Skip to main content

Addiction Treatment

LEAP: "We have a major fight ahead of us..."

Dear friends,

LEAP fully supports Proposition 5 on the November 4th California ballot.  Please read the following message from Ethan Nadelmann, Executive Director of the Drug Policy Alliance, and vote for Proposition 5 if you live in California (if you are outside California, please support DPA in any manner you choose):

“I’ve never invested as much in anything as I have in Proposition 5, our ballot initiative in California.  If we win on Election Day, this will be the biggest reform of prisons and sentencing in U.S. history – and the biggest reform of drug policy – since the repeal of alcohol Prohibition seventy-five years ago. 

But we both know you can’t make a change this big without stirring up intense opposition from vested interests.  Last week the powerful prison guards union contributed $1 million to the opposition campaign.  That’s on top of hundreds of thousands of dollars from Indian tribes/casinos with close links to law enforcement as well as $100,000 from the California Beer and Beverage Distributors.

And I just found out that today the Bush administration’s drug czar is in Sacramento to announce his opposition to Proposition 5.

If we win, the new law will effectively transfer $1 billion annually from prison and parole to treatment and rehabilitation – and save taxpayers $2.5 billion because new prisons will not need to be built.  The result will be fewer drug and other nonviolent offenders behind bars, and also reductions in crime and recidivism.  The initiative even includes a sensible provision to reduce the penalty for possession of small amounts of marijuana to the equivalent of a traffic ticket.

This initiative, unlike most, was drafted with keen attention to decades of empirical research on what works best in reducing incarceration, crime and recidivism and enabling people with drug problems to get their lives together.

I am not instinctively a fan of the ballot initiative process.  But it seems to me that the process is ideally used when the legislature and/or the governor are unable or unwilling to enact worthy legislation, which is favored by a substantial majority of the public, and which advances the interests of those people who are most disempowered in the legislative process. That is clearly the case here. 

There has never been a return on investment in major reform of drug policy, prisons and sentencing like this.  Raising the millions of dollars needed to draft this initiative, get it on the ballot, and hopefully win it has been no easy task – and I am still trying to raise the final million with two weeks to go until Election Day. 

So we have a lot riding on this initiative – not just for DPA but also for the hundreds of thousands of people who will either sit in prison or get a second chance, depending on whether or not Prop 5 wins on Election Day.

Our opponents think they can defeat Prop 5 by resorting to the same old scare tactics that filled the prisons in the first place.  But we know we’ll win if voters focus on the bottom line, which is that Prop 5 will reduce prison overcrowding, reduce crime and recidivism, directly help huge numbers of people, and save taxpayers billions of dollars.

Please tell everyone you know in California to vote for Prop 5.  Forward this email if you like.  And if you think you can help in any other way, please let me know soon.  We MUST win Prop 5.

Many, many thanks.

Very truly yours,

Ethan

P.S. The campaign’s website is www.prop5yes.com.”

Prop. 5 May Be Last Chance to Reform Prisons

[Courtesy of Yes on Proposition 5] The ills of California's prison system have been diagnosed in one expert report after another, but the prescriptions for change have been ignored. Now, with Proposition 5, voters have the opportunity to enact a range of reforms recommended by experts that would reduce overcrowding and improve rehabilitation. "The prison lobby has dictated criminal justice policies for decades. Look at the results: prisons are stuffed to twice their capacity and the recidivism rate is twice the national average," said Dan Macallair, executive director of the Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice. "Prop. 5 takes a different approach to reduce recidivism – one recommended by criminal justice policy experts from around the country." Voters will decide on Prop. 5 just two weeks before a trial begins in a lawsuit that could result in an outright takeover of California's prison system by a panel of three federal judges. But, as with every prior effort to reform California's prison system, law enforcement groups and the prison guards' union are fighting tooth and nail to prevent reform. The prison guards recently poured $1 million into the No on 5 campaign. "After 25 years in San Quentin, I know how broken our corrections system is. Prop. 5 is the breath of fresh air this system needs," said Jeanne Woodford, former director of the California Department of Corrections under Gov. Schwarzenegger. "I am surprised to see a law enforcement organization that is responsible for public safety opposing an initiative that will not only reduce cost but will also dramatically improve public safety." "We have let law enforcement drive our response to addiction for long enough – and we are all, quite literally, paying the price," said Margaret Dooley-Sammuli, deputy campaign manager of Yes on 5. "Now it's finally time to listen to policy experts. By reducing addiction, we'll prevent crime and cut costs to the state." Prop. 5 is endorsed the League of Women Voters of California, the California Nurses Association, California Federation of Teachers and the California Society of Addiction Medicine, the California State Conference of the NAACP and the National Council of la Raza, among many others. The nonpartisan legislative analyst calculates Prop. 5 will reduce incarceration costs by $1 billion annually and save taxpayers $2.5 billion in reduced prison-construction costs. This doesn't include savings related to reduced crime, fewer social services costs (e.g. emergency room visits, welfare), and increased individual productivity. For more information, visit www.prop5yes.com.

