Matthew Perry debates drug courts with Peter Hitchens - BBC Newsnight
Summary
TLDRIn this intense debate, Matthew Perry, an actor and former addict, and Baroness Meacher, chair of the UK All-Party Parliamentary Group on Drug Policy Reform, discuss the effectiveness of drug courts. Perry supports them, citing a 55% reduction in recidivism, while others argue that addiction is a health issue, not a crime, and criticize the criminal justice system's approach to drug users. The conversation highlights differing views on treating addiction, with some advocating for a health-focused policy and others emphasizing the importance of deterrence and personal responsibility.
Takeaways
- 😀 Matthew Perry, an actor and former addict, and Baroness Mear, who chairs the UK All Party Parliamentary Group on Drug Policy Reform, discuss faith in drug courts.
- 🔍 Perry has been involved with drug courts for over four years and believes in their effectiveness, citing a 55% reduced chance of re-offending for participants.
- 🤔 The discussion questions whether addicts would quit without intervention, suggesting that drug courts provide a necessary interruption to addiction.
- 🏥 Drug courts are presented as an alternative to prison for first-time, nonviolent drug offenders, offering an 18-month to 2-year program instead of incarceration.
- 📊 The evidence supporting drug courts is described as scanty, with few studies and mixed long-term results, raising questions about their overall impact.
- 👮♂️ The conversation touches on the purpose of the criminal justice system, with one view arguing that it should deter crime, while another suggests it should address the root causes of addiction.
- 🇵🇹 Portugal's approach to treating addiction as a health issue, rather than a crime, is highlighted, showing a shift in perspective on how to handle drug use.
- 🚫 There's a debate on whether addiction is a choice or a disease, with Perry arguing that it's a health problem that needs treatment, not punishment.
- 🧬 The script mentions that addiction has genetic and environmental factors, suggesting that a comprehensive approach is needed to address it effectively.
- 🏛️ The conversation criticizes the current system for being too lenient, arguing that it fails to deter drug use and contributes to increased drug abuse.
- 🤝 The importance of personal responsibility and the role of willpower in overcoming addiction is emphasized, with differing opinions on its significance.
Q & A
What is Matthew Perry's perspective on drug courts?
-Matthew Perry believes in drug courts because he has been involved with them for over four years and has seen that participants have a 55% less chance of re-offending.
How does Matthew Perry define addiction?
-Matthew Perry views addiction as a disease, an allergy of the body and mind that leads to a loss of control over substance use once initiated.
What is the main argument against drug courts presented in the script?
-The main argument against drug courts is that the evidence supporting their effectiveness is scanty, and they may not make a significant difference in the long term.
What is the alternative view to treating addiction as a crime?
-The alternative view is to treat addiction as a health problem, focusing on prevention and treatment rather than punishment.
What is the stance of the American Medical Association on addiction?
-The American Medical Association recognizes addiction as a disease, which contradicts the view of some individuals in the script who argue against this classification.
How does the script discuss the role of the criminal justice system in deterring drug use?
-The script suggests that a stern and effective criminal justice system could deter people from taking drugs in the first place by making the consequences of drug use unappealing.
What is the argument made by the character who believes addiction is a choice?
-This character argues that people choose to consume drugs and alcohol and that addiction is not a disease, challenging the notion that it's a compulsive behavior beyond one's control.
What evidence is mentioned in the script to support the view that addiction is a health problem?
-The script refers to genetic factors and environmental influences, such as childhood abuse and foster care, as evidence that addiction has roots in both nature and nurture.
How does the script address the issue of willpower in addiction?
-The script presents a debate where one side argues that willpower is crucial in resisting the first drink or drug, while the other side contends that once the substance is consumed, the body's allergy-like reaction takes over, overpowering willpower.
What examples are given in the script to illustrate different approaches to drug policy?
-The script mentions Portugal as an example of a country that has shifted resources from prisons to treatment, resulting in a better record in dealing with addiction compared to Spain and Italy.
What is the counter-argument to the belief that addiction is an allergy of the body?
-The counter-argument is that addiction should not be simplified to a bodily allergy, but rather understood as a complex issue that may involve genetic predisposition and environmental factors.
Outlines
📚 Debate on the Effectiveness of Drug Courts
The first paragraph features a conversation about the role and effectiveness of drug courts. Matthew Perry, an actor and former addict, argues that drug courts significantly reduce the likelihood of reoffending. However, the journalist Peter Hitchin and Baroness Meas, who heads the UK's drug policy reform group, express skepticism about the evidence supporting drug courts and the selection bias of participants. They also debate whether addiction is a health problem or a crime, with Perry advocating for the health perspective and the need for prevention, while Hitchin emphasizes the importance of a strong criminal justice system as a deterrent.
🤔 The Role of Personal Choice in Addiction
In the second paragraph, the discussion centers on the concept of choice in addiction. Perry maintains that individuals choose to consume drugs or alcohol, challenging the idea that addiction is solely a disease. The opposing view is presented by an unnamed person who argues that addiction is an allergy of the body, implying a lack of control once the substance is consumed. The debate touches on the genetic and environmental factors contributing to addiction, the role of willpower, and the effectiveness of medical versus criminal approaches to addiction treatment.
