I am humbled that Bene invited me to post some of my thoughts on his earlier post of the problem of meth, its consequences, and what can be done about it.*  I wish I had some good answers.  The meth addiction problem is one of the most difficult addiction issues.  It is highly addictive, a public health menace equal to many toxic waste dumps when made in home labs, a crime problem in the drive to get or sell it, a family and child protection epidemic since it is often people with young children involved, and takes a devastating toll on the human body. That’s not a small issue.

I think there were three things in the original news article that struck me.  First was the issue of fines:

Police are frustrated, because possession convictions net only small fines. Recently, a Manitoba judge sentenced one teenager charged with possession to a fine of $150. Police and outreach professionals say that seems low, when the fine for possessing an opened container of alcohol in a public place is $167, the fine for speeding 15 kilometres over the posted speed limit is $163, and driving without your seatbelt buckled can cost $247. “If the punishment is to act as a deterrent, comparatively speaking, it seems out of bounds,” observed Winkler Police Chief Rick Hiebert told CTV News.

Should fines be higher? Of course they should.  The danger of meth to the individual and the society around them is sure higher than not having your seatbelt buckled.  The consequences need to be significant.  But let’s not think this will solve the problem. It will not be a deterrent. Nor will stiffer jail sentences for possession, sale, or manufacture.

In the original article Steve Paulson, executive director of Teen Challenge Canada, said that he had a better idea. “Perhaps things like boot camps, maybe privately run boot camps would be a good consequence,” he said, “not places where young people are being punished, but a place where the drugs aren’t going to be available.”  I’m not sure of calling it a “consequence.” We have to see it as an opportunity, not a disciplinary action. What he is calling for is intensive treatment options with enough time and effort to get the addict beyond the withdrawal and discover the possibilities of life without meth.

That’s the first key to successful treatment and recovery- time that isn’t cut short by regulation, insurance (at least in the US), or a view that treatment is punishment instead of an opportunity to start over with a new life.  I can’t over stress that last idea.  Time and time again I have clients who come into our outpatient program because of legal issues.  Many are required to be there or at least strongly urged to be so.  They see what is done in treatment as part of the legal consequences.  No wonder they don’t get clean and sober.  It starts as an adversarial relationship and hardly gets beyond that. We need to find ways to provide that treatment in healthy, supportive, concerned programs that see the people as people worthy of the time and effort to help them get and stay sober.

The third item is the information about the teenaged brain.

Drug consumption in the teenage years can create a receptivity pattern in how the brain reacts to stimuli, and set the stage for life-long abuse. According to Dr. Nora Volkow, head of the U.S. government’s National Institute on Drug Abuse, people who don’t use drugs before age 21 rarely get hooked later in life.

Unfortunately the truth in that statement is stronger than you may think.  That receptivity pattern that’s mentioned is deep within the limbic system, our primitive, “old brain” which highjacks our higher thinking processes. It is not just meth that gets that pattern established.  Perhaps the most significant sources of addiction training in the brain is smoking cigarettes or maybe even drinking highly caffeinated drinks.  The increase in teen addiction may have as much to do with learning how to be an addict from these chemicals long before meth comes into the picture.

Fortunately, while meth addiction has shown an increase, the overall rate of addiction doesn’t seem to be increasing.  In fact there are some signs in places in the US where it appears to be dropping.  It may be that meth is showing up because of its strength and repercussions and not that it is spreading into areas where addiction has never been.  The news reporting, the work of many agencies, and a strong PR push against it may keep  from seeing grow much more than it appears to have done already.

*Barry is an addiction counsellor, and a blogging friend who can be found at Wanderings of a Post-Modern Pilgrim. I asked him if he’d respond to the CTV story, “Fines not enough to curb abuse police say,”  that was the basis in this post.