TREATMENT AND REHABILITATION OF NARCOTICS ADDICTS THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 23, 1971 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, SUBCOMMITTEE No. 4 OF THE The subcommittee met at 10 a.m., pursuant to recess, in room 2141, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Don Edwards of California. (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. Present: Congressman Edwards of California, Conyers, Sandman, Keating, and McClory. Also present: Jerome M. Zeifman, counsel, Samuel A. Garrison III, associate counsel, and George A. Dalley, assistant counsel. Mr. Edwards of California. The subcommitee will come to order. Subcommittee No. 4 of the House Committee on the Judiciary continues today its hearings on various legislative proposals regarding the treatment and rehabilitation of narcotic addicts. We are pleased to have today as our first witness, our colleague from Pennsylvania, Congressman Joshua Eilberg, who is a coauthor of H.R. 4417, which provides for the mandatory commitment of certain narcotic addicts and provides for more facilities for treating, supervising, and controlling narcotic addiction and for other purposes. Congressman Eilberg has been a student of the drug problem in the United States for a long while. When Counsel Zeifman and I were in London a few weeks ago, we learned that Congressman Eilberg had been there a few days preceding, and made a very careful and intensive investigation of the English program. The committee certainly welcomes you, Mr. Eilberg, and you may proceed with your statement. STATEMENT OF HON. JOSHUA EILBERG, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA Mr. EILBERG. Mr. Chairman, distinguished members of this committee, I want to thank you for this opportunity to testify in support of H.R. 4417, of which I am a sponsor. However, before I begin my remarks, I would like to enter into the record the statement by Frank L. Rizzo, the former Police Commissioner of Philadelphia and presently candidate for mayor of that city, who you invited to appear this morning but because of his campaign, he was unable to appear. Mr. EDWARDS. The committee regrets that Commissioner Rizzo is unable to attend. We thank you for his statement and it will be entered into the record without objection. (The statement referred to follows:) STATEMENT OF FRANK L. RIZZO, FORMER POLICE COMMISSIONER OF PHILADELPHIA I appreciate this opportunity to state my views on the treatment and prevention of narcotics addiction. I share the opinion of many medical authorities that heroin addicts, in the main, are victims of a disease that cannot be cured, but only arrested. In this they are like victims of alcoholism. Most of them suffer from deepseated emotional problems and require psychiatric therapy. Without entering the field of the toxicologist or behaviorist, I can report on the basis of a quarter-century of experience as a police officer that heroin addiction is epidemic. The infection is spread by pushers, acting as carriers. There is a social pressure on the addict which impels him to entice the innocent, usually a friend. The addict is insecure, so he enlarges his own little circle. For him, it is group antitherapy. The novice feels the pressure of his peers toward conformity in rebellion. The novice may take up marijuana at first, or drop acid on weekends, telling himself there is no danger of dependency. It only takes one shot-and suddenly, our novice is gripped by heroin dependency. He is hooked. There is no prospcet that heroin addiction can be ended in the United States. but it can be rolled back. The Federal Government should expand its effort to cut off heroin at the source and at the border. This at least will make the drug more costly, and results in its further dilution by pushers, a hidden benefit. The Federal Government should impose strict controls on the manufacturers and distributors of amphetamines and barbiturates. Clandestine use of these drugs is catastrophic to American youth. The sale and possession of marijuana should never be legalized. Smoking pot is an initiation of the young into the drug subculture. Used excessively, marijuana can induce paranoid and other panic reactions. A smoker, when "high." suffers from distored perception which, for the driver of an automobile, can be fatal. The most vicious of all criminals, the pusher, must be jailed for as long as the law permits. There should be a redefinition of the crime to encompass the possession of a specified amount of the drug, the presumptive approach employed in the state of New York. Narcotics detoxification centers should be established in all major centers of population. They will offer voluntary commitment to users without cost and without stigma. Rehabilitation of the addict is the field of prime concern. In rehabilitation centers, segregation of patients must be complete, that is, under maximum security. The measures to which addicts and their friends will resort to get a "fix" are almost incredible. The methadone program now in use in several large cities may make the addict socially acceptable and return him to a productive existence, but methadene is addictive; the dependency is as complete as that on heroin. The methadone clinic system is being abused to the extent that we now find young people getting methadone illegally, before turning to heroin. Controls over these clinics must be tightened. Shopping around from clinic to clinic must be made impossible. In the long run the youth of our country must learn that to break the skin with a needle is the irreversible first step to disaster. Young people will not accept threats. Kids who cannot believe their elders must get the word from their peers: To live at all, live clean. Mr. EILBERG. