Remove federal barriers to a lifesaving tool
Rachel Johnson
Video Embed
New York City’s two overdose prevention centers operated by OnPoint NYC have averted 1,008 overdoses since they opened in November 2021. Unfortunately, their good work has been met with hostility from some officials.
Earlier this month, Damian Williams, U.S. attorney for Manhattan, signaled that he might take steps to close the centers, saying, “My office is prepared to exercise all options — including enforcement — if this situation does not change in short order.”
SMALL BUSINESSES HELPLESS OVER SPIKE IN RETAIL THEFTS, SAY THEY FEEL ABANDONED BY LAWMAKERS
While federal officials are threatening to close overdose prevention centers, many state officials are looking to benefit from their undeniably positive results. Earlier this year, Gov. Tim Walz (D-MN) signed a bill that included mandating the establishment of overdose prevention centers.
Still, the states that do this are operating in violation of federal law. 21 U.S.C. Section 856, commonly known as the “crack house statute” and passed as part of the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986, makes it illegal to maintain premises knowingly for the purpose of using or storing controlled substances. The law was clearly not created with the medical purposes of overdose prevention centers in mind since the first recognized centers in the U.S. did not open until 2021.
This legislation is not conducive to the care and protection of people with substance use disorders. In lieu of a full repeal, Congress should make an exemption to 21 U.S.C. Section 856. As more states defy this federal law and momentum grows in favor of these centers, lawmakers must remove federal barriers and allow these sites to function successfully, especially as prosecutors threaten to close them.
Policymakers must not lose sight of their purported goal in this fight: reducing the number of overdose deaths. Nearly 110,000 Americans died of drug overdose in 2022. Overdose prevention centers will be an effective tool in reducing that number.
These centers are safe locations for people to consume previously obtained drugs in a clinical, controlled setting. These clinics are staffed by trained people with access to naloxone, testing equipment, and clean consumption supplies. The staff can also provide referrals to social services and recovery treatment. The sense of safety and respect overdose prevention centers provide can empower people to seek the addiction recovery treatment they need.
Other developed countries have had success with overdose prevention centers. There are currently about 200 of these centers operating in 14 different countries. According to the American Medical Association, “Studies from other countries have shown that [overdose prevention centers] reduce the number of overdose deaths, reduce transmission rates of infectious disease, and increase the number of individuals initiating treatment for substance use disorders without increasing drug trafficking or crime in the areas where the facilities are located.”
One 2014 review of 75 studies on overdose prevention centers found that they promote safer injection conditions, reduce overdose deaths, and increase the number of people seeking access to treatment and health services. These centers also lead to less outdoor drug use and have no impact on crime rates or overall drug use.
If policymakers are serious about addressing the overdose crisis, they should get out of the way of privately funded organizations. These people and groups simply want to help ensure fewer of their neighbors die entirely preventable deaths. The primary obstacle standing in their way is an outdated federal law.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
Rachel Johnson works at a Washington, D.C., think tank and is a contributor with Young Voices, where she focuses on issues related to healthcare.