A Holistic Approach to Drug Enforcement
Right in the Drug Enforcement Agency’s mission statement is their primary goal of enforcing laws related to controlled substances, which right off the bat conveys a tough on crime model of dealing with drug issues. The word enforcement recalls a mentality stemming from the failed War on Drugs. The federal agency that holds the most power in the nation over drugs fails to take a holistic approach to drug control. For instance, nowhere in the DEA’s mission statement is there a mention of proactive ways to combat the use of illicit substances, such as education or addiction resources. Additionally, the dated standards of the DEA divide substances into varying schedules that are meant to represent how controlled a particular substance should be. Strict restrictions have historically resulted in the misinformation of some substances and a difficulty in conducting prolific research on the benefits of others.The schedule that a substance falls under often serve as guidance on the severity of one’s sentence in a drug court. For example, users of a schedule I substance often receive the most severe sentences. According to the DEA website, schedule I substances have a high potential for abuse and, often due to the restrictions in place, have no currently accepted medical uses. Drugs known to have detrimentally and deadly addictive properties are on schedule I, such as meth and heroin, but so are weed and LSD; two substances that have never resulted in overdose and that are backed up with evidence of in fact lack of abuse potential and even possible medical uses. Meanwhile, substances on lower schedules, like ketamine and prescription opioids, kill people and ruin lives everyday with their addictive properties. It is important that the DEA is driven in taking down violent and manufacturers and gangs who perpetuate drug abuse, but that is only one aspect of the problem. Theoretically, the government should exist to serve its people, not the other way around. Community based policing models show great success and responsibility of doing what is best for a whole community should not fall solely on local government. The DEA should change some dated drug classifications that serve little purpose in being criminalized and might serve a higher purpose if research was less restricted. They should also assess and improve their education regarding substance addiction and abuse in order to eradicate stigma. The law is not a be-all end-all. Just because something is legal, does not mean it’s good and just because something’s illegal, does not mean it is inherently bad. The framing of drug use and abuse as a legal issue often fails to address the health implications of substances. It is for this reason precisely that a lot of addiction disorders were not taken seriously for a long time. Before many revolutionary strides had been taken in the science of addiction, the thought that the common substances of alcohol and tobacco could be addictive and harmful seemed absurd. Depictions that we see of casual alcoholism and chain-smoking in media that portray life in the 50s and 60s paint a very common reality of ignorant Americans blind to their dependence and looming fates as a result of their addiction to these legal substances. Ignoring science and trusting that man-made laws will ultimately protect you is ignorant. Because our society puts such an emphasis on power and wealth, we also assume that the most powerful must also know what’s best for the rest of us. We begin to believe they even have a right to define moral, socially sanctioned behavior and immoral, arrestable offenses, regardless of what biases led them to such a conclusion. Laws are in place to prohibit and to allow certain activities, and while many exist to advise what is best for us, others simply reflect the opinions of close minded and self-seeking people in positions of power. I’m not saying we should obliterate the ties between drugs and criminality, because the two are certainly linked. But as I’ve discussed before, likening all drug abusers to violent drug trafficking rings creates an intimidating stigma that prevents addicts from seeking help. Some people mock and condemn political correctness under the pretense that proponents of PC culture are nitpicky and have forgotten how to take a joke. Why can’t I just exert my freedom of speech and why do the particular words I say have to suddenly hold some cruel and ulterior meaning? What’s the harm in having a little joke at a marginalized community’s expense? Rhetoric is important because words can very easily become vehicles of oppression. Either eradicating or reclaiming words and phrases that have historically been used to express hate towards a group of people is the first step in showing the respect of humanity of a marginalized community. Comedians are not an exception to the rule. Casually referencing and making light of oppressive behavior without condemning it normalizes and condones senseless hatred. The rhetoric of the war on drugs informed the way that the DEA currently operates, which is under the mantra of a tough on crime model and some unreasonable standards of what the most harmful substances are. I suggest that the DEA work to shift their rhetoric from the calculated apathy that is common in many government institutions, to one of compassion, education, and change. In an agency that deals with not just drug traffickers but with individuals who struggle with addiction, this shift is necessary. Propaganda that outright vilifies all drug use and only provides solutions on how to not succumb to peer pressure, often excludes hard facts about the specific effects of each drug and informed rankings of the most and least harmful substances, leaving children to find out those specifics themselves. It’s important that this education be taught equally and everywhere, as any child has the potential to get their hands on a dangerous substance. And because any human has the potential to become addicted to a dangerous substance, it is important that this education is delivered free of stigma and bias in case a student ever needs to work up the courage to seek rehabilitation in the future. A reevaluation of the standards and scheduling that the DEA currently holds so dearly can even open the door to great medical advances. Doesn’t it seem strange that cannabis is classified under schedule one as having no accepted medical uses? Marijuana is thought to be an effective natural pain reliever as well as a potentially useful tool in treating depression, anxiety, anorexia, and other mental disabilities. It definitely has medical use potential. And though research surrounding LSD has been limited, it shows promising signs of being a significant treatment option for individuals with major depressive disorder, death anxiety, or just overall improved general contentedness. Like any substance, these drugs carry the potential of dependency and their control should be carefully regulated. But in my opinion, the improvement of the human species requires openness to change and the humility to critically analyze, learn, and improve from the past.
Sources: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Gr0PjC91vizVTIPAYji3ezlTLg6eJYIizCRwMSWiCfc/edit?usp=sharing
