MANDATORY DRUG TESTS A FAILED IDEA

There is no proof that drug and alcohol addiction is a bigger problem
with people on welfare than any it is with any other group. Nor is
there proof drug and alcohol addiction is a greater barrier for them
to find and keep employment than it is for any others.

That hasn't stopped the government of Premier Mike Harris from
proposing mandatory drug testing and treatment for welfare recipients.
The Tory proposal isn't about true welfare reform. It's about
bashing the poor, perpetuating stereotypes and dividing society along
class lines.

It's not about helping people on welfare become job-ready, about
portraying them as low-lifes who abuse the system and deserve to be
cut off.

Had the Tories consulted professionals in the addiction field they
would have known drug testing is rife with problems. Testing does not
show how much of a drug was taken or in what form. It may reveal
recent drug use but it does not reveal addiction. False-postive tests
are not unusual with over-the-counter medications.

The Tory proposal raises a serious issue. If someone is on welfare,
have they lost the right to choose if, when and where to seek help?

When one applies for welfare, questions about drug and alcohol use are
not asked because they are "not relevant to entitlement" explained Bob
McNorgan, administrator of the London office for Ontario Works. He
said it is "inappropriate to ask those questions" about substance use.
Why, then, would it be appropriate for the Harris government to
demand testing and treatment later?

Carolyn Nutter of the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health in
Toronto said the centre is "very concerned" about mandatory testing
and treatment. It sees thousands of people each year from all walks of
life.

"You can force anyone to do anything for a while," said Nutter.
"Long-term, though, treatment won't work unless the person wants it
to."

Getting a person off drugs is one thing. Keeping them off is quite
another. Drugs are only part of an addict's problem. Behaviour is
the other part and it's far more difficult to treat. Behaviour change
happens in predictable stages, even for people on welfare. You don't
make someone urinate in a jar, tell them they have a problem, "treat"
them and end the story. Addictions are more complex than that.

"Because someone has been identified as having problems with addiction
doesn't mean they intend to change their behaviour," said Linda
Sibley-Bowers of Alcohol and Drug Services of Thames Valley. "Drug
use," she said "and the desire to or not to change has nothing to do
with socio-economics."

The province currently spends about $110 million for addiction
assessments and referrals, detox centres and recovery homes. That's
around $10 million more than the Tories are spending on their election
ads.

Who knows what kind of "treatment" the Tories have in mind? But
whatever it is, recovery is no quick cure. Homewood Health Centre is
a private hospital in Guelph that treats thousands of in-patients and
out-patients a year with substance abuse problems. Patients range
from professionals to the poor. Spokesperson Ric Ament said,
generally speaking, it takes approximately one year for an individual
to "get a life back in order."

There are about 13,500 welfare cases in the London and Middlesex area.
What if Harris's idea is enacted and only one per cent of these people
refuse testing or test positive and refuse treatment?

That's about 135 new homeless walking the streets in this part of the
province. What if that one per cent is provincewide? I'm no
statistician but Harris has probably thought it through.

Isn't he the one who has promised millions of dollars more for the
homeless?