The Argument for the Rehabilitation of Drug Users - Essay Example

? The Argument for the Rehabilitation of Drug Users The growing number of drug users who commit crimes cannot be emphasized too heavily. There is therefore a need to address the issue appropriately. Some people would claim that the prison is the answer to this. However, some believe that there is no way that prisons can correct drug users’ habits. Drug users should actually not be placed in prisons and that they should undergo rehabilitation. One reason why drug users should be given treatment instead of incarceration is that the latter is merely an impractical means of reducing drug abuse and of reforming the drug users. One reason for the impracticality is that the inclusion of drug users among the prisoners will simply result in overcrowding of prison, which is what the Californian State Prison is going through at this point. However, another impractical reason and one which is actually more important is that people who were jailed for drugs will not really reform drug users: “Charging those individuals with a felony doesn’t reduce illicit drug use” (Knafo). Putting drug addicts in prison will also not contribute to his own recovery as a drug user. Based on data from the Federal Bureau of Prisons, drug treatment studies for drug users in prison often make them reduce relapse, criminality, inmate misconduct, and behavioral disorders (“Substance Abuse Treatment”). Nevertheless, as long as a drug user is in prison, then he will never be able to have the environment that is conducive for his recovery. This means that as long as the drug user remains incarcerated, his behavior and conduct and his recovery will always be challenged by his fellow inmates, who can abuse him at anytime. Thus, instead of recovering from the abuse, he will continue to be violent as the prison itself has a plethora of threats and abuses of all kinds. Placing prisoners in rehabilitation programs instead of prisons will hopefully reduce recidivism. In fact, according to Cape Cod Times, this is basically the goal of American Representative Randy Hunt’s current program that favors the rehabilitation of drug users in prisons. The basis for the purpose of reducing recidivism somehow lies in the fact that undergoing treatment, drug testing as well as counseling will definitely take care of the pressing problem of drug addiction sooner than incarcerating the drug user (Barber). This is somehow similar to the idea of taking care of the drug abuse problem more readily so that it can actually be dealt with. Otherwise, the same kind of person will get arrested and jailed sooner or later. Moreover, subjecting the prisoner to the nadir of existence in jail, then common sense will tell us that they will never be able to recover from the drug problem. Furthermore, based on information from the International Penal and Penitentiary Foundation, prisoners with drug and alcohol related problems can only possibly recover in a “therapeutic unit” (Wrobel). As this therapeutic unit may allow leaving the cells open, may allow prisoners to receive outside volunteers or may allow the family of the patient to participate in the therapy as well (Wrobel). Although this can actually appear dangerous, it is an error on the side of kindness. Moreover, what is missing here and what should be known before a drug user is sent for rehabilitation is the idea that the drug user will undergo strict assessment first as well as strict monitoring. Strict assessment means that those who are extremely violent will not be able to walk freely during or may not even be sent for rehabilitation in order to reduce risks of causing violence. Moreover, strict monitoring means that throughout every phase of treatment that these drug users have to go through, they are strictly supervised by the police. This means that if the drug user has a history of violence, they he is less likely to participate in any rehabilitation program. Moreover, as long as these are true statements about the benefit of rehabilitation for drug users instead of imprisonment are backed by scientific evidence, then they cease appearing spurious or fallacious. A fourth reason for the option of rehabilitation over incarceration is the idea that patterns of drug conviction in prison may actually be “mutually reinforcing” (Iguchi et al.). This means that those with an already diagnosed problem of drug abuse, violence or alcoholism may actually revert back to their original selves as they know they are in the midst of a group that will definitely condone their abusive behavior. Having plenty of inmates who are actually suffering from the same maladjusted behaviors usually brought about by addiction of all sorts especially to drugs will definitely make one believe that it is normal to take drugs and not to recover from it. A fifth reason for not incarcerating the drug user and rehabilitating him instead is that they can have a chance of being more useful outside of prison if they are allowed to work and