Charles Krauthammer’s Feb. 24 column (“TV ad campaign will have trickle-down effect on drug use,” Op-Ed) accurately credits advertising with the ability to shape social norms and behaviors, citing public-service ads against smoking as a major force in the decline of smoking in the United States over the last two decades.
I believe, as he suggests, that over time it will work for drugs, but only in combination with other actions. One of those must be treatment.
In the same column, Mr. Krauthammer inaccurately suggests that substance-abuse treatment doesn’t work. On the contrary: It does.
Mr. Krauthammer cites a Rand study that stated most cocaine users are still using one year after treatment. He omitted another finding from a Rand study: “Substance-abuse treatment is seven times more effective in reducing cocaine use than domestic law enforcement.”
Then there is the oft-quoted CALDATA study, which showed that for every dollar spent on treatment, society gets back an average of $7, primarily in reduced health care and criminal justice costs. Some types of treatment exhibited as much as a 12-1 return on investment. That same study also found that criminal activity decreased an average of 66 percent following treatment.
A U.S. Department of Health and Human Services study of pregnant women undergoing substance-abuse treatment demonstrated that 40 percent eliminated or reduced their dependence on welfare.
Key to the long-term success of treatment is the opportunity for the addict to start life again. Aftercare (which nearly always includes regular attendance at 12-step meetings but may include housing in a recovery home, for example), continuing support for family and friends, and–most of all–employment are necessary for the addict to sustain a recovery, prevent relapse and become a productive, taxpaying citizen.
