Gathering Place
Meda Chesney-Lind,
Katherine Irwin
and Robert Perkinson
Drug treatment belongs
outside of isle prisons
Now that Hawaii's joint House-Senate task force on ice and drug abatement has met for the final time and state lawmakers are busy writing legislation that will shape drug policies for years, we would like to share some findings from the scientific literature regarding what does and doesn't work in combating drug abuse and crime.
CORRECTION
Thursday, Oct. 13, 2003>> Katherine Irwin was the principal author of the Oct. 26 "Gathering Place" column, "Drug treatment belongs outside of isle prisons," on Page A12. The byline made it appear that Robert Perkinson and Meda Chesney-Lind, who co-authored the piece, shared equally in the writing with Irwin.
The Honolulu Star-Bulletin strives to make its news report fair and accurate. If you have a question or comment about news coverage, call Editor Frank Bridgewater at 529-4791 or email him at fbridgewater@starbulletin.com.First, contrary to conventional wisdom, the current balance of evidence suggests that incarceration does a poor job of reducing crime.
Texas provides a sobering example of incarceration's failure. During the past decade, Texas' prison population tripled, growing faster than any other state. Yet while crime rates across the country dropped in the 1990s, they declined in Texas by only 5.1 percent. By contrast, in New York, which had the third-slowest-growing prison population during the same period, crime rates fell by 21 percent.
The lesson? Locking up more people does not necessarily make communities safer. Certainly, imprisonment keeps offenders from committing crimes while they are incarcerated. But this "incapacitation" effect ends when prisoners are released, and roughly 67 percent to 80 percent commit new crimes.
Recent news reports suggest that Governor Lingle's administration wants to build a 500-bed prison in Hawaii emphasizing drug abuse treatment. This is a seductive proposal. It responds to community pressure for more drug treatment and remains tough on drug users. But what does the scholarly literature say about the effectiveness of drug treatment prisons?
The current evidence is mixed. For example, while a University of California-Los Angeles study found that prison drug treatment followed by six months of aftercare cut recidivism by about 70 percent, a recent meta-analysis of prison- based drug treatment found that such programs decreased recidivism by only 10 percent. Why this huge variation?
A close look at the literature shows that a rigid set of criteria is necessary to achieve high rates of success. Effective prison-based treatment programs include costly components, such as separate units for those receiving treatment, extensive and on-going staff training, thoroughly planned interventions, continuous monitoring and extensive aftercare.
Will Hawaii's cash-strapped, overcrowded prison system be able to provide such a comprehensive program? If not, taxpayers will have spent an enormous amount of money on a program that may not work.
Finally, there is no guarantee that a drug treatment prison today will be a drug treatment prison tomorrow. Look again at Texas. In 1991, Gov. Ann Richards received funding to add 14,000 beds for prison-based drug treatment. When Gov. George W. Bush took over in 1995, most of the treatment facilities were converted to regular prisons. In 2003, Gov. Rick Perry cut prison treatment further. What began as an innovative and promising approach to incarceration ended in more of the same -- costly, ineffective imprisonment. Hawaii should not follow this failed model.
Instead, we believe Hawaii should do the following:
>> Invest in crime prevention strategies backed by solid scientific evidence. Criminologists have deliberated over the "what works" question for more than 20 years, and they have concluded that prevention programs work. Because drug abuse and crime share similar causes, prevention programs can decrease the number of youths starting drug use while preventing a range of delinquent and criminal behaviors. Prevention is not only effective, it makes good fiscal sense. One California study estimated that in their first year, prevention programs saved the state from $1,468 to $15,000 per person enrolled; 30 years out, the savings were from $29,350 to $221,750 per person.>> For those already drug-addicted, Hawaii needs to invest in scientifically proven community-based interventions. Extensive evidence suggests that drug treatment implemented out of prisons can decrease drug use, criminal activity and arrest rates while increasing employment rates among treatment populations.
>> Finally, the state should reduce reliance on incarceration for nonviolent drug offenders. Prisons are blunt, expensive tools. They devour taxpayers' money, chew up the lives of prisoners and their families and do a poor job of reducing crime. Yet we know treatment outside of prison works. It costs less than incarceration and comes with fewer side effects. Before investing Hawaii's precious resources in new prisons, we urge lawmakers to think about cheaper, more effective alternatives.
The authors are professors at the University of Hawaii-Manoa. Meda Chesney-Lind is a professor of women's studies; Katherine Irwin is an assistant professor of sociology; and Robert Perkinson is an assistant professor of American studies.
