PeterdeMarneffe’sargumentagainstthelegalizationofdrugsrequiresthattheburdens tothosecausedbycriminalizationareoutweighedbythebenefitstothosewhowouldbe deterredfromdrugs.Ifitiseitherthecasethatthereareharmsthatremaineveninarevised punishmentsystem,andthoseharmsoutweighanybenefits,orthatunder legalization/decriminalization, asimilarlyrestructuredsystemaddressestheharmsofdruguse, thendeMarneffe’sargumentdoesnotstand.Iwillarguethatboththeburdensofpunishmentand benefitsofdeterrencearemiscalculatedbydeMarneffe,eveninhisidealizedsystem,and decriminalizationofdruguseispreferableinthebalanceofburdensandbenefits.
Thisargumentforcriminalizationreliesheavilyonthegroundsthatheroinuseandabuse wouldincreasegiventhelegalizationofthatdrug.Forthepurposesofthispaper,Iwillassume thatthefollowingpremisesofdeMarneffe’sargumentaretrue:
1.Heroinprohibitiondecreasesusewhencomparedtolegalization.
2.Heroinuseincreasesheroinabuse.
3.Ifheroinislegalized,abusewouldincrease.
4a.Heroinabuseamongadultsdamagesfutureprospectsofchildren,andanincreaseof abusewillincreasethechanceofsignificantlossesforchildren.
4b.Heroinuseamongadolescentswillsimilarlyincreasethechanceofsignificantlosses.
5.Evenwithpolicychangestothepunishmenttodecreaseburdens,prohibitionwill decreaseuseandabuse.
Whatmustbeshowntobetruetojustifyprohibitionofdrugsitthat“thereasonsfor someyoungpeopletowanttobeprotectedfromanenvironmentinwhichheroinislegal outweighthereasonsofotherstowanttobeinanenvironmentwhereheroinislegal(provided thattheexternalcostsofviolenceandintimidationthatarisefromthedrugtradecanbedefrayed bymorefundingandotherchangesinpolicy)(DeMarneffe123).
Thefirstpieceindeterminingthereasonsthatsomepeoplemaywantanenvironmentof prohibitioniswhatdeMarneffecallstheindependentharmsofuse.Inthecaseofheroin,he believesthat“drugprohibitionnowreducesrisksofprematuredeath,accidentalbodilyinjury, violence,vandalism,maritalinstability,childneglect,andfailureatimportanteducationaland occupationaltasks”andthesearetheharmsthatwouldremaingivenlegalization(DeMarneffe
109).Thereisanissuewithdirectionalcorrelationwithmanyoftheharmshelaysout.Itmaybe thecasethatauserofheroinwouldhaveahardtimekeepingstablerelationships,butitisalso possiblethatinstabilityinrelationshipsiswhatmadethembegintouseheroin.Thesamecanbe saidfordruguseandmentalillness.Problemswitheducation,motivation,andapropensityfor accidentsarealsosymptomsofmentalillness,andhavingamentalillnesshasabidirectional correlationwithdruguse(Esmaeelzadehetal.).Itishardtodrawstrongconclusionsaboutthese typesofindependentharmsandtheirinherentconnectionwithdruguse.IwillgrantdeMarneffe thattheseareharmsthatwouldremain,butthedirectionalityissuemaymeanthatfixesforthese issuescouldverywelldecreaseuse.
ThesecondpiecethatdeMarneffe’sargumentreliesonisarestructuredsystemof prohibition.Theburdensofpunishmentmustbedecreasedsothattheydonotoutweighthe reasonsforwantingprohibition.ThechangesthatdeMarneffeproposesincludeasystemof proportionalpunishmentanddecreasedsentencesforpeoplesuchasfirsttimeusers,thosenot carryinglargequantities,thosewillingtoagreetotermsofprobation,etc.Policychangesmust alsobemadeaswellsuchas“thegovernment[committing]toreducingtheneighborhood violencethattheblackmarketcreates…[andincreasing]fundingforneighborhoodpolicing”as wellas“governmentsofthedevelopedworld[offering]financialincentivestolessdeveloped countriestogrowothercropsandtohelpthemsuppressmoneylaunderingactivities”(De Marneffe120).Civillibertiesofallcitizensmustberespectedbylawenforcement,whichwould requireextensivetrainingandincentivestodoso.Themedicalsystemwouldhavetobe reformedsuchthatcleanneedleswouldbemadeavailable,andprescriptionsmustbemade availableofherointopeoplewhowouldotherwisebeselfmedicating(DeMarneffe122).Given thesechanges,deMarneffebelievesthattheburdensofpunishmentthatremainarenecessary andareoutweighed,andthereforejustified,bythebenefitsofdeterrence.
