gested to these friends, that they set up an effort, that they contact people like the mayor, the chief of police, the principal of the Anchorage schools, the junior college there, and suggest they sit down and form a panel, to discuss the problem, and maybe set up a house situation there, run by credible realistic people, that young kids can relate to, and by this, I mean people that have been involved in drugs, and they can utilize the professional people, the psychiatrists, the medical center there for detoxification, and this is what is the makings for a decent program in a community. Again, back to the Aquarian Effort, military people have to resort to come to our program, as opposed to going to their own commander, and saying I have got a problem. The military suggests people in the Sacramento area, that they go to the aquarian effort, and nobody will bother them, but traditionally, the military has been on a parallel basis with police. Drug users formerly believed if they went to the Aquarian Effort, people would be spying. It takes a long time to build that credibilty. Your programs in the service are not yet credible. I went to a talk in Oakland the other day, to give you an example, and a sergeant said 12 people came in with heroin addiction problems, and he said, I took them over to the hospital for detoxification, and they were given thorazine. Thorazine is not an adequate drug for detoxification of heroin. The people refused to go, because they knew ahead of time what the results would be, so the sergeant said the only thing I could do at that point was to give a directive, and I ordered those guys to go, otherwise they would be considered AWOL, and I told him that is the reason you have not had more people coming in for detoxification, they are not stupid, and apparently you do not know enough about the problem. The gentleman did not even know what the letters OD stood for. The people just did not have the information to deal with it, but back to your point Senator STEVENS. You are beyond me. What does it stand for? Again, I sent the proposals to Anchorage, and hoped somebody would pick up the proposals. We are a community-based program. We do not have the funds to travel to Anchorage, or any place else at this point. We came back here through moneys we just appropriated from concerned citizens that would support us to come back here, because the problem of the military drug abuse in Sacramento is such that we have to start dealing with it, as it is in a lot of communities. Mr. JUHL. I might add that we would be happy to send you a proposal of the Aquarian Effort, to give you an idea of the type of program that may be applicable in Anchorage, or in Alaska. Senator STEVENS. I think there are some programs presently in the works in Alaska but none are this type of facility that you described. I also know of a great educational effort in dealing with the schools which you mentioned you started when you were in school. I am not sure we can pick up those that did not have this program. We have more of a preventative concept in Alaska than a curative concept. I would appreciate seeing your proposal for the Aquarian Effort. Mr. JUHL. We would be glad to get it to you. There is a point about the undesirable discharge. In trying to organize this panel, one of the problems that occurred was trying to convince GI's, especially veterans, to come with us, to communicate their problems, primarily, because they were totally alienated. Those people that did have undesirable discharges found themselves totally unable to obtain any help through the VA. Their recent concept in their own language is "you ripped us off; we are not about to help you." Senator CRANSTON. How much is the added problem of a dishonorable or "bad" discharge in terms of getting employment? Mr. JUHL. It is a fantastic problem, and as we all know, unemployment is difficult as it is. If you have an undesirable, or even a general, with a section 288, which means drug abuse, as I understand it, the first thing the prospective employer does is call the recruiter, and ask what that means, and when he is told drugs, he says he does not want a drug addict working for him. The dishonorable discharge is usually a ticket to unemployment. Tom Hanzo is here with us on my left, and he would like to talk to you about his experiences. Since his cleaning up from heroin, he is working extensively with GI's who have a small program in Davis, Calif., so perhaps he can give you his experience as well. Mr. HANZO. Senator, I am here today to talk about my experiences with drugs in Southeast Asia, and with that also to bring the experiences of GI's I have worked with, veterans, those who have come back to the States with a heroin problem. For myself, I did not become addicted in Vietnam. I served in the U.S. 7th Fleet, and that entailed 30-day missions, and then we had port periods. Those in-port periods are where I got addicted. It started in the Philippines, and at every port of call that I made, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Japan, I found drugs very available. I want to say, too, that the men I served with, they were also using drugs. Officers just had absolutely no concept of how to deal with drugs. They looked at us as criminals when one or two were found out, so we felt the clique, and in every port that I made, I could get into this clique immediately, and find out where the drugs were. I don't consider myself a hard core junkie. I never have. I had my reasons for using drugs in Vietnam in the service, and those reasons are ones of reality of where I was, of who I was, reasons of boredom, 30 days in the middle of the ocean, firing shells into Vietnam, not knowing what I was doing, or why I was doing this. I feel that most of the other fellows that I have served with, and I have worked with, have had a lot of feelings too. When we sailed for home, I would be on heroin about 4 months. Senator CRANSTON. What year was that? Mr. HANZO. In 1968, Senator. I arrived in Pearl Harbor, and then my troubles began. I had enough stuff to last me in Pearl Harbor, after being in the Philippines. When arriving there, I tried to seek help, tried to feel out where I could touch somebody that was real and understood my problem, but I found no one. I therefore sought out a private psychiatrist, who was a great help to me. At least I thought so at the time. He put me on methadone. My guts are torn up. I have a lot of trouble eating because of methadone. It filled the need of my craving for a drug until I got to the States. Back home I took 30 days leave, and I worked the problem out myself, after visiting a house in San Francisco. I then turned my energies toward helping my friends. Senator CRANSTON. Where did you get that help in San Francisco? Mr. HANZO. The Crisis House on Hay Street. I used to live near there, and I knew some people there. They brought me off methadone. I feel all right now, and I feel that I can serve my country best by working with these addicts. I came here to say they will not come; they do not feel anything will be done for them. When Don asked me to come here, I called