Pubdate: Fri, 24 Nov 2000
Source: Fresno Bee, The (CA)
Copyright: 2000 The Fresno Bee
Contact:  http://www.fresnobee.com/man/opinion/letters.html
Website: http://www.fresnobee.com/
Forum: http://www.fresnobee.com/man/projects/webforums/opinion.html
Author: Terry Bergfalk, Special to the Bee
Bookmark: Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act
http://www.mapinc.org/prop36.htm

PROP. 36 INCITES DRUG USE, PORTERVILLE COUNSELOR SAYS

PORTERVILLE -- Deborah Sanderson, a recovering drug addict and a
graduate of the Tulare County Drug Court, is concerned about the
passage of Proposition 36.

The proposition bans incarceration for drug users convicted for the
first and second time of being under the influence of drugs or
possessing drugs for personal use. Instead, the users are sent into a
treatment program.

If they fail treatment or violate probation three times, they no
longer are eligible for treatment and can be sent to jail for no
longer than 30 days.

Sanderson, who now works at Alternative Services as a counselor and
program facilitator for people with drug addiction, sees many
differences between Prop. 36 and the drug court.

"The drug court structure uses a motivating crisis, which is the
threat of incarceration. This helps keep people motivated to stay in
an intensive program. It is a very difficult program," Sanderson said.
"The new statute will just recommend treatment for first- and
second-\time\ drug offenders."

"Addiction is a very strong thing to overcome, but you need to have
something that keeps you motivated into recovery," Sanderson said.
"That's one of the reasons drug court works so well -- it's a
combination of the threat of jail and outpatient treatment.

"Prop. 36 says everyone has the right to go into treatment with no
jail time. Not everyone wants treatment, so they will be placed in
with people that do, and these are the ones that become disruptive,
argumentative and you have to spend a lot of your time dealing with
this behavior and the problems it presents."

Sanderson points out the new statute doesn't provide enough impetus to
get people to comply with the program.

"You have to take someone with the ability to think with an addictive
mind," Sanderson said. "I'm a recovering addict; I took
methamphetamine for over 10 years. At first I thought the proposition
was a great idea; I like the idea of people having a choice of
recovery treatment rather than going immediately into custody."

But when she started to look at how the proposition worked, she said,
she saw that addicts can go from one treatment center to another. She
believes most of those in the program will have no intention of complying.

"This is going to be like a revolving door of taxpayers paying for a
treatment to go on and on," Sanderson said. "You see, addicts have a
tendency to manipulate."

Another concern of Sanderson's is that the drug problem will not be
solved. "Now, out on the street the word is they can use drugs and not
go into custody. You are going to see activity," she said.

"Addicts have the idea we don't have to be held accountable,"
Sanderson said. "There will be more open use of drugs and more
arrogance. You're going to see increased activity on the streets, and
all kinds of drug-related crimes are going to start picking up."
- ---
MAP posted-by: Richard Lake