IthinkthatitwouldbeusefultousedeMarneffe’sideaofindependentharmsandapply thattotheburdensofpunishment.Ibelievethatthereareindependentharmsofincarcerationthat wouldremaineveninhisproposedrevisionofdrugprohibition.Itwouldbeuncharitabletode Marneffetotakethesepropositionsasfullycomprehensive,buttothereasonableextentthatany sortofinterventioncouldbeimplementedacrossanygoverningbody,gapswouldstillremain.In ourcurrentsystemofpunishment,thereisapushtorestorethevotingrightsoffelonsthatI believewouldfallunderthecategoryofcivillibertiesbeingrespectedthatdeMarneffe
proposed.Theharmarisesinthefactthateveninplaceswherevotingislegalandaccessiblefor felons,votingamongthatgroupisdecreased.Ifpeoplehavemisdemeanorcharges,thatgroup willlikelyvoteless.Whenthefinancialbarrierstovotingareremoved,thereisstillanissue gettingpeoplewithcriminalchargestoknowthattheycanvote(Polancoetal.).Thereasonable interventionintheseplaceshasbeenmadetorestoretherightsofcriminals,butaharmstill remainsformanyandtheirrepresentationinfurtherpoliciesisdiminished,leadingtofurther harms.Gettingthisdemographictovoteinsimilarnumberstothepopulationatlargewould requireaholisticallydifferentpostreleaseexperiencewhereeducationisprioritized,andchanges tovotinglawsasawhole.Thesearen’tthingsthatareproposedbydeMarneffe,andareperhaps notallthatfeasibleonalargescale.
Asimilarissueexistswithcivilrightsinabroadersense.Iamnotsureiftheintervention oftrainingandincentivesalonewouldmakeadifferenceintheprotectionofcivilrightsby police.Searchandseizurelawswouldhavetobereformed,aswellasstrictlyenforced.Qualified immunityforpolicewouldeitherhavetobeweakenedorgottenridofcompletely Thechanges thatwouldbemadetopunishmentfordrugviolationswouldhavetoextendtoothertypesof crimesaswell.Surveillancemethodslikedogs,heatmapping,frisking,etc.thatareused currentlyindrugenforcementwouldmostlikelyneedtoceasetoavoidviolatingthecivil libertiesoftheinnocentandaccused.Muchofwhatwerecognizeaspolicingnowwouldhaveto bereformedorabandonedtomakeasystemofpolicingthatiscongruentwiththerespectofcivil rights.WhileIdon’tdisagreethatwouldbeagoodthing,itisonceagainanissueofreasonable changesthatcouldfeasiblybeimplementedtoreducetheburdenstospecificallydrugusers.
Anyamountofincarcerationhasseriousconcernsforthedignityoftheaccused,andde Marneffeproposingshorteningthesentencesofpeoplearrestedfordrugusedoesnotchange that.Eventhetimespentinaninterrogationroomshouldbetakenasaninfringementoffreedom anddignityforaperson,andthetimespentthereshouldbejustified.DeMarneffesaysthatother crimescanbejustifiedusingthe“comparativerisk”,likethereasonswewouldwantan environmentwithouttheftoutweighanybenefitsthatthethiefgetsfromthieving(DeMarneffe 126).WhiledeMarneffemayberightthatthisframeworkcanbeappliedtocriminalizationof theft,itseemslikeadistinctioncanbemadeagainstacrimethatposesriskstooneselfanda crimethatimpedesontherightsofothers.Iwoulddisagreethatusingthisframeworkthatthe harmcausedbytimespentincarceratedaloneisjustifiedinthecaseofdruguse,evenif
decreasedtodays.Outsideofpolicyreform,therearestillharmsstemmingfromtheexperience ofincarcerationitself.Itishardtoseehowinterpersonalharmsbetweeninmatescouldbe reducedbypolicyreform.Itisalreadyapunishableoffensetophysicallyharmanotherinmate, andyettheharmremains.Stricterenforcementmaydecreasetheseharms,butwouldincrease otherunfavorableaspectsofincarceration.Dictatingaprivatecitizen'sbehaviordoesnotseem likeafeasiblechangethatcanbemadetodecreasetheburdenofincarceration.
Anotheraspectoftherelationshipbetweenreductionofharmsandburdenisthe decreasedmarginsbetweenthetwogiventherestructuringhappens.Theindependentharmsthat aredescribedarelikelytobedecreasedbytheproposedchanges.Harmreductionhasbeen showntoreducethephysicalrisksofdruguse,especiallyinthecaseofinjectionaswouldbe presentinheroinuse(DeBecketal.).Safeinjectionsiteswereshowntochangethebehaviorsof injectionusers,andarecorrelatedtocessation,atleastforthedurationoftheprogram(Petraret al.).Similarly,theuseofopioidtherapiesdecreasetherisksofdiseasetransmissionandinjection cessation(Sullivanetal.).AsdeMarneffeproposes,thesupervisedprescriptionofdrugsforpain ormoodcontrolwoulddecreaseratesofabuseforpeoplewhoneedmedicalintervention.
