Drug Policy Issue Forum
Suzanne Wills
November, 2005
The only disappointing thing about the drug policy issue forum was that there were not more League members in attendance. The Hitt Auditorium was an excellent venue, the panelists were varied, interesting and, for the most part, tried to answer the questions that were posed.
Dr. Leland Lou, Chief, Pain Management Division, UT-Southwestern University Hospitals, brought a perspective that is seldom heard in forums of this sort. He said that pain specialists are constantly afraid that they will be targeted by law enforcement, will have to defend themselves in court and will lose their livelihood. Because of this fear they undertreat their patients. In any large hospital you “could count the chronic pain patients who are getting adequate relief on your fingers.” He supported syringe exchange programs saying they prevent extremely serious and expensive diseases. With regard to medical marijuana, he has read studies that show it has therapeutic uses and studies that show it has risks. But, there are no perfect drugs. Dr. Lou’s colleagues discouraged him from participating in our forum because they thought he might become a target of prosecution.
Eric Mountin, Assistant District Attorney, was invited to defend the status quo while others were discussing problems and possible change, not an easy or comfortable task. He never strayed from the government’s drug policy stance. When asked to explain the extremely skewed results of the drug law enforcement from a racial perspective he said the DA’s office takes only the cases the police bring. [92.2% of Texas inmates convicted of a drug crime are non-white.] The DA’s office does not discriminate based on race or wealth. They prosecute traffickers and repeat offenders, rarely users. Certain drugs are illegal because citizens want them to be illegal. Law enforcement does what citizens want. He said that more people are in treatment for marijuana than for all other drugs combined. [According to SAMSHA 54.1% were sent by courts. Only 10.3% were sent by health care providers.] Mr. Mountin said he is does not consider what happens to the children of offenders when determining sentences. On the contrary, he is harder on people who bring their children to sentencing hearings. He noted that the Texas Alliance for Drug Endangered Children addresses the needs of children from homes where drugs are used.
Judge John Creuzot is well known as a reformer and for starting an innovative drug court. [See DIVERT, February 2003 Voter] In response to the question about racially skewed results of drug law enforcement he said that people who are stopped for a broken tail light or other minor infraction in minority neighborhoods are not given a ticket, they are arrested and searched. So, the police uncover more crime in those neighborhoods. He suggested that more crime would be uncovered at Mockingbird and Hillcrest if the same tactics were employed there. On syringe exchanges--If you oppose syringe exchange programs on moral grounds that’s the end of the discussion. If your tax dollars are important to you or if preventing disease is important to you, syringe exchanges are a reasonable option. Are there enough beds for drug treatment in Dallas? No. Does Texas’ drug policy reduce crime? No. Does it improve public health? No. Does it protect children? No. Does it efficiently use public resources? No.
Veletta Lill did an excellent job as moderator, as we knew she would. We owe a debt of gratitude to her and to each of the panelists for an extremely informative evening.