The W.o.D, Counter-Narcotics and -Terrorism
The W.o.D, Spaces of Change
The W.o.D Housing
Six years later in 1996, Congress passed the Housing Opportunity Program Extension Act, which established “One Strike” laws and expanded on previous acts to give PHAs the authority to evict tenants if they or a guest was suspected of using or selling drugs, even outside of the premises
This series of public housing policies requires neither a drug arrest nor proof that a tenant or their guest is involved in drug use, sales, or activity Private housing markets can also enforce zero-tolerance drug policies.
In over 2,000 cities across the U.S., landlords can certify their property as “crime-free” by taking a class, implementing “crime prevention” architecture, and including clauses in their leases that allow for immediate eviction should a tenant, family member, or guest engage in “criminal activity,” particularly drug-related activity, on or off the premises.
Landlords, in close partnership with law enforcement, can invoke these laws by claiming to enforce crime-free ordinances, regardless of whether the alleged drug-related activity is illegal.
In states across the U.S., private landlords have evicted tenants following an overdose. In practice, these programs and ordinances increase the surveillance and displacement of low-income Black and Latinx tenants while not decreasing crime and potentially deterring someone from calling 911 for medical assistance in case of an overdose
Evictions can lead to unstable housing or homelessness, which is associated with a host of chronic health problems, infectious diseases, emotional and developmental problems, food insecurity, and premature death.
Lacking a permanent address and reliable transportation makes it more difficult to receive and store medications and travel to a hospital or clinic; this is compounded with the stigma and discrimination that unhoused people often face from healthcare providers.
#Being unhoused or housing unstable is also associated with difficulty obtaining long-term employment and education. Longitudinal studies have found that family eviction has both short- and long-term impacts among newborns and children, including adverse birth outcomes, poorer health, risk of lead exposure, worse cognitive function, and lower educational outcomes.
#These negative health outcomes are compounded for people with SUDs. Unhoused people who use drugs are often forced into more unsafe, more unsanitary, and riskier injection and drug-using practices to avoid detection.
#Evictions and homelessness are also associated with increased risk of drug-related harms, including non-fatal and fatal overdose, infectious diseases, and syringe sharing. In addition, evictions can disrupt relationships between users and trusted sellers, making an already unregulated drug supply even more unpredictable
While housing is understood as a key component of health and safety for all people, including people who use drugs, drug war logic can encourage and facilitate displacement, making it hard for housed people to remain so and creating barriers for those who are unhoused to find safe, affordable housing options.
#Solutions for improving housing access include ending evictions and removing housing bans based solely on drug-related activity or suspected activity, restricting landlords from using criminal background checks to exclude prospective tenants, and ending collaborations between housing complexes and law enforcement.
#Housing interventions that can improve the health of people who use drugs include investing in Housing First programs and permanent supportive housing, providing eviction protection to people who call for help during an overdose emergency (i.e. expanding 911 Good Samaritan laws), and establishing overdose prevention centres.
Education
Education is also understood as a strong predictor of health, but drug war logic in educational settings can subject young people who use drugs to punishment rather than needed support.
Adolescent substance use is associated with sexual risk behaviour, experience of violence, adverse childhood experiences, and mental health and suicide risks, which should justify greater mental health and support services in schools.
Despite this, punitive responses to suspected or confirmed drug use, ranging from surveillance and policing to drug testing and expulsion, are commonplace in the field of education.
In 2018, 94% of high schools used security cameras, 65% did random sweeps for contraband, and 13% used metal detectors. Twenty-four states and the District of Columbia have almost as many police and security officers in schools as they do school counsellors.
Drug use is one of the most common sources of referrals of students to police. And recent estimates show that over a third of all U.S. school districts with middle or high schools had student drug testing policies.
Drug war policies also impact higher education, which is integral to economic mobility. Prior to December 2020, federal law prohibited educational grants and financial aid to people in prison, one-fifth of whom were there for a drug offence, and drug convictions could lead to temporary or indefinite suspension of federal financial aid for students.
Still today, fourteen states have some temporary or permanent denial of financial aid for college or university education for people with criminal records These education policies – surveillance, policing, drug testing, zero tolerance, and barriers to financial aid – restrict access to education and ultimately impede economic wellbeing and positive health outcomes.
For example, dropout risk increases every time a student receives harsh school discipline or meets the criminal legal system, including through school police officers. Dropping out, in turn, is associated with higher unemployment and chronic health conditions.
Reduce Higher Risk
In addition, discipline, such as expulsion for a drug violation, can contribute to more arrests for drug offences or the development of SUDs. In contrast, school completion can help reduce higher risk substance use patterns, and education is a strong predictor of long-term health and quality of life.
Rather than supporting young people in completing their education and getting the support they may need, drug war logic prioritises punishing them in schools while often restricting access to financial aid and educational services for those seeking higher education.
If we want to improve the health of young people, we need to reverse these policies. For example, the American Academy of Paediatrics opposes the random drug testing of young people based on an exhaustive review of the literature finding it did more harm than good.
Removing police from schools, ending zero-tolerance policies, and offering young people who use drugs counselling and support, instead of expulsion, could also help improve completion rates, ultimately leading to better health outcomes.
