HARM REDUCTION IS KEY TO NEW DRUG POLICY

My recent commentary calling for "Peace talks in the war on drugs"
has prompted Vermonters to ask what a new drug policy might look
like. Although many focus on decriminalization or legalization of
drugs, these poorly defined terms tend to polarize the debate.
Instead, let's try to find common ground by focusing on
transformation -- transforming our current approach to drugs away
from excessive punishment, absolute prohibition, and professed
morality and toward an approach that emphasizes harm reduction.

A government's response to a drug should not create more harm than
use of the drug itself. Under a harm-reduction model, each substance
would be evaluated separately to determine the harm of its use and
the harm created by our approach to its use. We would then devise a
response tailored to the particular drug. For some drugs, we might
find any and all use creates such personal harm that the drug must
remain prohibited and an enforcement and punitive response
maintained. Methamphetamines might fall into this category.

For other drugs, however, we might find that the black market and
related crime and violence that result from complete prohibition
create more public harm than the use of the drug itself. For these
drugs, we might adopt a non-criminal justice approach, focusing on
education, prevention, and treatment to minimize harm. Marijuana
falls into this category. If we are committed to public health and
safety, we cannot perpetuate a system that exacerbates rather than
reduces harm.

Recently, the mayor of Barre simultaneously called for the death
penalty for dealers of hard drugs and for the legalization of
marijuana. Although advocating an extreme position, the mayor
deserves credit for highlighting the need for a particularized
response to individual drugs. Without a focused assessment of the
harm created by each drug and by our response to that drug, we will
fail to make significant headway in reducing drug use and drug-related crime.

It is important to re-emphasize that discussing a transformed drug
policy should not be construed as an invitation to break the law. We
can have a thoughtful debate about the future while continuing to
abide by existing restrictions. Violation of any laws, including our
current drug laws, is not acceptable.

Transforming drug policy to emphasize harm reduction requires us to
change our thinking and approach in the following ways:

1) We must accept the fact that humans have always and will always
use intoxicants and therefore reducing the harm of use is of
paramount importance, even as we aspire to eliminate use.

2) We must increase funding for treatment, education, public health
and prevention programs -- treatment and education change behaviors
far more effectively than punishment.

3) We must reduce the stigma of addiction and lessen the punitive
consequences for users, assuming their conduct did not harm others
(addiction can never be a justification or excuse for harming another
person). A lessening of criminal justice sanctions with a focus on
treatment and recovery is part of the drug court model used in a few
of the criminal courts in Vermont.

4) We must allow our medical and substance abuse providers to use a
broad array of treatment options. Nicotine is used to treat tobacco
addiction. Several countries, including our neighbor, Canada, have
found similar success prescribing pharmaceutical-grade heroin to
acute addicts to stabilize them, better address their addiction, and
transition them off of the drug.

5) We must redirect law enforcement efforts toward the most harmful
and violent behaviors and away from those that do not overtly
endanger others. Over the last three years, criminal charges
involving marijuana were the second or third most commonly filed
criminal cases in Vermont. We cannot afford to maintain this type of
criminal justice emphasis.

How do we move forward? How do we transform a highly punitive model
into one that focuses on harm reduction? Here are three immediate
steps our governor and Legislature could take:

1) Provide support and funding for drug courts throughout the state
to work more effectively with users who come into the criminal justice system.

2) Call on our congressional delegation to amend the Federal
Controlled Substances Act to allow states greater latitude in
designing their own drug policies.

3) Create a gubernatorial or legislative bipartisan task force to
look at what works and does not work in current drug policy and to
make recommendations for changes in approach.

Even if our current approach was working well (a claim no one is
making), it is economically unsustainable. Let's acknowledge that
reality and start planning now for the future. These three important
steps would begin transforming drug policy in a positive new
direction focusing on harm reduction. It is time to move forward on
drug policy reform.

Robert L. Sand is Windsor County state's attorney.