WHAT MAKES METH SO BAD

"Who has to pay to rehab the addicts? The working, taxpayer types? Or would the addict at least pay their own rehab? Some addicts have too high a failure rate --- something like 90% for meth addicts --- it's too futile, too expensive to teach them --- they aren't teachable."

That's just not true. I do not know exactly what the success rate is for our drug court program, but most of the people make it through the 15 month program and they are drug tested so often that it would be nearly impossible to cheat the entire way through without being caught and bing sent to jail. Over half cheat at first, but as they get caught and go to jail and see those around them getting caught and going to jail most of them get the picture, stop hanging around anyone who gets high so as to alleviate the temptation to chat, and they leave the stuff alone. By the time they get through the program most have fattened up, gotten the color back in their skin and they seem to be doing great. I couldn't tell you what the success rate is as far as getting these people off meth for good but I expect it's much higher than 10%.

Drug court is not a very expensive program. I am not paid any extra for the hours I donate to the program. It's just an extra few hours per week I handle in addition to my standard caseload. The state provides a probation officer and a drug counselor. These people also have other duties besides our small drug court. Sometimes we send some of the really hardcore addicts off to in patient treatment for 45 to 90 days and that is often paid for by the state. That happens with less than 10% of the people in the program. Others are sent to rehab that they must pay for themselves. Also, the people in the program pay $50 a month. It's not much, but it does at least defer some of the drug testing costs and we didn't want to set these people up for failure.

The cost for drug court, treatment and all, is only a tiny fraction of what it costs to send these people to prison. Some of these people end up going to prison anyway, but still we are saving a fortune. Let me give you a for instance. I pled a lady into drug court a few months ago. The prosecutor almost didn't go for it because the lady was charged with cooking meth. He wanted her to plead to 20 years with 10 suspended and she would not have been eligible for parole for 7 years. She paid for her own 45 day rehab and the prosecutor showed a rare moment of compassion and let her plead into drug court. This lady has been doing great, she's been an inspiration and a real asset in the program and I'd say there is a high likelihood she won't go back to what she was doing. The taxpayers saved over hundred grand just on that lady. And had she gone to prison she'd have gotten zero drug treatment, she probably would have been able to get drugs there, and she'd probably have come out of it worse off than she was when she went into it. Not only that, but her three children would have been wards of the state. Now, she has custody of her baby and is working to get her other two kids back. Again, the state is saving thousands of dollars.

You have to look at the big picture. Addicts are going to cost us one way or another. It makes sense to try to minimize those costs. Much of the time no jail or actual in patient treatment is required. Sometimes we do need to provide a little bit of treatment if the situation calls for it. Sometimes a little attitude adjustment through jail time is all that's required. Sometimes though none of that will work and the best thing to do is send them off for 9 months to a year at a minimum security community punishment facility where they will lead structured lives, be drug tested frequently, receive some drug treatment and counseling and have to work through some behavior modification steps like the Moral Recognition Therapy (MRT) program used at our Community Correction Centers, our drug court, and several similar programs throughout the country.

Regular prison should only be used as a last resort and I would think only if these people are committing other more serious crimes than simple drug crimes. The only thing plain old fashioned prison is good for is keeping really bad people off the streets away from the rest of us. It does not tend to change the offenders for the better, and the cold hard fact of the matter is that they are going to get out someday and probably be worse burdens on society when they do get out.

You make some assertions about meth addicts that are dead wrong. Ninety percent of the people in our drug court program were using meth. Many of them were hardcore addicts. They were strung out and in really bad shape when we got them. Some of these folks do fail out of our program, but most make it. They start looking so much healthier. The bags disappear from under their eyes. That "tweaker" look tends to go away. They fatten up. They all have to get jobs, pay their child support, get transportation and stable living arrangements. Many of them save up their money and go to the dentist to get their bad teeth fixed. Their futures brighten up, and I have to say I am just proud to know most of these people. We had drug court today and one lady actually brought me a flower with a card thanking me for getting her into the program and helping her change her life. I must admit I don't get flowers very often (ever) but many if not most of these people do appreciate the chance they are given through this system.

"I've known cocaine and alcohol addicts who were only able to start their rehab after going to jail --- it gave them a time out on their drug, allowed their minds to clear for once and think about rehab --- plus the fear of being locked up without the drug seemed to motivate them to clean up --- and none had signed up for a voluntary program until there was jail time. It seemed like they must have thought if they keep on the way they were going they were going to be locked up without their fix -- and being locked up is horrible so they might as well try to get some control."