Theproposedinterventionscouldbetakenfurtherwithoutcriminalization.Theincreased fundingforpolicingthatheproposescouldbetterbeusedindecreasingtheindependentharms ofdruguse.Reformtothemedicalsystemwouldincreaseaccessibilityofbothphysicaland mentalhealthservices.Becauseofthebidirectionalityoftheindependentharms,itisvery possiblethataddressingtheharmsthemselveswoulddecreasedruguse.Changeslike safeguardinginappropriateprescribing,expansionofopiatereplacementprograms,and supervisedproductionanduseofdrugsarechangesthatcanbemadetothehealthcaresystem givenappropriatefundingandsupport(Strangetal.).Multidimensionalfamilytherapyislinked todecreaseduseofmarijuanaandalcoholinadolescents,whichwouldaddressmanyofthe concernsdeMarneffebringsupaboutthelossofopportunitiesofchildren(Liddleetal.).
Anotherconcernhehasiswiththeunequalrisksdrugusehasinimpactingtheeducationof differentclassandracegroups.Thisisanotheraspectthatislikelytoimprovewithfundsforthe communityandeducationalinfrastructure,notmerelythedecreaseindruguse.Thegeneral benefitofsocialprogramstothecommunityshouldalsobeconsideredbecauseofthe bidirectionalindependentharms.Fundingforcommunitiesdecreaseshomelessness,whichalso
hasabidirectionalrelationshipofdruguseandmentalhealthproblems.Portionsofthis populationwhowouldexperienceharmwouldnolongerbeinthatposition.
Programstodeterdrugusearealsonotbeingproposedattheirstrongesthereeither. Educationalprogramstodissuadechildrenhavenotbeeneffective,buteducationalprogramsas awholeworkbestwhenpairedwithmaterialinterventions.Providingresourcestocommunities, structuralchanges,andfinancialaidarethingsthatwhenpairedwitheducationalprograms couldincreasetheeffectivenessofdeterrence,butarealsoexpensive,andoftennotutilized.Ina systemofdecriminalizationorlegalization,highpricesofdrugsareadeterrentnotnecessaryfor addicts,butforfirsttimerecreationalusers.
Ifthebenefitsthatcomestrictlyfromdeterrencebycriminalizationarelessthan expected,andtheburdensofincarcerationarehigherthanexpected,thereisreasontothink underdeMarneffe’ssystem,decriminalizationwouldactuallyprovidethemostbenefitstothose whowouldhaveotherwisebeenharmedbylegalizationandcriminalization.Theproposed changesdonotseemtodecreasetheburdensenoughtojustifypunishment,buttheydoseemto decreasetheharmsofdrugusetoanextentwheredruguseisdecriminalized.Theproduction andsalealonemaybebettercriminalizedinthisframework,astheselfdirectedcrimeofuse isn’tadequatelyjustifiedbydeMarneffe.
WorksCited
DeBeck,Kora,etal.“InjectiondrugusecessationanduseofNorthAmerica'sfirstmedically supervisedsaferinjectingfacility.” Drug and Alcohol Dependence,vol.113,no.2-3, 2011,pp.172-176, https://www-sciencedirect-com.unco.idm.oclc.org/science/article/pii/S037687161000269 3?via%3Dihub#sec0030.
Esmaeelzadeh,Sarvenez,etal.“ExaminingtheAssociationandDirectionalitybetweenMental HealthDisordersandSubstanceUseamongAdolescentsandYoungAdultsintheU.S. andCanada—ASystematicReviewandMeta-Analysis.” Journal of Clinical Medicine, vol.7,no.12,https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/7/12/543.
Husak,DouglasN.,andPeterDeMarneffe. The Legalization of Drugs.CambridgeUniversity Press,2014.
Liddle,HowardA.,etal.“Treatingadolescentdrugabuse:arandomizedtrialcomparing multidimensionalfamilytherapyandcognitivebehaviortherapy.” Addiction,vol.103, no.10,2008,pp.1660-1670,https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1360-0443.2008.02274.x.
Petrar,Steven,etal.“Injectiondrugusers'perceptionsregardinguseofamedicallysupervised saferinjectingfacility.” Addictive Behaviors,vol.32,no.5,2007,pp.1088-1093, https://www-sciencedirect-com.unco.idm.oclc.org/science/article/pii/S030646030600252 8?via%3Dihub.
Polanco,Emmanuel,etal.“MillionsofPeopleWithFeloniesCanNowVote.MostDon'tKnow It.” The Marshall Project,23June2021, https://www.themarshallproject.org/2021/06/23/millions-of-people-with-felonies-can-no w-vote-most-don-t-know-it.Accessed1April2024.
Strang,John,etal.“Drugpolicyandthepublicgood:evidenceforeffectiveinterventions.” The Lancet,vol.379,no.9810,2019,https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(11)61674-7.
Sullivan,LynnE.,etal.“DecreasinginternationalHIVtransmission:theroleofexpanding accesstoopioidagonisttherapiesforinjectiondrugusers.” Addiction,vol.100,no.2, 2005,pp.150-158,https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1360-0443.2004.00963.x.