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I represent the Fourth District of Pennsylvania, which covers, generally, the northeast section of Philadelphia. The northeast, along with every other neighborhood in Philadelphia and all other major cities in the country is threatened by a plague: Drug addiction. The use of drugs is a cancer that is eating away the life of our cities. And, it has spread from the cities to the suburbs and rural areas. But, it is in the great cities of our country where the major threat is and where the infection must be stopped if we are to come up with any sort of a solution. At the end of 1960 the number of known addicts in the United States was about 45,000. The official statistics have climbed slowly to the present level of around 68,000, but no intelligent person thinks that is the real figure. The Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs estimated there were probably some 330,000 addicts in this country in 1970. This number is certainly too low today, and if something is not done immediately it will eventually pass 1 million. In addition to the persons who become addicted here, there are the estimated thousands of American servicemen in Vietnam and elsewhere who are becoming "hooked." These men are bringing their addictions home just as veterans of other wars brought home captured flags and swords. Unfortunately, heroin addiction cannot be hung on the wall or stored in the back of a closet. Hopefully, the military has begun to deal with this problem and addicted servicemen will not be discharged until they are free of the habit. But, in our big cities we are facing a problem that is fast becoming a disaster. Drug addicts are estimated to be responsible for approximately 50 percent of all property crime committed in urban areas. Moreover, observers have noted an ominous trend during the last several years. In many cities addicts have turned more and more to direct, on-thestreet robbery. According to Joseph Heath, deputy director of one of the District of Columbia's drug treatment regions, addicts have traditionally supported themselves through shoplifting, pocket picking, burglary, and other nonviolent forms of theft. But, today there are many young addicts who never learned the subtler skills of nonviolent crime. Heath said, "The only way they can support their habit is to put a pistol in their hand." The cost of the crimes committed by addicts is impossible to pinpoint accurately, but there have been estimates. President Nixon, in his June 17 message establishing the Special Action Office for Drug Abuse Prevention, set the figure at "more than $2 billion a year." And this may be a low estimate when you consider the addict must pay from $30 to $100 a day for the drugs he needs. The bulk of this money must be gotten through some form of robbery and most of the objects that are stolen must be sold or traded for a fraction of their value. Mr. EDWARDS. If the gentleman will yield at that point, it is an interesting figure given by the President, but certainly hasn't been made definite, because, as you point out in your statement, most of the objects stolen must be sold at a fraction of their cost, that perhaps the figure of goods stolen on a yearly basis in the United States might exceed $8 billion. Mr. EILBERG. In addition to the cost in money, there is a price we all must pay in the quality of life in our cities. Today urban residents are afraid to walk the streets. The doors to their houses are double and triple locked and the windows are sealed shut. Whole buildings, and in some cases, whole neighborhoods have become practically uninhabitable because addicts have taken them over. Finally, there is the actual number of lives lost because of drug addition. In my city, Philadelphia, the figures are reaching catastrophic proportions. The police department's records for this year show that so far 56 people-according to the findings of the city medical examiner— died from narcotics overdose. There were seven suicides by drugs, 68 deaths in which the toxocologist found narcotics in the body, and 56 other cases which are pending and awaiting a formal report to confirm the involvement of drugs. This is 187 deaths so far this year. The figure for all of 1970 in Philadelphia was 189. The figures for other cities are equally bleak and disturbing. The number of deaths