Press Release: Drug Czar Backs CA Prison Guards, Opposes Unified Treatment Community

For Immediate Release: October 21, 2008 Contact: Margaret Dooley-Sammuli at (213) 291-4190 or Tommy McDonald at (510) 229-5215 Drug Czar Backs California Prison Guards, Opposes Unified Treatment Community SACRAMENTO – President George W. Bush’s drug czar today announced his opposition to Proposition 5, the Nonviolent Offender Rehabilitation Act (NORA), which will expand access to drug treatment for young people and nonviolent offenders – and make rehabilitation a priority of the state corrections system once again. “The drug czar is going against the whole of California’s treatment and prevention community to line up with law enforcement. We have tried incarceration as a primary response to addictive illness for decades and failed utterly,” said Dr. Judy Martin, president of the California Society of Addiction Medicine. “The treatment field enthusiastically supports Prop. 5 because it marks a historic shift away from the drug czar’s failed approach and towards a proven one - treatment.” “The drug czar’s rhetorical support for treatment is obviously just a fig leaf for the same old law enforcement approach. This hardline drug czar from a lame-duck administration is now opposing California’s entire treatment community,” said Margaret Dooley-Sammuli, deputy campaign manager of Yes on 5. “Back in 2000, the previous drug czar opposed Prop. 36 and that didn’t matter to voters. It’s hard to imagine President Bush’s drug czar having any more influence.” Supporters of Prop. 5 include the League of Women Voters of California, the California Nurses Association, the California Federation of Teachers, the Consumer Federation of California – among many others. Opponents are overwhelmingly law enforcement organizations, with $1 million in with funding from the California prison guards union. The Legislative Analyst’s Office calculates that Prop. 5 will lower incarceration costs by $1 billion each year and will cut another $2.5 billion in state costs for prison construction. This doesn’t include savings related to reduced crime, lower social costs (e.g. emergency room visits, child protective services, welfare), and increased individual productivity. ********** The campaign will make available treatment advocates in support of Prop. 5. For those contacts, please contact Tommy McDonald at (510) 229-5215. For more on Prop. 5, visit www.Prop5Yes.org. ###

Press Release: Innovative Addiction Treatment Program Celebrates 20th Anniversary

[Courtesy of Drug Policy Alliance] For Immediate Release: October 16, 2008 For More Info: Tony Newman: (646) 335-5384 ARRIVE, an Innovative Addiction Treatment Program, Celebrates its 20-year Anniversary at October 23 Gathering Cutting-edge Program Challenges Notions that Threat of Prison and Abstinence are Required to Receive Help New York Center will Honor its more than 8,700 Graduates and Visionary Leader, Howard Josepher The pioneering drug program, ARRIVE, will celebrate their 20-year anniversary of serving the New York City community in its fight against drug addiction and HIV/AIDS at a gathering at Pacha nightclub (618 W. 46th St.) on Thursday, October 23 from 6 p.m. until 10 p.m. ARRIVE started in a church basement in 1988 in an attempt to help drug users who were contracting HIV through dirty syringes. In 1990, Exponents was founded as a non-profit organization to keep the ARRIVE pilot project alive. The organization has 40 staff members, the majority of whom have histories of addiction and incarceration and are graduates of ARRIVE. With more than 8,700 graduates, the cutting-edge program differs from many of the status quo treatment programs by challenging the notion that people have to be coerced into treatment by the threat of jail. The program has always been voluntary and has better results in getting people through their program than programs that favor the punitive, coercive treatment models. The ARRIVE program also doesn’t demand abstinence from drugs in order to access their help. “ARRIVE changed the paradigm of how we treat and help drug users and the response has been nothing short of phenomenal. Over the years, thousands of inner-city drug users voluntarily showed up for the program and over 75% of them graduated.", said Howard Josepher, founder of Exponents and an ex-offender who overcame his heroin addiction 40 years ago. “We now have more that 8,700 graduates and not a single one of them was coerced or mandated to attend. Our experience has been, contrary to popular belief, that addicts will seek out treatment if it is presented in a non-punitive and non-judgmental manner.” Each week, hundreds of New Yorkers participate in Exponents’ full range of programs, which include: recovery readiness (active users), drug treatment and recovery services. Other services offered include job skill training, support groups, stress reduction, health and wellness information, acupuncture; relapse prevention techniques, help with benefits and advocacy and communication skill trainings. Another special aspect of Exponents is the focus on building community and empowering through advocacy. Exponents’ participants and graduates have been on the front lines of demonstrations and activism whether it be organizing against New York’s draconian Rockefeller Drug Laws or pushing for access to clean syringes to reduce HIV transmission. “ARRIVE has been such an integral part of my recovery, support, career, and life,” said Bobbi Hart Charles. “I walked into the Exponents’ office on Beach Street June 1991 and seventeen years later I am still clean. As a direct result of the counseling and encouragement that I received at Exponents, I returned to school and obtained a Master’s Degree in Public Administration, specializing in Healthcare Administration and Policy. Norbert and I just celebrated our fourth wedding anniversary and I still feel like a newly wed! As I look back over my life, and I think things over, I can truly say that I’ve been blessed and I have a testimony. ARRIVE is a very large part of that testimony!”

