Highlights From Past DPFOK Forums

PUNITIVE SCHOOL GUIDELINES: DO THEY HURT OR HELP?

Do punitive school guidelines work to change the behavior of young people who experiment with drugs? The guest speakers at the Drug Policy Forum’s February 2005 meeting answered that question with a a firm “no.” Cathy Liska, a Mediator from Edmond, shared the head table with Lee Denney of Cushing, new Republican State Representative from District 33, as the audience participated in a lively discussion. More..... Rep. Denney admitted right away she is “not an expert” on all the issues of drug use and misuse, but feels strongly that punishment of offenders does more harm than good. She said she is the mother of two OU students, which caused a little wave of good- natured groans throughout the audience. Anyway, she thinks our present system of punishing young drug offenders is wasteful. She strongely regrets that “a whole generation of adolescents is going to enter adulthood with felony convictions.” David Lebow, a writer at the Drumright Gusher, in a recent article quotes Payne County Sheriff Carl Hiner who admits we need a new approach. Ms. Liska is also the parent of two children, one of them a son of 19, who is an addict. In case anyone thinks drug problems are rare and isolated, she said that 20 per cent of all children will eventually become addicted to substances that most use without harm. It may be anything from alcohol to tobacco to meth, cocaine, or prescription drugs. Every day in the U.S. nine children die of drug related causes, and in one year 1,400 college students die from overuse of alcohol. We hear about only a few of these. The speaker’s main argument was that for society “it is better and less expensive to do the right thing.” And what is the right approach? The police- sponsored program, DARE, or Drug Abuse Resistence Education, started in 1983, is now regarded as a failure by many. Dr. Rodney Skager of UCLA who has worked with drug related issues in the schools for years agrees. Liska referred to his article, “On Reinventing Drug Education, Especiallly for Adolescents,” in which he writes, “ there is no doubt about it. Federal drug education programs have failed.” He goes on to say that “ The government is spending over a billion dollars a year through DARE, but students are continuing to use drugs.” Skager points out that drug use of some kind ia now “normalized” among mainstream American adolescents.” Merely trying to indoctrinate these young people with scare tactics simply does not work. It is a complex problem. Liska said that some children have been using drugs for six or seven years before their parents are even aware of it. She also revealed that in her experience with her son’s problem that the parents were blamed. And many counselors asssume the worst, that the parents themselves are actually the cause of the problem. She emphasized that everyone needs education about drugs--juvenile workers, teachers, School Boards and Administration, law enforcement, police, lawyers, judges, D.A.’s , and the general public. Suspension or expulsion from school because of drug problems is a bad idea. When that happens, the offenders will probably just “sit at home and smoke pot all day. ”Why not try an opposite approach? Why not require them to join two or three highschool clubs, go out for a sport, and study harder? A criminal record prevents the person from applying for a wide variety of occupations for life, a policy which is counter productive and ultimately harmful to society. The last part of the discussion centered on groups and positive programs such as Safe Schools, the local PTA, and the Parent -Teacher Drug Task Force. Though these are imperfect, as pointed out by some in the audience, they are more hopeful than the policy of punitive school guidelines which punish but do not rehabilitate.

Rehabilitation is the Answer

Effective treatment for drug addiction is a pressing need right now in Oklahoma. Donna Woods Bauer, a recovering alcoholic and a counselor helping others with drug and alcohol addictions, was the speaker at the December 2004 meeting of the Drug Policy Forum of Oklahoma (DPFOK).

Bauer works with Oklahoma Citizen Advocates for Treatment and Recovery (OCARTA). In her forceful and convincing style of speaking she told the audience that "slapping a drug offender in jail is like putting a Band Aid on a person who needs stitches." She knows what she is talking about from personal experience. Abused by her father during her growing up years, she slowly descended into addiction and mental pain so severe she almost ended her life through suicide, Yet after all the suffering she was able to be rehabilitated.

She made the point that fear of the law or punishment or even death does not automatically bring addicts to the place where they want to get help. They use many tactics for avoiding the problem. They may deny they have a problem at all, or blame someone else for it. Well meaning friends and family members may even contribute to the pain by ignoring it or somehow enabling the behavior to continue. But out of all the confusion and trauma can come a solution. To re-enforce her belief in rehabilitation Bauer brought two brothers with her to the meeting, the youngest a sophomore in college. He told about passing out in school one time as a teenager. But he got help in time.