do simple jobs. In fact, according to information from Informa Healthcare, 78% of offenders who enrolled themselves in vocational programs were able to obtain employment after release from prison (Kemp et al.). This means that offenders actually have qualifications for employment despite the fact that they have been imprisoned. In fact, it would even be better for them if they do not go into prison and that they should only undergo rehabilitation as the time in prison is actually a waste of time. These drug users, sometime during the course of their treatment, can actually become already qualified to apply for a job. Moreover, they can learn more things about their craft if they are not imprisoned. Lastly, they can actually have more chances of getting hired because they have not stayed in prison and that this will not be indicated in their record and thus it will not be indicated as well in their application form. Moreover, further substance abuse may be prevented if the drug user is carefully monitored outside the prison for rehabilitation instead of being allowed to stay in jail for a long time. The fact that “80% of paroles have a history of substance abuse” is actually overwhelming (Kemp et al.). Such information only means one thing – that these prisoners who have long been kept away from treatment may actually have got so accustomed to their illness that they have learned to live and survive with it. Thus, putting them under rehabilitation will therefore prevent such state of permanence that some drug users have developed inside prison. Moreover, the farther the drug users are kept from prison, the farther away they are from the negative influence of more drug abuse. Another reason why prisoners should be rehabilitated and not incarcerated is that their health is better taken care of if they undergo rehabilitation. Rehabilitation programs may actually already include hepatitis, STD and HIV tests and services together with the rehabilitation assistance (Gunn et al.). If the drug user is incarcerated, it means that he will not be given appropriate treatment for his drug abuse, and his health will even be just the least of the government’s priorities. Thus, chances to better health and a more certain way of recovering from drug abuse can only be achieved through rehabilitation. Another reason for using rehabilitation instead of incarceration is that rehabilitation goes hand in hand with social support. Social support is an essential component of any rehabilitation program for drug users (Bobrova et al.). Some governments like those of Russia would usually opt for incarceration of drug users because of a lack of resources for social support and rehabilitation programs, but the problem should not be addressed in this way. The government may be as impecunious as a beggar but it should definitely seek the necessary resources in order to carry out the important task of rehabilitation. As long as governments use as an alibi the idea that there are not enough resources just to resort to incarceration of drug users instead of rehabilitating them, then the real problem of drug abuse is never addressed. It will therefore continue to exist as it is. Drug treatment or rehabilitation has always been documented as effective in terms of implementation. In fact, “drug treatment courts have multiplied over the past decade” (Turner et al.). The multiplication of drug treatment courts is actually an indication of the public’s growing acceptance of the drug treatment option for drug users instead of incarceration. The more opportunities people have for drug treatment, the more drug users will be brought to these places for treatment. Sometimes, the only reason for incarceration is that there is no other option, and that drug treatment facilities are actually either too few, too substandard or practically nonexistent. Another reason why rehabilitation is the better option instead of incarceration is that it can prepare the drug user for a better life by reforming him. In fact, if the drug user has improved motivation, psychosocial resources, coping strategies, social support and a secure attachment, then he is more likely to recover faster and make himself a more productive citizen to the country (Meier et al., 2005). Moreover, he can achieve all these things only through rehabilitation. There is no way to become a better person through imprisonment because prison facilities have all sorts of problems and challenges ranging from gangs to abusive law enforcement officers. However, if one is undergoing rehabilitation, one would notice that the environment he is in is at least conducive for his mental and emotional recovery. Thus, it will only take a short time before he can function in society again as an ordinary human being, which is after all the goal of all correctional institutions including the harshest prisons. Indeed, incarceration can only make things worse for him by depriving him of the environment by which he can recover fast and become a productive citizen. Aside