Online Course: Confidentiality Issues in Substance Abuse Treatment

The Brown University Distance Learning Program and the Addiction Technology Transfer Center of New England are offering a credited, on-line course on confidentiality issues in substance abuse treatment beginning on September 22, 2008..Individuals should be able to expect that information they have given in confidence to a treatment provider will be kept private unless there is a compelling reason for it not to be. The principle of a confidential relationship between a patient and a clinician is an ancient one, shared by many cultures. Nowhere is that expectation more vital than in substance abuse treatment. This course will introduce the learner to ethical and legal issues bearing on the confidentiality of patient information in substance abuse treatment. It will introduce the student to confidentiality provisions under the federal regulations on Confidentiality of Alcohol and Drug Abuse Patient Treatment Records (42 CFR Part 2) and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) as well as special concerns relating to child protection issues, underage patients, patients involved with the criminal justice system, and HIV infected patients. This course will serve to alert the student to concerns and provide a basic grasp of the issues but is not a substitute for legal advice from an attorney or consultation with federal and state regulators. 

Instructor

David F. Duncan, Dr. P.H. is President of Duncan & Associates, a consulting firm providing consultation on research design and data collection for behavioral and policy studies. He is also Clinical Associate Professor in the Department of Community Health at Brown University School of Medicine. His education included an undergraduate major in psychology, with minors in sociology and education at the University of Missouri at Kansas City , and graduate work in criminology at Sam Houston State University in Texas . He earned the degree of Doctor of Public Health (Dr.P.H.) from the University of Texas at Houston with an interdisciplinary program in behavioral sciences, epidemiology, biostatistics, and program and policy evaluation. He earned a postdoctoral diploma in alcoholism early intervention and treatment effectiveness research from Brown University . He has over thirty year’s experience in the substance abuse field, including direct service provision and direction of treatment and rehabilitation services. 

Course Objectives

  • Describe the three most common ways in which patient confidentiality is violated.
  • Define informed consent, patient health information and client identifying information.
  • Describe who is covered by the confidentiality rules in 42 CFR and in HIPAA respectively.
  • Discuss the exceptions to confidentiality permitted under 42 CFR and under HIPAA.
  • Name the three purposes of the administrative simplification provisions of HIPAA.
  • Discuss the special problems and issues of confidentiality involved in providision of substance abuse treatment to minors.
  • Discuss reporting requirements in child abuse related cases and the “obligation to warn” under the Tarasoff decision.
  • Discuss the issues a patient’s HIV positive status may raise concerning confidentiality.

Course Requirements

This is a three-week course requirements are:

  • Required on-line reading (one hour per week)
  • Completion of pre and post test
  • Completion of weekly homework assignments (one hour per week)
  • Participation in the weekly course forum
  • Completion of an on-line course evaluation

*Please note that there are no real time events associated with this course. Lessons will be posted on the class home page on Tuesday and responses are due the following Monday. With the exception of the first weeks lesson which will be posted Monday with the responses due the following Monday. Assignments can be accessed at the participant's convenience.The total cost of this course is $60.00 the course payment is due by the start date of the course. A full refund is available up until the posting of the second lesson, after which there will be no refunds. 