Bauer says that we we need to talk with our children about drugs long, long before they get to high school, or even middle school. Having said this, the difficulty is that most parents are not qualified to offer their children informed advice. "Get the kids before they get to the judge," she advises. And tell them as soon as they can understand it, "Be too smart to start." Bauer believes it would be a gigantic step forward if we as a society could accept and act on the simple fact that drug addiction, whether it’s to alcohol,cocaine, prescription drugs, or anything else . is a disease and not a crime. That one realization would clear the air, decrease the confusion, and provide the basis for improving treatment. She is convinced "We ought to bring treatment into the open. Recovery is a reality!" She thinks that right now we are "so stuck in the problem we can’t see the solution." But for rehabilitation to be the answer two factors are important-- time and money. Bauer knows from her own experience that that 30 days in jail or anywhere else is hardly enough to make for significant change even in individuals eager to turn their lives around. She suggests it can take more than a year of treatment for the brain to regain its lost ability to manufacture neuro- transmitters.

Widespread use of rehabilitation rather than incarceration would save money because there would be fewer repeat offenders. Right now full scale rehab are quite expensive. at places like Valley Hope in Cushing it can be more than $10,000 a month , and remember the minimum time for a good outcome is six months. Without a national health insurance system, few can afford that, and ordinary health insurance would not pay either.

In conclusion, the speaker said Oklahomans need to continue to support taxes on liquor and cigarettes so more money can go to drug treatment programs. She also encouraged citizens to talk about all these issues in our community every chance we get and contact our legislators.

(Article by Alvena Bieri)

View 5 min. video excerpt here.

METHAMPHETAMINE: SHOULD WE PROHIBIT OR LEGALIZE?

The October 2004 speaker for the Drug Policy Forum of Oklahoma was Monty Johnson, Salasaw lawyer and candidate for U.S. Senate. His topic was, "Methamphetamine: Should We Prohibit or Legalize?" After graduating with a degree in theology he worked as a part time D.A. He noticed that most crimes such as burglary, credit, theft, stolen property, hot checks were related to methamphetamine addiction. He realized that what he at first thought of as property crimes were really crimes caused by drug addiction. On the basis that 85% of felonies are drug related he started to understand that it was a mistake to send people with a drug problem to prison. Judges in Sequoyah County began to realize they had a drug problem and that they needed to address crimes caused by drug addiction. He saw more murders done by meth than by guns. Of five murders only two were by guns, three were because of meth.

One young man addicted to meth got so bad that towards the end his family didn’t want anything to do with him. He ended up shooting a man and being sentenced to life without parole. Johnson said, "He’ll spend the rest of his life in prison for what is really a meth addiction problem." Another client was on meth the night he killed his father by stabbing him 13 times. Johnson observed, "When reporters talk of murder they only give the facts of what happened- they don’t talk about the drugs, the drinking, the meth." Johnson was astonished that he was getting some 200 drug cases a year.

He explained that anybody can become addicted. He mentioned the case of a good looking couple from good families who he had known since high school. The parents had good jobs, one mother was a school teacher. Once addicted they ran up thousands on their credit cards, wreaked their S.U.V. and lost their jobs. Suddenly their lives were a shambles. Even their house was destroyed by cooking meth- all in a matter of a few months.

He told of a woman in her mid 30's. She was so addicted she couldn't keep her own children, who were turned over to DHS custody. She became addicted the first time she experimented with "bathtub" methamphetamine. Clients on meth often look like emaciated inmates of a German concentration camp. Meth eliminates appetite and addicts simply go without food. Johnson commented, "After treatment some recover and look so much better that it's difficult to recognize them."

He explained that because of meth it’s common for grandparents to raise grandchildren... that the children suffer the most. He talked about a school system that started a “back pack” program. Because parents on meth don't attend to the needs of their children they just don't eat well and don't perform well in school especially on Mondays. The school began to send children home with back packs filled with food on Friday so they would have something to eat on the weekends.

He explained that even his secretary became addicted to meth. Though he knew a lot about drugs he was unable to notice anything wrong. In some cases it is impossible for any one but a professional to detect the signs of drug use and even professionals can be fooled. He said Sequoyah County is one of the most progressive counties in relation to enlightened drug policy issues. He is surprised that larger, better educated, richer counties are not doing as well as Sequoyah County. ( Payne, Noble, Cleveland, Logan) Every county needs good drug courts, good District Attorneys, good judges who understand that the problem of addiction is not a moral failure. All need to know that addiction is as real a disease as any physical sickness. He commented, "Most state officials involved have come to understand this. But it hasn’t trickled down to the judges and the D.A.’s. Too many find political success in raging against drugs, maintaining a law and order position, insisting on sending addicts to prison, insisting against all common sense that addicts stop being addicted. It defies all common sense from a financial as well as a community standpoint."