I agree that many of these people have to go to jail before they are ready for rehab. Part of the addiction and recovery process is that these people often have to hit rock bottom before they can admit that they have a problem. One of the key components to addiction is denial. I've seen people get in trouble time and time again such that it is obvious to me and everyone else around them that they have serious problems but these people will continue to insist that they are just casual users who could quit any time they wanted.

There are certainly people though who go into treatment all own their own without being forced into it and without ever having even been arrested. The biggest problem there is money though. I had an old case from private practice that I just finished up a couple of months ago where a client had gone to his employer of 13 years and told them he had a problem with meth. His company sent him to rehab, paid for it, paid him while he was in rehab and then soon after he got out they actually gave him a promotion. That was three or four years ago. Since then his life has turned around for the better. He's continued to do well in work and we got him custody of his child.

Not everyone has an employer like this fellow who will go the extra mile and get their employees drug treatment. Many of these people can't even hold down jobs. There may be places in America where these people can just check themselves into drug treatment anyway free of charge, but it isn't that way here. There is a place with limited space available where they might be able to check themselves into that will bill them seven or eight hundred dollars or so later on, but the thought of having to wait on a waiting list and then have another big bill to pay scares these people away. Also, it's only a short program that isn't very effective and once these people go once, relapse and neglect to pay the treatment bill, they aren't welcomed back.

Drug addicts almost always relapse several times before they kick their habits. That's just a fact of life. It has nothing to do with disrespect for the law, lack of love for those close to them or anything like that, it's just that addiction can be a difficult if not impossible thing to beat. It's hard for any addict. Their brains have physically changed as a result of their addictions. Studies have even shown that some synapses quit firing and it takes a while to get things re-routed and working right again. This is especially true with meth addicts who seem night and day different as the months progress in their treatment.

If it were up to me, people caught with a small amount of illegal drugs like LSD or other non-addictive drugs would receive a fine and maybe have to take a drug education class to show them how what they are doing could hurt them. They'd get at most a misdemeanor conviction, if it wasn't just shown as a violation like a traffic ticket. People caught with addictive drugs like heroin or meth would have to go through a period of between 60 to 90 days where they had to undergo frequent drug tests, sometimes several a week. They'd have to call in everyday and report within a couple of hours if they are told to give a sample. Some samples would be tested for all drugs, some for some drugs and some not tested at all. Sometimes saliva tests could be performed to switch it up and minimize the possibility that people could get aways with cheating. The offenders would not know what tests were to be performed, and they would be required to pay for the tests either up front or through a payment plan. Upon completion of the testing period if they pass all the tests and complete an extended probation period lasting a few months with no further offenses, the cases would be dismissed without showing a criminal record other than a violation or at most a misdemeanor.

If people couldn't go the 60 or 90 days clean or if there were other reasons to suspect they were addicts and not just casual users, they would be forced into a drug court type program. I'd even consider small time dealers and even people out there cooking meth in their kitchens for something like this because most of the time these are just addicts trying to get high, selling whatever is left over to other people not unlike them. Most of them aren't making any money to speak of with their drug involvement. Most cannot even afford to pay their regular bills, let alone pay for a lawyer. I'd rather see them getting off drugs, getting jobs, and becoming responsible members of the community rather then wasting space in the prison that we could be using for child molesters, violent criminals and the like.

Today I pled three people into drug court. One had three counts of breaking or entering, one count of forgery and one count of theft of property, all drug related. Another had one count of theft of property, also drug related. Another had two counts of obtaining a prescription by fraud, after he stole pain medicine prescriptions from a neighbor. Each one of these people will go to three group meetings, three NA or AA meetings, one meeting with his probation officer and one with his drug counselor, as well as one court appearance, every single week. After three months or so when (if) they get out of "Phase One," there will be fewer meetings every week and court only every other week. A few months later they'll probably make it to "Phase Three" and have fewer meetings still. Each will be drug tested at least once a week, and sometimes several times a week.

Our drug court has a solid track record and it is the one always used as an example for how drug courts should be run in our state. We have people coming in from other parts of the state to observe all the time. Our judge is strict, and he tries to be as consistent, although some situations require differing remedies. In those situations he always asks for input from the group in drug court, which is a fairly interactive place. People get three strikes. On the fourth strike they are kicked out of the program.

The judge is fairly consistent with the strike system and with giving everyone the same punishments for each strike, but sometimes will throw in different punishments for other contemptuous conduct. Today for example, someone was sentenced to 30 days on his first strike and sent back to the beginning of phase one after several months in the program because he got caught trying to use someone else's urine for a drug test. Normally first strike would have only been two weekends in jail.