from bad prisoners and police officers, the prison itself can be very depressing and can symbolize punishment and guilt. Thus, as long as the drug user is in jail, he is most likely to think that he is being punished for the wrong acts he has committed and with thoughts of punishment come many other negative thoughts. Another reason for choosing the rehabilitation option is that it is useful for juvenile offenders as well as for childhood prevention of drug use. In fact, according to the results of a 2006 Pennsylvania survey, adults are actually more willing to pay for a childhood prevention program as well as a rehabilitation program for the youth offenders and drug users instead of spending for long incarcerations (Nagin et al.). Public opinion may not actually be a very good and fitting substitute for facts but there is always some truth in what the general public says. The fact that most people would rather spend their money on rehabilitation instead of incarceration somehow implies that these people believe that there is always more hope in the former than in the latter. Rehabilitation is the better choice for drug users because all cases of substance abuse require immediate treatment. In fact, according to the journal European Addiction Research, 170 recently published articles from 4 large databases confirmed that substance abuse requires immediate treatment, as expressed by the policy proposals, reviews, as well as legal and ethical commentaries (Wild et al.). The only way for immediate urgent and compulsory treatment to take place is only through rehabilitation and not incarceration. Drug abuse cases always require immediate treatment and attention, and the longer one ignores it, the worse it can get. Thus, rehabilitation is the answer to this. Otherwise, if one is in jail, no special attention is given to him and not even if he seeks for treatment. No matter how much they say that prisoners have rights, they are basically just prisoners – or people that most of the society would simply lampoon to their disadvantage. Another reason why one chooses to rehabilitate and not incarcerate a drug user is that incarcerated drug users receive limited treatment and a relatively low-level of care. According to Belenko and Peugh, “We estimate that one-third of male and half of female inmates need residential treatment” but “treatment capacity in state prisons is quite inadequate relative to need” (Belenko & Peugh). From this aforementioned statement, one may think that the prison may actually provide the care that is being given in rehabilitation. However, it is very clear that care in prison is very limited and lacking, for the prison is simply different from the hospital, the infirmary or the rehabilitation center. The prison is a place for punishment and a place for making criminals suffer in order to teach them a lesson. It is basically not a place to take care of them. Rehabilitation is the better option compared to incarceration because health and mental health problems should be addressed through service utilization. Rehabilitation is the only way that service utilization can be done. This involves the use of an emergency room or hospital room and mental health treatment. However, if one is incarcerated, it will be a limited substance abuse treatment utilization (Staton et al.). Thus, the most important thing is being rehabilitated so that one can freely use the benefits of hospitalization and other medical services. The goal is not to undergo rehabilitation just to avail of service utilization. The goal is to avail of these medical services as they are necessary in the case of mental health problems. Another reason why we should opt for rehabilitation for drug users instead of incarceration is that drug users that are really into drugs will most likely continue selling and using drugs in prison. Thus, there will be a need for a separate prison for drug users if this is the case (Sihaloho). However, if one wants to cut down expenses, then he has to push for rehabilitation. With rehabilitation, then both the prisoner and the prison can actually have an advantage: the prisoner can recover fast as he can avail of medical services immediately and the prison need not spend much on providing medical services to these prisoners as well as taking steps to avoid a drug deals inside prison. Moreover, prison officials are spared from segregating drug users and building a separate prison for them. If drug users stayed alongside non-drug users in prison, chances are there will always be a tendency for the latter to extol the former, and for the former to vilify the latter. The problems of incarceration may also be used as reasons for opting for rehabilitation. Among these problems include the fact that drug treatment in prison falls short of the minimum, and that there is a risk of doing more harm than good in prison. The reasons for this are numerous but some of the most noteworthy include loss of employment, disruption of family relationships, increased health