many of them up, and I asked them for statements, asked them if maybe they would come, and they would not. I think that for my own addiction, the reason I went to seek out VA help, was when people were busted, maybe for marihuana, for LSD, for the small drugs that they would wind up in prison, and nothing was done for them. That really scared me. I did not want to get a dishonorable discharge, and I did not want to go to jail. I say I am not a junkie, because I was not on long enough. I was not on 20 years, and I was just on a year, I was just involved a year, I should say. That is why I feel the problem is very real in dealing with it, dealing with the addicts. A lot of the addicts that I am working with now have just been on a year. All they need is usually your support, support to programs that can really help them. That is all I have to say. Senator CRANSTON. What help do you feel we should seek to give? Mr. HANZO. As for my own program that I work with, just in funding ourselves, we have a real problem. I work as a volunteer. These people have to support themselves. There is just no money. Senator CRANSTON. How was it so easy to find drugs while you were in the armed services in the various ports? Mr. HANZO. In various ports, there are bars, many bars lining the streets, and from one bar to another, until you find the right bar, and when you find the right bar, you have got it. Senator CRANSTON. You spoke of boredom being one of the things that caused you to turn to drugs. If there was a vigorous educational program, providing an opportunity for those that have not gotten through high school, to be tutored, or taught, and college preparatory work, for those that might want to go on to college, would that be helpful in giving people an alternative? Mr. HANZO. I think it is one of the answers. Senator CRANSTON. Do you think that those programs should include educational material on drugs? Mr. Hanzo. If it is presented properly. I have been presented with material, pamphlets on what will happen to me if I am caught, beyond that, I have never received any information from the service on drug addiction or anything. I would also like to say that a very good friend of mine last week killed himself. He was an ex-GI, and I am here for him too. Senator CRANSTON. Was there any aid given to you in any way by the service? Mr. HANZO. None at all. Senator CRANSTON. Do you feel the amnesty programs are working? Mr. Hanzo. It is very, very inadequate. Senator CRANSTON. What do you feel can be done? Mr. HANZO. I feel it will take an effort such as the Aquarian Effort. It will take a cooperation of everybody to solve this problem. Mr. JUHL. Mr. Chairman, after we hear from the other members on the panel, we will have some recommendations. I would like to go to Roy Newton of San Francisco, a returning GI. Senator SCHWEIKER. How long were you on drugs? Mr. HANZO. About 5 months. Senator SCHWEIKER. How long were you on methadone? Senator SCHWEIKER. A lot of people coming to our committee have indicated that it is virtually impossible to do what you have done. Why do you feel you were able to do it, and in what ways, and why have not other people been able to do it? Mr. HANZO. Well, my methadone addiction was much harder for me to kick than the heroin addiction, but I was only an addict for 5 months. I am not a junkie. In a lot of programs, a lot of GI's have to work out their own problems, and a lot that I have worked with have helped themselves, mainly because they have not been on that long, but it is finding the proper atmosphere and environment to do it in. I had to go on leave to do it, to leave the military. Senator SCHWEIKER. In taking the methadone, did you take the methadone when you were in the service, or outside the service? Mr. HANZO. In the service. Senator SCHWEIKER. When you took the methadone, was this something did you take any specific medical help to do it, or was it a mental problem in your judgment that made you take it? Mr. HANZO. I don't understand. Senator SCHWEIKER. In other words, when you took methadone, did you feel it was a matter of a physical thing, where medical help or support had helped you do this? Mr. HANZO. It was my own responsibility to myself to do it. I had a hard time kicking methadone, because of the physical addiction that it caused me. Senator SCHWEIKER. Your friend that killed himself, was he hooked on heroin? Mr. HANZO. Yes, he was. Senator SCHWEIKER. How long had he been hooked? Mr. HANZO. He had been hooked 211⁄2 years. Senator SCHWEIKER. Had you talked to him about doing the same kind of thing? Mr. HANZO. He has gone through three programs, Senator. He went through methadone, and from methadone back to heroin. Senator SCHWEIKER. He was not able to stay on methadone from heroin? Mr. HANZO. No. The program closed down on him. Senator SCHWEIKER. Do you think in his case Well, in his case, what do you think society might have done to help him, to save him from what happened? Mr. HANZO. I would think it would be a combination of the proper environment more than anything else. It is that responsibility again in the individual. He has lost that responsibility, and to gain that responsibility he would have to have the support of society in the first place. Senator SCHWEIKER. Were you discharged honorably from the service? Mr. HANZO. Yes, I was. Senator SCHWEIKER. Was the service at anytime aware of your problem at all, or not? Mr. HANZO. No, they were not. Senator SCHWEIKER. So you not only did not get any help there, but you were able to beat the habit without them knowing what was going on? Mr. HANZO. They had no idea, Senator. Mr. ANGLIN. I would like to speak to a couple of issues, if I may. One, the issue of using drugs in the service, and then being able to get out of the service with an honorable discharge. I know we are talking now of having some kind of screening process for veterans on their discharge basis. I think we should give that a lot of thought, because I was a veteran who used drugs in the service. I was in the Medical Corps, and I used the hospital drugs and other drugs that I could get. I was able to cancel my habit. When I knew the physicals were coming up, I would clean up. It was either that, or 20 years in jail. The point is, it can be done. This legislation being spoken of now to give physicals, urine tests on or near discharge, the question is, is that testing going to be done stateside, or is it going to be done where the person is overseas? I think we should give that some thought. In terms of the amnesty programs, I certainly think it has to be made available so people will come forward, but that is a two-edge sword. Now, we also have to be aware of the problems we are creating with the solutions that we are offering, and the last point, I want to make this point, in terms of treatment, the only way the VA can possibly treat 12,000 addicts by 1973 is with methadone maintenance, and again, I say Well, there are certain other ways to treat addicts, but I am assuming that if the VA is going to open 60 centers in the next 2 years, with 200 people per center, that translates to 12,000 addicts. |