Missing court or required meetings is usually a strike but sometimes if there is a good enough excuse and the probation officer and drug counselor inform the court that the person has been trying hard he won't get a strike but might get some jail time or be required to do extra NA meetings. Failing a drug test or failing to report for one is always a strike. On occasion though, when we get a really hardcore type who gets in the program and right away either goes on a binge or never gets off the one he was one when he pled in, the judge will put him in jail and then as soon as a slot opens get him into drug treatment for 45 to 90 days, either at the defendant's expense or the state's, depending on the defendant's ability to pay and whether we have a slot open that the state will pay for. We only get precious few of those each year. After these people dry out they come back into the strike program and basically start all over, usually just showing one strike against them even if they might have racked up two or three or more in a short period of time while they were on their binge.

As I said, on first strike people normally get two weekends in jail. On second strike it's 15 days and on the third strike it used to be 120 in the community correction center (CCC) where they have drug treatment. But lately third strike has been a seven month sentence because it takes three or for months for a slot to open up in the CCC during which time these people just wait it out in jail. The extra time the judge is giving is in hopes that they'll have the 120 drug treatment program in the CCC and not spend all the time in the jail, where all the inmates do is talk about cooking dope and how they can't wait to get out and get high. On fourth strike these people are booted from the program and then usually get a year in the CCC or worse, depending on whether they are eligible for the minimum security CCC, what their underlying charges were, and what they did to get booted from the program.

Drug court is not a slap on the wrist, and it is certainly not easy. Programs like this are a step in the right direction. These are human beings we are dealing with. I don't look at any of them as throw aways who we should turn our backs on. Many of them are good people who will be assets in the community. Prison won't help them, and we aren't saving money when we refuse to try to help these people with their drug problems. Drug court is much, much cheaper than prison. Those community correction centers are often cheaper than prison. Our's are cheaper than our prisons and prison costs in our state are among the lowest in the nation (around $14,000 annual cost per inmate) because most of our prisons are prison farms (awful places to be though). The CCC's have close to the same annual costs even with the treatment and counseling because they are minimum security with far fewer guards. Total per inmate costs are much lower though because prisoners spend sentences that on average are much shorter at the CCC because the whole behavior modification/treatment program only takes nine months to a year to complete. And the best thing is that recidivism rates are much lower from the community correction centers than they are from prison.

Certainly part of that is because they don't let violent offenders or sex offenders or the hardest of the criminals into the CCC, but also I am convinced that a good part of the reason for the lower recidivism rates is the general attitude of caring of the people who run those facilities and the attempts made to rehabilitate these people. I have talked to many people who have come out of that program who say that it helped them grow up and it saved their lives. The reports I get from the regular prison usually involve stories of violence, homosexual rape, and drug use. It's extremely rare to hear someone talk about how that type of prison helped them become better people. Most of the people who go there will be going back.

Sorry to go on and on. It just really bothers me when I hear all of these attitudes being expressed in these forums about how we need to nail all of these "dopers" to the wall. Some people even suggest killing drug users and small time dealers and addicts who cook dope in their kitchens. I really don't think most people have any clue what they are talking about. We have something like 2.2 million people locked up in this country. The people locked up in prisons and jails in this country account for about 25% of all of the people locked up in this world, even though we in the U.S. only make up less than 5% of the world's population. We lock up more people than they do in Russia or China. We lock up more people than they do in all of the countries in the European Union combined.

Largely I think this is due to ignorance about what prison is actually good for. For the most part, all standard prison is good for is keeping really bad people off the streets and away from the rest of us. All of that nonsense about sending a message to others who might commit crimes is highly overrated. If you think that people are learning their lessons and learning how to be good citizens in prison, think again because usually they are learning exactly the opposite. We do need to work on our drug addiction problem in this country, but just as importantly, we need to work on our addiction to imprisoning people. This is America for God's sake, land of the free. There is no excuse for us having the highest incarceration rates in the world.

>>...silver spray paint...

Amazing isn't it. All they are doing is suffocating themselves, same as the ones around here who do the whippits (CO2). Nothing but oxygen deprivation, and when I was drowned as a kid I don't remember it being especially pleasant.

>>...undermining the effectiveness of anti-meth education with stupid 'pot makes you let children drown' ads.

Well if there is any anti-meth education I haven't seen it, only the ones on pot like you describe (not that there's nothing to that, but the same can be said for alcohol, both cause a bit of attention deficit).

As much as I appreciate your attempt to walk a middle path, as much as the horror-stories of stimulant-abuse ring true, as much as we all want to do what is best for the country, for our family, friends and neighbors - we have tilted too far in the direction of safety, at the expense of our precious liberty. It is not a proper function of government to monitor our diet. It is not a proper function of governmnet to dictate how we shall address our own health and well-being. Yet, the government is doing these things and so much more. Too much more. Liberty cannot survive under this assault.

