In recent months, the media narratives surrounding the burgeoning opioid drug epidemic have become a national conversation. With doctors prescribing more opioids than ever, the abuse of such drugs has skyrocketed, taking lives and wrecking communities. Research shows that in 2014 alone, 28,647 people died from opioid use. While not all of those casualties are due to prescribed substances, the New York Times reports that “about one in 550 people who received opioids for chronic pain not linked to cancer died from an opioid-related overdose a median of 2.6 years after their first prescription.”
Individual states are beginning to change legislation to mitigate the issue. The Tufts Observer has done extensive, well-researched reporting on work being done in Massachusetts, specifically Gloucester's "Angel" program in its article "Policing Addiction." And just last month, Massachusetts passed a groundbreaking law that addresses the issue from a people-first standpoint. In a statement commending the state's political stakeholders, Senate President Stanley C. Rosenberg described how he is "proud that here in Massachusetts, we have turned a very big corner. This problem used to be seen as a crime. It’s now understood to be a disease.” The law’s two biggest successes require that initial prescription length for opioids be limited to seven days so that addiction can be managed more easily and that doctors keep track of prescriptions by way of a “prescription monitoring program” to prevent users from hopping from doctor to doctor to get re-prescribed opioids. The law is especially important in a state where statistics show as many as 100 lives are lost per month as a result of the epidemic and where hospitals are seeing an increase in babies who have been exposed to drugs. The problems that arise from drug exposure are not only costly to fix but inflict unfair damage on the infants themselves who, with good luck, face withdrawal, but with bad luck face irreparable developmental damage. With the passing of the law, Massachusetts has become the role model for other states that face the same problems.
The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) have also made considerable, but potentially less effective, efforts to break the drug crisis on the national level. They released a set of guidelines in mid-March for practitioners that are non-binding but “not seen as voluntary” according to Myra Christopher, the director of the Pain Action Alliance to Implement a National Strategy. These guidelines recommend, among other things, that practitioners try treating their patients with ibuprofen and similar substances before committing to harsher opioids.They also propose mandatory urine testing before receiving prescriptions and to limit opioid prescriptions to an initial three days as opposed to Massachusetts’s seven. While Massachusetts took action in the form of legislation, the CDC’s nonbinding recommendations may prove less successful and may not do as much to halt the drug crises.
But as ideal as these changes to the status quo sound, there has been some backlash, especially from those who view their prescribed opioids as a necessary and completely beneficial part of their lives. Once such person is Katherine Cameron from Alameda, Calif. who wrote to the New York Times about her disapproval of the CDC’s new guidelines. She, like many others, has found that a low-dose opioid regimen makes her chronic pain and associated symptoms such as depression more manageable. And she, like many others, has not become addicted to her prescriptions. She argues that the alternatives the CDC and state governments suggest, ibuprofen and aspirin, actually pose more of a threat to her health, such as having the potential to irreparably damage her kidneys, liver and other essential organs. The new laws pose a threat to her well being. And when the message from Mayor Walsh of Boston is “if this law helps one family and one addict, it has done its job,” we begin to question how that sentiment plays out when the law prevents one family and one patient from getting the help she needs.
Although the drug crisis is a pressing issue, it is also true that voices like Katherine’s are largely left out of the media. The drugs can be used dangerously, but they can also be used safely. And sometimes they are the best option for the patient. While the new legislation and guidelines are a step in the right direction to stop the nationwide problem, legislation should do more to include the needs of those who truly benefit from these drugs.
More from The Tufts Daily