Accredation

This three-week course, has been approved by the National Association of Alcoholism and Drug Abuse Counselors (NAADAC) for 6 educational credits. It is being provided by the Brown Distance Learning program, which is accredited as a NAADAC Approved Education Provider (#000151). This course meets the qualifications for 6 hours of continuing education credit for MFCC's and/or LCSW's as required by the California Board of Behavioral Sciences (PCE#1917). This course is approved by the Connecticut Certification Board (CCB) for six Category 1 continuing education for Certified Alcohol and Drug Counselors (CADC's). The CCB is an IC&RC affiliate. The New York State OASAS does accept distance learning CEUs provided by institutions of higher learning for individuals pursuing or renewing a CASAC, CPP or CPS. Certificates will be mailed within two weeks to participants in the program for its duration who submit all required materials. Please contact your local certification board to verify reciprocity or acceptance of Brown Distance Learning contact hours. 

To participate, you must have:

  • An E-mail address and the capacity to retrieve and send E-mail;
  • Access to World Wide Web (the following programs provide WWW access: Netscape, Apple CyberDog, and Microsoft Explorer)
  • Internet Explorer 5.0 or higher is the preferred browser for Brown DLP online courses
  • The ability to navigate the World Wide Web
  • A basic understanding of how to use a computer and send and receive email
PLEASE NOTE NETWORK AND COMPUTER TECHNICAL SUPPORT WILL NOT BE PROVIDED. REGISTRATION DEADLINE: September 22, 2008 or when the course limit is reached.  To register for this course please log into your account or create your account then log into your account and click the Enroll in a New Course link at the bottom of your account page. On the Enrollment page select the course you wish to register for using the pull down menu and click on the enroll button. Having enrolled into the course you will be prompted for payment. You may make your payment online or by regular mail. To view payment information please use the payment policies. For a list of current Brown University Distance Learning courses, please go to the following site: http://www.browndlp.org/. Please Bookmark this site for future references. Course announcements will be made via the Brown University Online Course Announcement Listserv 6-8 weeks prior to the start of each course. If you would like to be subscribed to this list, please contact Monte Bryant, Program Administrator, at Monte Bryant, or (401) 863-6606.

Press Release: New Study Documents Increased Use of Ibogaine for Detoxification from Opiates such as OxyContin and Heroin

For Immediate Release: February 8, 2008 Contact: Kenneth Alper, M.D.: (212) 263-8854 New Study Documents Increased Use of Ibogaine for Detoxification from Opiates such as OxyContin and Heroin Thousands Participate in the “Vast Uncontrolled Experiment” with the Use of Ibogaine A Naturally Occurring Compound Derived from an African Shrub, Ibogaine may be a Prototype for the Development of New Drugs to Treat Addiction. In what has been termed “a vast uncontrolled experiment” taking place in North America and Europe in the setting of homes, hotel rooms and private clinics, increasing numbers of individuals are taking ibogaine, a naturally occurring psychoactive plant alkaloid, to treat drug addiction. A new study published in the Journal of Ethnopharmacology provides the first systematic ethnographic description and quantitative estimate of the extent of this remarkable medical subculture. The new study documents that the majority of individuals in the US and Europe that have used ibogaine were severely physically dependent on opiates and took ibogaine for acute detoxification. The study reports that the use of ibogaine increased four-fold between 2001-2006, with as many as nearly 5,000 individuals having taken it. The expansion of the ibogaine subculture parallels the upsurge of opiate addiction in the US, where deaths due to opiates such as heroin and OxyContin have doubled in the first half of this decade. According to the lead author of the study, Kenneth Alper, M.D., an Associate Professor in the Departments of Psychiatry and Neurology at the New York University School of Medicine, “An important finding of the study is that the most frequent purpose for which ibogaine is used is detoxification from opiates, because this suggests a significant, objective, pharmacologically mediated effect. The syndrome of acute opiate withdrawal tends to severe in its clinical expression, especially with the high levels of physical dependence that are typical of individuals who seek treatment with ibogaine. Treatment providers are generally experienced and can make valid observations of the presence or absence of opiate withdrawal signs, even in the nonmedical settings in which ibogaine is presently used. The clinical literature confirms that there is no significant placebo effect in opioid detoxification, indicating that valid observations of an effect can be made without placebo control group. The focus on opioid detoxification distinguishes ibogaine from other compounds designated as “psychedelics”, such as LSD, mescaline or psilocybin, for which there is no preclinical or clinical evidence that suggests a significant effect in acute opiate withdrawal.” Ibogaine has been used as a psychopharmacological religious sacrament in Africa for centuries. In the US in the early 1960s, the unexpected absence of withdrawal symptoms was noted in heroin-dependent individuals who had taken ibogaine. Further case reports, as well as preclinical evidence eventually persuaded the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) to support research on ibogaine, and the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to approve a clinical study. NIDA ultimately ended its effort to develop ibogaine because the project exceeded its budgetary resources. However, ibogaine, although never popular as a recreational drug regardless of its legal status, has continued to be used outside of conventional medical settings. The expansion of the subculture reflects a demand for new treatment that is sought despite legal prohibition in some cases, and the medical risks, including fatalities that are associated with the lack of clinical and pharmaceutical controls the settings in which ibogaine is used. Alper sees a prospect for innovation in ibogaine, “Researchers are increasingly focused on the development of drugs to treat addiction that extend beyond the present repertoire of pharmacological mechanisms of action. Ibogaine’s mechanism of action is unknown, which makes it potentially informative as a paradigm for studying the neurobiology of addiction and developing new treatment.”