Would it not be preferable to remove the awful restraint of government, to remove the corrupt subsidies of government, using our own substance to enrich the rich, to remove our authorization for our government to do any vile act, such as it does with billions of dollars extracted from our exertions, to spend on the foreign intrigues which now do threaten the survival of the country?

It IS preferable to cut off our support of government excess. And the first excess we must address is the oversight and meddling in the affairs of the American People. Will there be problems if the government withdraws restraints? There may well be. Will there be pain when the government withdraws subsidies from industries and individuals. Yes.

By the way, as an aside, the government MUST return to its rightful concerns such as control of our borders and collection of fees and tarrifs from foreigners wishing to trade in our markets. These things support freedom.

The War on Drugs is not and has never been intended to benefit the American People. Those who do benefit are industrial concerns and those who would control the United States without our consent.

Nevertheless, I appreciate your position and rather doubt that any movement in the direction of my thoughts will soon be forthcoming. Let's pray about it.

If "PING" means "ditto" or "I concur" then ... PING!

I'm going over 25 words here:

Paul Stevens couldn't figure out why so many meth addicts he came across had the same piece of busted equipment — a VCR.
The special agent with the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension had noticed the pattern for a while. One day in a meth user's home he saw a VCR with a screwdriver jammed into it. He thought the resident might be hiding drugs. That wasn't the case.
Said Stevens: "They're so paranoid, they wonder where those people (on TV) are. They attack the VCRs with screwdrivers, hammers."
Paranoia is just one side effect of methamphetamine, a highly addictive illegal drug increasingly taking hold across Minnesota.

Shades of Reefer Madness ("after two puffs I turned into a bat!"). I spoke with someone who has experience working with meth addicts, who tells me the conclusion regarding the cause of the VCR destruction -- rampant and common paranoia among users -- is all wrong, even preposterous.

What happens is what happened with housewives in the 1960s who ramped up on diet pills. They can't sit inactive, they look for something to do. The '60s housewives cleaned house. Husbands were often amused to find that their dieting spouses suddenly and compulsively kept spotlessly clean homes.

With male speed users, something similar occurs, but rather than compulsively clean, males look for something more "mechanical" to noodle around with. They find themselves intensely interested in how things work, or to just "clean" them, and with speed-driven compulsion to do something, they go after mechanical things with zeal and focus.

He said think of it as high-octane Ritalin -- the meth users become extremely task oriented and capable of intense tunnel-vision-focus on taking things apart like that. The problem is they often cannot put them back together -- they often don't have the right tools, and many electronic devices like VCRS are easily damaged or destroyed in disassembly, or just in a meth-driven desire to clean them.

He also said that with most -- not all, but most -- meth users, a paranoid episode like the one described in the article is usually enough to scare them away from the drug for good, or to motivate them to severely curtail their usage. He said if that kind of paranoia were that common a side effect, because of the unpleasantness of it there would be no meth epidemic.

So it might be a good idea to take the article's conclusion about rampant paranoia with a grain of salt. It's good WOD propaganda, but according to the worker I spoke to, it has little basis in real world meth use.

This is not to minimize the dangers of meth or its addictive nature -- just to offer a little balance for consideration before indulging in the hysteria.

hahah im from missouri "meth capitol"

Meth was smuggled from Taiwan and South Korea into Hawaii in the 1980s. By 1990, its presence had grown in the U.S. mainland, according to the Koch Crime Institute, a national organization aimed at understanding the causes of crime.

What??? They were cooking this stuff in the late 70's here in Memphis and we aren't exactly at the head of the curve here.

Fix any VCRs lately?

All I said was the legal version of meth was a lot safer than the homemade poison being made now. And there were a lot less addicts.

I believe when it was prescribed it was called crosstops. Small white pills. They were outlawed along with many other pharmy drugs that were popular in the 60's and 70's.

I am sure to get flamed for this but I believe drugs were "safer" when made and controlled by the drugstore. Now it seems the kids have their choice between crank or crack. Both are many times worse then the pharmy drugs that people use to use to change their reality.

I have seen the damage meth has done to a few people. I am sure it is the work of satan.

I thought that multiply banned MrLeRoy stated that alcohol is the only drug that causes agression. Looks like he was wrong again

Do you know the difference between a alcoholic and a meth fiend? A alky will give you the shirt off his back. A methfiend will steal your shirt, then help you look for it.

If it isn't Meth, these folks will find something else, we are not all equal when it comes to strength of character...

That is naive. Try testing your own strength of character against meth or cocaine.

seven months later...