risk especially because of the uncontrollable habit to inject oneself with drugs while in custody, increase in the risk of overdose or the possibility of death (“Sentencing Drug Users”). This is normal among male prisons with drug users because usually drug users will ambuscade the non-drug users, who will have a hard time refuting the former. This is actually the banal rule in prisons where drug users are incarcerated. There is actually an argument that the jail is the “appropriate” place for drug users or drug addicts who have committed crimes (“Is it more appropriate to send addicts to jail”). The idea is that the jail is a place where nobody would want to end up in and where no one would want to risk putting themselves in (“Is it more appropriate to send addicts to jail”). Thus, it is understood that the jail becomes a symbol of fear and will be highly instrumental instilling fear upon the prisoner. Thus, some people believe that incarceration is the better option. However, fear is largely arbitrary and at best temporary. People may be afraid of prison at first but then give them a year and they will get used to it. Moreover, stories of people who successfully reformed themselves in prison and stories of prisons where drugs are not allowed are all apocryphal. In prisons, the zeitgeist is always violence and the rest of the rules are esoteric. No one exactly knows how to survive or use the prison to their advantage except for a chosen few. The option of rehabilitation is always better than incarceration. There are so many reasons to prove this claim. However, these reasons can be summarized into three types: rehabilitation always facilitates better growth and faster recovery from drug abuse, which is what drug users need anyway; the prison does not provide a conducive environment for change; and rehabilitation is the popular choice among the public and even among government officials, both of whom would rather spend much on rehabilitation and prevention programs compared to incarceration. Top of Form Bottom of Form Works Cited Barber, C. Ryan. “Rehab, not jail time, proposed for addicts.” Cape Cod Times. 20 Nov 2013. Web. 1 Dec 2013. Belenko, Steve & Peugh, Jordan. “Estimating drug treatment needs among state prison inmates.” Drug and Alcohol Dependence 77:3 (2005): 269-281. Bobrova, Natalia, Urij Rughnikov, Elena Neifeld, Tim Rhodes, Ron Alcorn, Sergej Kirichenko & Robert Power. “Challenges in Providing Drug User Treatment Services in Russia: Providers’ Views.” Substance Use & Misuse 43:12-13 (2008): 1770-1784. Gunn, Robert A., Marjorie A. Lee, David B. Callahan, Patricia Gonzales, Paula J. Murray & Harold S. Margolis. “Integrating Hepatitis, STD, and HIV Services into a Drug Rehabilitation Program.” American Journal of Preventive Medicine 29:1 (2005): 27-33. Iguchi, Martin Y., Jennifer A. London, Nell Griffith Forge, Laura Hickman, Terry Fain & Kara Riehman. “Elements of Well-Being Affected by Criminalizing the Drug User.” Public Health Reports 117 (2002): S146-S150. “Is it more appropriate to send addicts to jail, or into rehab treatment?” Debate.org. 2013. Web. 2 Dec 2013. Kemp, Kathleen, Barry Savitz, William Thompson & David A. Zanis. “Developing Employment Services for Criminal Justice Clients Enrolled in Drug User Treatment Programs.” Substance Use and Misuse 39:13-14 (2004): 2491-2511. Knafo, Saki. “California Bill Would Give Drug Users Treatment Instead of Prison Time.” Huffington Post. 11 Sept 2013. Web. 1 Dec 2013. Meier, Peter S., Michael C. Donmall, Christine Barrowclough, Patrick McElduff & Richard F. Heller. “Predicting the early therapeutic alliance in the treatment of drug misuse.” Addiction 100:4 (2005): 500-511. Nagin, Daniel S., Alex R. Piquero, Elizabeth S. Scott & Laurence Steinberg. “Public Preferences for Rehabilitation versus Incarceration of Juvenile Offenders: Evidence from a Contingent Valuation Survey.” University of Virginia Law School: The John M. Olin Prgram in Law and Economics Working Paper Series 28 (2006): 1-39. “Sentencing Drug Users.” UK Drug Policy Commission. 2013. Web. 3 Dec 2013. Sihaloho, Markus Junianto. “Calls for Separate Prisons for Drug Addicts.” Jakarta Globe. 2013 Nov 1. Web. 1 Dec 2013. Staton, Michele, Carl Leukefeld & Webster, J. Matthew. “Substance Use, Health, and Mental Health: Problems and Service Utilization Among Incarcerated Women.” International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology 47:2 (2003): 224-239. “Substance Abuse Treatment.” Federal Bureau of Prisons. 2013. Web. 2 Dec 2013. Turner, Susan, Douglas Longshore, Suzanne Wenzel, Elizabeth Deschenes & Peter Greenwood. “A Decade of Drug Treatment Court Research.” Substance Use & Misuse 37:12-13 (2002):1489-1527. Wild, T. C., A. B. Roberts & E. L. Cooper. “Compulsory Substance Abuse Treatment: An Overview of Recent Findings and Issues.” European Addiction Research 8 (2002): 84-93. Wrobel, Wlodzimierz. “Alcohol and drug addiction among prisoners.” International Penal and Penitentiary Foundation. n.d. Web. 1 Dec 2013. Read More