Justice Policy Institute Press Release: Data Shows Substance Abuse Treatment Reduces Crime

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Monday, January 22, 2008 Contact: LaWanda Johnson (202) 558-7974 x308 WASHINGTON - Community-based substance abuse treatment reduces crime rates and helps states reduce corrections costs, according to a new policy brief released today by the Justice Policy Institute (JPI). The Substance Abuse Treatment and Public Safety brief found that the sooner substance abuse is treated, the bigger the long-term cost savings and increases in public safety. At a time when some have raised concerns about the release of people convicted of drug offenses from federal prison due to U.S. Sentencing Commission reforms, the research shows that substance abuse treatment helps individuals transition successfully from the criminal justice system to the community. "This new report confirms that investing in drug and alcohol treatment is both socially responsible and fiscally prudent and should be a top public policy priority," said Maryland Delegate Bill Bronrott, chair of the House Committee on Drug and Alcohol Abuse. "The report documents the tangible results of treatment, such as cutting crime, reclaiming lives, and making healthier families and safer communities. More investments in these lifesaving and cost-effective services are needed now to expand the benefits of treatment that this report so clearly demonstrates." The policy brief--the last in a series that examines the impact of positive social investments on public safety--found that: Increases in admissions to substance abuse treatment are associated with reductions in crime rates. Admissions to drug treatment increased 37.4 percent and federal spending on drug treatment increased 14.6 percent from 1995 to 2005. During the same period, violent crime fell 31.5 percent. In California, where Proposition 36 diverted thousands of people from prison and jail to treatment, violent crime fell at a rate that exceeded the national average. In Maryland, where policymakers have been working to implement various approaches to diverting prison-bound people to treatment, the counties that relied on drug treatment were more likely to achieve significant crime rate reductions than those that relied on drug imprisonment. Increased admissions to drug treatment are associated with reduced incarceration rates. States with a higher drug treatment admission rate than the national average send, on average, 100 fewer people to prison per 100,000 in the population than states that have lower than average drug treatment admissions. California, in particular, experienced decreases in incarceration rates when jurisdictions increased the number of people sent to drug treatment. Substance abuse treatment prior to contact with the justice system yields public safety benefits early on. Research has shown that drug treatment programs improve life outcomes for individuals and decreases the likelihood that a drug-involved person will be involved in the criminal justice system. Substance abuse treatment helps individuals transition successfully from the criminal justice system to the community. Community-based drug treatment programs reduce the chance that a person will become involved in the criminal justice system after release from prison. Substance abuse treatment is more cost-effective than prison or other punitive measures. The Washington State Institute for Public Policy (WSIPP) found that community-based drug treatment is extremely beneficial in terms of cost, especially compared to prison. Every dollar spent on drug treatment in the community is estimated to return $18.52 in benefits to society in terms of reduced incarceration rates and associated crime costs to taxpayers. "If lawmakers invest in community-based substance abuse treatment--instead of prison beds--for people living with addiction, our communities will reap tremendous benefits," says JPI Executive Director Sheila Bedi. "Crime rates will decrease, families will remain intact and since treatment is less expensive than incarceration, state budget dollars can be redeployed to meet education, housing, infrastructure and other pressing needs. " For more information on this or other research, contact LaWanda Johnson at 202-558-7974 ext. 308.