He continued, "When you send these people off to prison they can’t work, they can’t support their kids, they can’t keep their family together. If you want to keep the family and the fabric of the community together, we have to keep addicts in the community where they can with help be productive. We have to make sure they get off meth. Prison needs to be a last resort rather than the first option. The attitude of D.A.’s and law enforcement that by God we’re going to do something about these drugs is unrealistic and counter productive," Johnson claimed, "We need more Drug Rehabs. If addicts can stay in the community they can stay in touch with their families. They might be even able to work. The use of meth destroys the natural ability of the brain to produce neurotransmitters that are responsible for feelings of well being. The brain requires 18 months or longer to recoup its ability to produce natural neurotransmitters. That’s why short term treatment programs do not work. We need more long term treatment programs. We need more treatment." Johnson explained, "I’m not for legalization, I’m for helping people. There are ways of helping that are less expensive than putting them in prison. It’s more productive for our communities. It’s more productive for our whole state. We can actually save money by rehabbing these people rather than sending them to prison." Johnson ended his presentation by saying,"I hope that’s what our D.A.’s and judges will start learning. I hope that’s what we’ll start doing more of. I’m going to do what I can to support such efforts. I know most of you will to."

A letter writer's solution to the meth problem.

Drug Prohibition: The Libertarian Perspective

Lynn Atherton, with the Oklahoma Libertarian Party (www.oklp.org), spoke at the monthly meeting of the Drug Policy Forum of Oklahoma on May 10th, 2004. Atherton pointed out that many who challenge Libertarian thought immediately ask, “How could you be opposed to the “War on Drugs”? Do you want all of our kids hooked on cocaine and smoking pot? We have to protect our children!” Atherton continued by posing this question, “How many liquor store owners do you see on the street corner trying to get kids to drink? It just doesn’t happen today – but it did during (alcohol) prohibition when the bootleggers had control of the alcohol.” This is one of the main points which Atherton stressed - with proper controls, all drugs can be safely legalized without fear of overwhelming social ills. As our system is now, illegal drugs are more readily available to children than tobacco or alcohol – our two most popular and legal recreational drugs. “With legalization and regulation this situation could be changed dramatically.” Atherton explained further that, “The ‘War on Drugs‘costs us taxpayers between 60 and 70 billion dollars per year and an enormous underground economy is driven through the buying and selling of illegal drugs. If we spent even a small percentage of what we spend now to enforce draconian drug laws on education and treatment we could free up an incredible amount of resources for use elsewhere and help many citizens at the same time.”

One person in the audience pointed out that, “The only reason weeds are worth their weight in gold is that they are illegal.” Atherton explained that, “Many people who simply use drugs for recreational or medical purposes are stigmitized for life by our justice system which prosecutes these people and labels them as felons. Not only are they affected mentally by incarceration, disdain from their family members perhaps, and developing a disrespect for authority and the law, but are forever made less employable in our mainstream economy, thus driving them to take part in the underground economy and putting them at further risk for addiction and future incarceration.” Atherton went on to point out that many of the drugs which are villified today, such as cocaine and marijuana, were legal treatments which could be purchased over the counter less than a hundred years ago, and urged those in attendance to think about how these drugs were made illegal in the first place. Highly recommended by Atherton, ‘A Drug War Carol’ is a new book by Susan W. Wells and Scott Bieser which presents a history of drug prohibition in the United States (http://adrugwarcarol.com/ADWC.php).

