Despite the short comings of some drug treatment programs, treatment in is a better policy decision than incarceration.
A treatment based policy falls under the term "harm reduction". Where we reduce the harm a drug user has on himself and society. What makes harm reduction an attractive proposal? One benefit is a "low threshold to access to services" as opposed to high threshold access of services that demand reduction has(29 ).
Treatment must be holistic in nature to be the most successful "Successful intervention in this respect, for example, counseling with this regard to martial problems and assistance in trying to find a job." (30 ). Reviewers found that "Empirical questioning will encourage a multi disciplinary perspective, because addictions cannot be understood by any single approach."(31 ).
In Alaska, what drugs do Alaskans seek treatment for, a note the following number may also reflect court referral.
Over all what drugs did these clients say they need treatment for
With shrinking state and federal monies does treatment make sense?
Since 1990 the Alaska has spent an average 25 million annually, and 370 million from 1980 to 1998 for treatment and prevention programs for drug and alcohol abuse(34 ).
A study show for every dollar spent on treatment programs $11.54 in social cost are saved, and a more current study showed for every dollar spent on treatment spent on treatment programs $5.60 was avoided being spent by the tax payer, this study also showed of people who successfully completed out patient treatment were arrested at a 45% lower than those who did not complete treatment. People who Successfully completed treatment were incarcerated at a rate 70% lower that those who did not, and a decrease in child welfare cases(35 ).