caused by overdoses in New York City was 1,156 in 1970. For Chicago the figure was 277; Miami, 41: San Francisco, 170; Washington, 63; Detroit, 133; Cleveland, 38; New Orleans, 42; and Baltimore, 70. All of this, the deaths, the loss and destruction of property, and the effect on all residents of our cities can only add up to a disaster and we are doing almost nothing about it. This proposal, H.R. 4417, which establishes the right of civil detention for addicts is one step in the right direction. It makes treatment and rehabilitation facilities available to the addiets and it takes them out of the reaches of the pushers. If enacted, the proposal would also mean the addicts being treated while under civil commitment would no longer have to or be able to prey on the rest of society. This bill is also a major step in the direction we must take if drug addiction is to become controllable. It recognizes that addiction is a social and medical problem and not just something to be handled by the police. This summer, as you pointed out, Mr. Chairman, I visited a Government clinic in England where addicts are given the drugs they need so they do not have to resort to crime. During my visit in London, I spoke with doctors, administrators, and the addicts themselves. They all agreed that this system had made the illegal sale of drugs a very small time and almost nonprofit industry. While the system is far from perfect it does enable the addict to get the drugs he needs without turning to crime and it makes him readily available for treatment and rehabilitation programs. Writing in Harper's magazine this past June, Edgar May quoted a Scotland Yard report which states: There is no concrete evidence of any particular criminal activity with those dependent on the hard drugs. However, there are drawbacks to the English system. There is no money for rehabilitation and treatment and the addict is never even asked to aid the police in stopping the illegal traffic which continues to make drugs available to potential users. If we adopt this method, the centers must not become "pill dispensers," as the doctor in the English clinic himself described them. There must be a staff to work with the addicts and the treatment must be mandatory. And, finally the addicts should be urged to help the police locate the pushers. Scotland Yard has only 25 narcotic agents on its squad which is amazingly low. But along with any treatment programs there must be massive and effective means of educating our young people, starting with the preschool age children. Sesame Street has been able to effectively teach our youngest and most disadvantaged children basic learning skills. Why can't the same kind of creativity and skill device meaningful and effective drug education programs. And, at the same time, we must make it possible for the pushers and smugglers to be arrested and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. But, if we are going to solve the problem we need two things fastaction and money. Drug addiction is a cancer, but we have been treating it as though it were a case of the sniffles. When a portion of our country is hit by a physical disaster we are able to move quickly and effectively. We react almost instinctively with whatever is needed-food, clothing, shelter, money, et cetera. When floods recently ravaged Maryland causing 13 deaths and $11,839,400 in property losses and damage, the Federal Government provided more than $8 million in relief funds. When a hurricane swept through New York this year and caused $4,320,843 worth of damage and property loss the Federal Government provided an equal amount of aid. But, when the President himself estimates the cost of drug addiction at more than $2 billion a year and the number of lives lost annually is in the hundreds and possibly thousands, we do not seem to be able to provide a significant fraction of what is needed. Apparently life is not as important as property. The President has made supplemental budget requests for the fiscal year 1972 amounting to $155 million. This would bring the total Federal budget for fighting the drug problem in fiscal year 1972 to a little over $380 million. This is far from enough. Governor Milton Shapp, of Pennsylvania, in testimony before the House Select Committee on Crime, pointed out that New York State alone spends $188 million annually. In Pennsylvania authorities estimate that a minimum of $45 million a year is required until the problem is brought under control, but the State has been able to appropriate only $20 million. For these reasons, I feel our cities must be declared national disaster areas and emergency funds be made available to pay for the problems and facilities necessary to combat drug addiction effectively. We cannot continue to think of drug addiction as a problem. It is a threat to the very life of our country. We must decide what we are going to do immediately. Every day we wait the threat grows stronger. We must do something before it becomes impossible to stop. Thank you for the opportunity to present my views. |