Those most impacted by the opioid crisis are often excluded from decision-making on the distribution of settlement funds, an analysis reveals.
A comprehensive look into the allocation of funds from opioid settlements indicates that individuals with substance use disorders are frequently omitted from the decision-making process. With around $50 billion set aside in settlements, only a small portion is directly influenced by those with lived experiences of addiction.
Advocates criticize some allocations, arguing that funds are directed towards measures which may not effectively address the crisis, such as law enforcement equipment rather than treatment centers. For instance, in Jackson County, West Virginia, a decision was made to utilize over $500,000 for a first-responder training center, and less for direct recovery efforts. Josh George, a recovery advocate, mentioned that funds could better support recovery houses – crucial for ongoing support in the community.
Since the late 1990s, opioids have presented significant challenges in the U.S., evolving from prescription pills to more potent substances like fentanyl. Despite the flexibility in using settlement funds to combat the crisis, many decisions do not reflect the urgent needs identified by individuals directly affected. Christine Minhee from Opioid Settlement Tracker plans to release a guide to enable advocates to influence funding decisions better.
Research shows advisory groups, often lacking representation from drug users or recovery experts, have decision-making authority over only a fraction of the funds. It is reported that less than one in seven dollars is overseen by boards including members with firsthand experience, which can hasten the allocation process to effective initiatives.
The need for transparency and equity in the decision-making process is paramount, according to public health advocates. Some regions prioritize traditional government spending practices over targeted intervention solutions, ignoring the benefits of consulting experienced voices. In Minnesota, Renville County allocated a significant sum to scan jail inmates for drugs, a decision questioned by addiction experts who advocate for treatment-focused spending.
In West Virginia, efforts to use settlement funds to train law enforcement reflect broader tendencies to favor institutional responses over recovery support. Community leaders like Tonia Ahern, who lost her son to an overdose, emphasize the importance of drawing insight from those who understand addiction when deciding fund allocation.
To make a substantial impact on the opioid crisis, it is vital to include those affected in funding decisions. Transparent processes and direct involvement from experienced individuals could lead to more effective use of settlement funds, focusing on treatment and prevention rather than enforcement. Strengthening these efforts might better address the ongoing challenges and save more lives.
Source: Apnews
