When I first learned (about a year after the fact) that Oregon had decriminalized possession of less than two grams of methamphetamine my first thought was, if he'd stayed in Oregon when the rest of us returned to Arizona he might not be behind bars now. He could tweak himself into oblivion and not suffer any punishment beyond a fine that's roughly equivalent to a traffic ticket.
My second thought was, are Oregon voters and lawmakers aware that even that small amount can be fatal? Because it can. While the methamphetamine produced by pharmaceutical companies for legitimate medical purposes is (presumably) as standardized and untainted as any other pharmaceutical, the stuff that's made by drug cartels and sold on the street definitely isn't. These days it can be adulterated with Fentanyl. And even if it isn't, for a person with little or no acquired tolerance to meth, even the smallest of doses can kill.
My third thought was, how in hell is this supposed to help anyone? How does minimizing consequences motivate any addict to get clean? When I minimized the consequences of his addiction in an attempt to buy myself a little relative peace it was labeled "enabling". And rightly so. How can this possibly help the legions of families, spouses, and friends who already struggle with setting and maintaining healthy boundaries with the addict in their lives? (I can imagine how that conversation would have gone for me. It would end with him sneering, "What're you gonna do? Call the cops?")
I know that addiction is an illness, not a character flaw or moral failure. I also admit that my reservoir of compassion for addicts has been rather depleted over the past decade or two, while my concern for the people around them has grown.
My family lived in Oregon for seven years. I saw first hand that meth addiction is not a problem that's confined to large cities. It's horrifyingly prevalent in rural areas too. Near the town of Blue River, a few miles away from where we lived in McKenzie Bridge, there was a small trailer park known as "Tweaker Town". It was the grimmest, saddest, filthiest community I'd ever seen. I was told that every single residence contained at least one meth addict. I could easily believe it. Nearly twenty years later it remains one of the most horrifying places I've ever seen.
But the problem of meth addiction wasn't confined to that small trailer park. The stuff was everywhere. It was at least as prevalent in our tiny Oregon town as it was back in Phoenix. Something I was unaware of when we made plans to move there. It was the saddest, most terrible wake-up call I'd ever experienced by that point in my life.
In November 2020 Oregon voters passed Measure 110 by a 59% majority in favor of decriminalizing petty possession of all illegal drugs. The idea was to move from the current ineffective model of shipping addicts off to prison to a focus on health and social services based solutions. Which definitely seems like a better idea. Assuming that it works. The health-centric approach to dealing with addiction was to be funded by an anticipated $100 million in tax revenues collected from sales of marijuana in that state, which was legalized in 2014. The idea was to increase the help available for addicts to pursue recovery; housing assistance, medical care, counseling, treatment, harm mitigation. The argument could be made that if even just one life is saved, it'd be worth it.
At the time of it's introduction proponents of Measure 110 said that they wanted to adopt "the Portuguese model" for dealing with drug addiction. Just one problem with that; Portugal has had universal healthcare since 1979. We of course do not. Portugal decriminalized all drugs in 2001. As time passed they'd seen a dramatic decrease in overdose deaths, drug related crime, and HIV infections.
For several years now the "new meth"- more potent, more lethal and even more highly addictive- has been trafficked in the US. It's effects have been absolutely devastating. In Oregon, despite increased available funding for healthcare and other services for addicts, the state's hospitals and mental health facilities are being severely strained. The ongoing problem of widespread homelessness is worsening. The criminal justice system is seeing an increase of violent, psychotic offenders who aren't even competent to stand trial, they're so mentally damaged. Years after the passage of Measure 110, thousands of people will not have the blight of a criminal conviction for drugs on their record, and at least one needle exchange site has been opened. Apart from that it appears that not a lot of progress has been made. If anything, the situation is worsening.
I agree that our nation's "war on drugs" is an abysmal failure, has done far more harm than good, and needs to end. But this kind of "solution" in my opinion was doomed to fail before it began. Without the support of universal healthcare already in place decriminalization couldn't have worked. It's just made it easier for addicts to keep using. The road to Addiction Hell has been repaved by the good intentions of people who honestly wanted to help.
I wish I knew what the answer was. I'm not a medical professional, nor am I a social worker or lawmaker. I'm just a woman with far more experience with addiction in general and meth in particular than any sane ordinary person would ever want.
More about this-
www.vice.com/…
strugglingwithaddiction.com/…
www.opb.org/…
Thank you for reading. This is an open thread, all topics are welcome.