Atherton began by asking those in attendance, “How would you define a victimless crime?” One member of the audience defined a ‘victimless crime’ as a crime which is solely against the morals of the ruling class –breaking a law which has been written to ensure obedience to such morals and codes of personal conduct in instances where the only percieved ‘victim’ is one’s self. Atherton suggests that we think about using altenative terms when dealing with the concept of a ‘victimless crime’ stating that, “Peter McWilliams writes that we should not use the term ‘victimless crime’, but instead stir people’s thinking by saying ‘consensual activity between adults’ or ‘consensual activity amongst adults’. I still use the term ‘victimless crime’ to point out that there is no victim – there is no one who has been victimized by your activity.” Ms. Atherton went on to point out that many citizens say that, “’The families are hurt , the people that love the person are hurt because they don’t want the person to do those things or, worse yet, they might get into trouble with the law.’ This is true to an extent, but if we chose to use those criteria we start to slide down a slippery slope. Every fellow who has ever broken up with a girl has hurt her and every woman who has ever broken up with her fiance has hurt him, so should we punish that?” Atherton went on to list many other examples which fit into this category such as smoking and gambling – activities which some might find repugnant, but which there is much debate as to whether or not the government has the right to pass legislation against. Next Atherton asked,“Who owns you?” The consensus of the room was that you have ownership of yourself. “Libertarians assert that we own ourselves. If we hold this concept to be true, we must logically conclude that it is absurd to pass laws which preclude such self-ownership. If you own yourself, you have the right to pursue your own dreams and make decisions regarding your own life. Self-ownership is fundamental to this idea.” Atherton went on to state that this is the primary reasoning which leads the Libertarian Party to take it’s position that we must bring the “War on Drugs” to an end.

DPFOK Hears From Those In Doubt OF DARE

A Drug Abuse Resistance Education panel and guest speaker Roger Hudlin presented an opposing view of the drug program at a the Drug Policy Forum of Oklahoma meeting. The speakers spoke against drugs and how the drug program and policy is not working. “It gives the appearance of doing something,” said Roger Hudlin, current law enforcement against prohibition speaker. Almost half a trillion dollars are being spent to fight drugs, Hudlin said. The drug program alone costs $1.4 billion to operate. There have been 13 independent studies that proved that the drug program is ineffective, Hudlin said. “Drugs are cheaper and easier to get than they ever were before,” Hudlin said. Hudlin is one of 50 in the prohibition group that travels around the country speaking against the program and about reasons for new policies. “Cops aren’t teachers,” Hudlin said. Story continued here.

Is DARE Worth the Money? OSU's O'Colly asks.

DPFOK Adopts Constitution

A large contingent of Drug Policy Forum of Oklahoma members gathered to celebrate the adoption of an organizational constitution Nov. 12th, 2003 at the Strode Hospitality Center in Stillwater. Some of the celebrants pictured left to right are Clarence and Janet Cunningham, Jeff Pickens (rear), Tim Shelby, Mary Haney, Carmen Dorris, Ron Shewey, Mary Randall, Ron du Bois.

Former Narc Speaks to DPFOK

Jack Cole, former New Jersey State Police, spoke at the June 2003 meeting of the Drug Policy Forum of Oklahoma. Cole states that the war on drugs is not working. He worked for 25 years for the New Jersey State Police, first as a state trooper, then for 14 tears as an undercover narcotics agent. He holds a B. A. degree in criminal justice, a master's degree in public policy and is currently writing his dissertation in the public policy Ph.D. program at the University of Massachusetts. He is executive director of Law Enforcement Against Prohibition.

Cole's solution to the drug problem in the United States includes ending prohibition, legalizing drugs. This would remove the profit motive from dealers. Each year, 1.6 million less people would be arrested and $69 billion would be saved. There would be less incidences of institutionalized racism in the criminal justice system. For example, blacks use 13.5 of the drugs, but blacks constitute 37 percent of the drug arrests and 60 percent of those imprisoned for drugs. A black male born today has a one in four chance of serving time in prison. Disenfranchisement is also an unjust consequence. Because of their felony convictions, 10 percent of black males cannot vote. In Texas 31 percent of black males cannot vote.

Prohibition puts the manufacture and sale of drugs in the hands of the criminal element. Cole would put the government in charge of the production of all drugs, so there would be quality control, standardized measurement and potency and therefore, an end to the vast majority of overdoses, the result of unknown potency. Cole also advocatesfree maintenance doses of drugs to adults requesting them. In Switzerland and Holland, when addicts began receiving free heroin, crime dropped by 60 percent, homelessness dropped from 12 percent to 0. AIDS and Hepatitis dropped to the lowest of any other countries in Europe and full time employment more than doubled. Then Cole would redirect the $69 billion no longer needed for the drug war to programs that offer hope for the future, such as rehabilitation centers, housing, health care and job training. He showed a picture taken during the last years of alcohol prohibition with a motto that could be used today: "Save our children. Stamp out prohibition."

Another story on Cole and LEAP shown here.

DEA Won't Debate Its Drug Policy With LEAP Members and Others

More DFPOK Meetings Reviewed Here.

To DPFOK front page