DPA Press Release: NY Poised to Become First State to Require Addiction Programs to be Smoke-Free, Aimed at Helping Clients Quit Smoking; Treatment Advocates See Rule as a Mixed Bag

For Immediate Release: July 24, 2007 Contact: Tony Newman at (646) 335-5384 NY Poised to Become First State to Require Addiction Treatment Programs to be Smoke-free, Aimed at Helping Clients Quit Smoking Treatment Advocates See New Rule as a Mixed Bag: Applaud Effort to Help Smokers Quit; Warn of Possible New Barriers to Treatment Created by Smoke-free Centers New York Alcohol and Substance Abuse Service officials announced today a new rule that will require treatment centers to help their patients to quit smoking. The plan, which is slated to take effect next year, will require treatment centers to help patients quit smoking by offering nicotine replacement therapy, including nicotine gum and patches, to all smokers. For those lacking health insurance, the nicotine replacement therapy will be free of charge. The treatment centers also will be required to be smoke-free. Smokers will be prohibited from smoking at the centers. Officials estimate the new law will impact 110,000 patients on any given day. Approximately 92 percent of those in alcohol and other drug treatment programs are cigarette smokers, according to official estimates. Treatment advocates have mixed feelings about the new rule. They are applauding the effort to help people quit smoking, but warn that the smoking ban may deter some smokers who are hoping to quit other addictions. “Smoking leads to more premature deaths than all illicit drugs combined and it is a positive development to offer nicotine replacement therapy to all who want it,” said Ethan Nadelmann, executive director of the Drug Policy Alliance. “But prohibiting smoking at the treatment centers may discourage people who want and need treatment to other drugs, but are not willing or able to stop smoking.” Many people struggling with addiction may have problems with multiple drugs, both legal and illegal. Advocates caution against barriers that will discourage people from seeking out help. “Not everyone can or wants to abstain from all drugs all at once,” said Tony Newman, media director at the Drug Policy Alliance. “Do we really want to set up barriers for someone who wants to quit heroin, but may not be ready to quit cigarettes? We need open doors that encourage people to get help for their problems, whether it be for illegal or legal drugs, and not rules that drive people away from life-saving programs.”

Supreme Court of New Mexico Strikes Down State’s Attempt to Convict Woman Struggling with Addiction During Pregnancy

For Immediate Release: May 11, 2007 CONTACT: Reena Szczepanski (DPA): 505-983-3277 or Nancy Goldstein (NAPW): 347-563-1647 Supreme Court of New Mexico Strikes Down State’s Attempt to Convict Woman Struggling with Addiction During Pregnancy Leading Physicians, Scientific Researchers, and Medical, Public Health, and Child Welfare Organizations Applaud Court’s Order On May 11, the Supreme Court of the State of New Mexico turned back the state's attempt to expand the criminal child abuse laws to apply to pregnant women and fetuses. In 2003, Ms. Cynthia Martinez was charged with felony child abuse “for permitting a child under 18 years of age to be placed in a situation that may endanger the child's life or health. . .” In bringing this prosecution, the state argued that a pregnant woman who cannot overcome a drug addiction before she gives birth should be sent to jail as a felony child abuser. Today the Supreme Court summarily affirmed the Court of Appeals decision, which overturned Ms. Martinez’s conviction. New Mexico joins more than 20 other states that have ruled on this issue and that have refused to judicially expand state criminal child abuse and related laws to reach the issues of pregnancy and addiction. The Drug Policy Alliance (“DPA”) and the National Advocates for Pregnant Women (“NAPW”) filed a friend-of-the-court brief http://www.drugpolicy.org/docUploads/NMvMartinezAmicusBrief.pdf on behalf of the New Mexico Public Health Association, the New Mexico Nurses Association, and nearly three dozen other leading medical and public health organizations, physicians, and scientific researchers. During oral argument, the Justices referenced the amicus brief filed by these organizations and expressed grave concerns about the deterrent effect such prosecutions would have on women seeking prenatal care. Tiloma Jayasinghe, NAPW staff attorney, explained, “Making child abuse laws applicable to pregnant women and fetuses would, by definition, make every woman who is low-income, uninsured, has health problems, and/or is battered who becomes pregnant a felony child abuser. In oral argument, the state’s attorney conceded that the law could potentially be applied to pregnant women who smoked.” Reena Szczepanski, Director of Drug Policy Alliance New Mexico, said, “I hope that this case serves as a reminder that pregnant women who are struggling with drug use should be offered prenatal care and drug treatment, not prosecution. There are better ways to protect our children in New Mexico, and ensure that future generations will be safe and healthy.”
Subscribe to Addiction Treatment