a growing number of treatment
professionals oppose it, even though it would authorize $120 million to be
spent on drug treatment.

"Addicts come to treatment to escape the negative consequences of their
disease," said David Moore, director of Scripps McDonald Center in San
Diego, which has treated 10,000 drug and alcohol addicts in the past 20
years. "If we replace jail with treatment, then they've escaped the
consequences and have no reason to stay in recovery."

Moore believes we should defer criminal prosecution with treatment, not
replace criminal prosecution with treatment, as Proposition 36 would do. In
drug courts, when an addict breaks the law because of his addiction, the
judge gives him a choice: jail or treatment. It's very effective,
benefiting not only the addict and his family, but society as a whole.

Decades of studies have shown the efficacy of coerced drug treatment. In
the 1960s, the California Civil Addict Program provided compulsory
treatment for some heroin addicts. The program was studied extensively by
Douglas Anglin, director of the University of California at Los Angeles
Drug Abuse Research Center, who has been studying mandatory treatment for
nearly 40 years. He concluded coercion is "a useful and proven strategy"
that could "produce significant individual and social benefits." Addicts in
mandatory treatment reduced drug use three times as much as addicts
discharged from commitment.

Nearly 40 years later, another study showed similar results. The National
Institute of Justice released a study this spring surveying drug courts in
Washington, D.C., comparing offenders who faced sanctions and treatment
with those who received treatment without sanctions. The combination of
sanctions and treatment produced significant reductions in drug use and
overall criminal activity, the study showed.

Dozens of other studies have been conducted on coerced treatment. The
conclusion among both researchers and treatment professionals is that it
works. The idea that addicts must enter treatment voluntarily is a myth,
Anglin says.

"The only way to get an addict to genuinely participate in recovery is to
make them accountable for their actions with the threat of consequences,"
Moore says. That's exactly what we've done in drug courts, building upon
decades of research and the accumulated knowledge of treatment
professionals. Now, Proposition 36 threatens to take it all away.