Byliner: Gen. McCaffrey on U.S. Progress Against Drug Abuse

(Abuse among adults down nearly 50 percent since 1970s)  (1170)

[This article appeared in the February 2000 issue and is reprinted
with permission from THE WORLD & I, a publication of The Washington
Times Corporation, copyright (c) 2000.]

We Have No "War On Drugs"
By Gen. Barry McCaffrey

[Barry McCaffrey is director of the White House Office of National
Drug Control Policy (ONDCP).]

The ill-chosen term "war on drugs" illustrates the problem that can
develop from using misplaced military metaphors. The so-called war on
drugs is not the "longest war in U.S. history," as some have claimed,
because the effort to reduce substance abuse is not a war. If we use
the term "war" for any sustained initiative, we could term education
the "war on ignorance." Then we might argue erroneously that since
American schools failed to stamp out ignorance despite centuries of
schooling, the country has lost what is truly the longest "war" and
therefore should close all schools.

In fact, the United States is a lot closer to reducing substance
abuse. Drug use among adults is down nearly 50 percent from its high
point in the late 1970s. We have been winning with Americans who are
mature enough to make sound, informed decisions. The recent decrease
(13 percent in just the past year) in illegal drug use by teens shows
that we are on the right track in our efforts to educate upcoming
generations to avoid the dangers of addictive drugs.

Although the struggle to reduce drug use is not a war, illegal drugs
contribute to the deaths of more than 50,000 Americans each year --
close to the number of U.S. casualties during the entire Vietnam War.
People who say that drug use is a victimless crime are ignoring the
facts. Drug abuse imposes an unacceptable risk of harm on others. The
evidence supporting this viewpoint is chilling:

-- One study revealed that non-drug users who live in households where
drugs are used are 11 times more likely to be killed than individuals
from drug-free households. Drug abuse in the home renders a woman 28
times more likely to be killed by a close relative (Journal of the
American Medical Association).

-- More than half the crime in this country is committed by
individuals under the influence of drugs. The majority of these crimes
result from the effects of the drug, not from the fact that drugs are
illegal. A study of drug-related homicides in New York found that 60
percent resulted from the psychopharmacological effects of illegal
drugs ("Substance Abuse in Urban America: Its Impact on an American
City," a CASA study).

-- A survey of state child welfare agencies identified substance abuse
as one of the top two problems exhibited by 81 percent of families
reported for child maltreatment. Researchers estimate that substance
abuse is present in at least half of all child-abuse and neglect cases
(National Committee to Prevent Child Abuse, DUF-Drug Use Forecasting,
National Institute of Justice).

-- Research from the National Institute for Drug Abuse shows that
untreated opiate addicts die at a rate seven to eight times higher
than similar patients in methadone-based treatment programs (Joe
Loconte, "Killing them Softly," Policy Review). Dr. James Curtis,
director of addiction services at Harlem Hospital Center, explains:
"It is false, misleading, and unethical to give addicts the idea that
they can be intravenous drug abusers without suffering serious
self-injury." Eighty-two percent of drug addicts die of causes other
than AIDS, such as drug overdoses (Dr. G.W. Woody, New England Journal
of Medicine). Intravenous drug users contract septicemia, wounds
botulism, and other severe conditions resulting from their drug
habits.

Drugs themselves harm users. A significant percentage of users become
addicted. Addiction is a brain disease that results from the
introduction of foreign substances into the body which, in turn,
change a person's neurochemistry. For four million chronically
addicted Americans, drug use is not a choice; it has nothing to do
with personal liberty. Sanctions on drug use, when combined with
increased drug treatment resources, are the best hope many addicts
have of regaining control of their lives. Compelling scientific
evidence indicates that a large number of drug-dependent individuals
will only complete treatment if forced to do so by the threat of
criminal sanctions. A study of a Brooklyn forced-treatment program
found that the percentage of offenders who stay in drug treatment is
two to four times higher than for general residential treatment.
Removing the threat of criminal sanctions eliminates the possibility
of forced treatment, condemning addicts to miserable lives.

One argument given for drug legalization by harm-reduction advocates
is that the alleged "war" against drugs has been lost. This false line
of reasoning ignores the fact that drug use in this country declined
by half in the last two decades. The number of current users dropped
from 25 million in 1979 to 13 million in 1996, while the number of
current cocaine users plummeted from 5.7 million in 1985 to 1.75
million in 1998 -- a 69-percent decline.

Nevertheless, the execution of drug-control policy can still be
improved. The National Drug Control Strategy is implementing important
changes. The strategy's number-one goal is prevention. In the past
four years, the administration increased spending on prevention by 55
percent, and over the past five years the investment in treatment rose
26 percent. The strategy calls for more treatment in the criminal
justice system as well as scientific research to break the cycle of
drugs, addiction, and crime. (The federal government's National
Institute on Drug Abuse conducts 85 percent of the world's research on
addiction.)

Fundamentally, the debate over drug legalization boils down to a
question of risk. Studies show that the more a product is available
and legitimized, the greater will be its use. If drugs were legalized,
the cost to the individual and society would grow astronomically.
Removing the criminal status associated with drug use and sale
ultimately would produce more wrecked young lives.

On a judicial level, the question of drug legalization comes down to
whether we should condone destructive behavior. American jurisprudence
has gone in the opposite direction for the individual and society at
large. Americans have decided that people do not have a right to ride
motorcycles without wearing helmets, drive cars without using seat
belts, pollute the environment at will, or endanger themselves and
others by refusing vaccination or similar life-saving health measures.
In general, our laws indicate that self-destructive activity should
not be permitted. Drug consumption damages the brain, which in turn
produces other forms of negative behavior. U.S. law does not grant
people the right to destroy themselves or others. Addictive drugs were
criminalized because they are harmful; they are not harmful because
they were criminalized.

(Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Persons who intend
to redistribute this byliner should credit THE WORLD & I as the
source.)

(end text)

(Distributed by the Office of International Information Programs, U.S.
Department of State. Web site: usinfo.state.gov)