🔍 Evaluating the Impact of Drug Policies
The third paragraph continues the debate on addiction and drug policies. The participants discuss the outcomes of different approaches to drug use, with one arguing that a lax approach has led to increased drug use and addiction. The counter-argument is made that research shows voluntary treatment can be as effective as drug courts, emphasizing the importance of personal willingness to change. The conversation also addresses the complexity of addiction, the need for support and treatment, and the flawed assumption that addiction is solely a matter of personal choice or willpower.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡Drug Courts
💡Addiction
💡Recidivism
💡Criminal Justice System
💡Treatment
💡Willpower
💡Genetic
💡Environmental Factors
💡Deterrence
💡Policy Reform
💡Health Problem
Highlights
Faith in drug courts is based on their observed effectiveness, with participants having a 55% less chance of reoffending.
The necessity of distinguishing between addicts and non-addicts is questioned, with the suggestion that addiction is a continuous cycle until interrupted.
Drug courts offer an alternative to prison for first-time, nonviolent drug offenders, implementing an 18-month to 2-year program.
Criticism of drug courts due to limited evidence supporting their long-term effectiveness.
Concerns about the selection bias in who goes through drug courts and its impact on their perceived success.
The criminal justice system is criticized for failing to deter crime effectively, with a call for a tougher stance.
A counter-argument is presented that addiction should be treated as a health problem, not a crime, citing Portugal's shift in focus from prisons to treatment.
The American Medical Association's classification of addiction as a disease in 1976 is challenged.
The belief that addiction is a choice and a lack of willpower is debated against the medical view of it as a disease.
The role of genetics and environment in addiction is discussed, with evidence suggesting a combination of both factors.
The effectiveness of deterrence through a stern criminal justice system is questioned, with arguments that it has not reduced drug use.
The importance of prevention in tackling addiction, with the suggestion that efforts should focus on stopping people from starting drug use.
A debate on the definition of addiction as a disease, with disagreement on the existence of an 'allergy of the body'.
The argument that addiction treatment should not be compulsory, with the belief that individuals must want to change.
A claim that drug courts do not significantly outperform voluntary treatment in terms of effectiveness.
The complexity of addiction treatment is highlighted, emphasizing the need for sobriety and support for effective decision-making.
The discussion concludes with a challenge to the opposing view, questioning the validity of the policy that has led to increased drug use.
Transcripts
now is the actor and former addict
Matthew Perry the journalist Peter
Hitchin and baroness mea who chairs the
UK all party parliamentary group on drug
policy reform why do you have such faith
in drug courts uh well that's uh kind of
an easy question to answer I see that
they work I see that uh I've been
involved with them for about four years
and a little over four years and uh
people that go through drug court have a
55% less chance of uh seeing hand
handcuffs ever
again how do you know that these people
wouldn't have quit their drug happy to
anyway well that that gets into a bigger
question of whether these people are
addicts or not you know what I mean if
they're if they're drug addicts and
alcoholics then they're going to keep
going until something stops them and
drug court is a wonderful way to to
interrupt that process and it's a it's a
way to not throw these people away so it
takes first time non uh nonviolent drug
offenders and instead of throwing them
into prison it puts them into a uh
18-month to 2-year program what's not to
like about it well the evidence in favor
of them is pretty scanty there haven't
been many serious studies I think one in
B War One in Arizona and one somewhere
else in the United States and they tend
to suggest it over the long term then
they don't make much difference anyway
and the selection of the people who go
through them I think has some has some
impact on it but the real problem for me
is this that what you're saying is
you're effectively you're seeking to
fail in a criminal justice system the
whole point of a criminal justice system
and we forget this all the time is to
deter people from committing crimes once
you've arrested someone once they've
appeared in court it has already failed
and to soften the court system to make
it into a kind of Jolly where the judge
wears trackit bottom is nice to the off
you should see you should see some of
the things that have been going on in
this country the West London Drug Court
where the the judge said wore tracksuit
bottoms and was Macy with the defendants
this gives the impression not of the
Majesty of justice but of somebody
trying to be nice now actually it
doesn't do anybody any favors to try and
be nice to drug Tak there's nothing
wrong the problem there's a great deal
wrong with it because if you want to
stop people becoming drug users then the
best thing to do is is is to make sure
they never start in the first place and
an effective deterrent Criminal Justice
System point
isal started well yes because they've
started because the criminal justice
system peopleit feeble is isn't the real
problem it's it's feeble from the start
if you me you can have a contribution
here come on isn't the problem that by
the time you get to a drug court you've
already assumed that that drug addiction
is a crime actually drug addiction is a
health problem so the first thing you've
got to do is some preventive work
prevent people becoming drug addicts and
that we now know there's good evidence
that you can do that Portugal have
switched vast sums of money from prisons
to treatment they have vastly more
people in treatment than we do here uh
they they have a much better record than
Spain and Italy you can deal with this
as a health problem instead of waiting
till people get become really severe
addicts get into the criminal justice
system and then okay I agree with you uh
can be more I'm not understanding your
your point your point is to stop drug
drugs and alcoholism by just never
people never starting will you two
believe in this fantasy of addiction in
which people lose fantasy of addiction
complete fantasy in which people lose
lose lose the lose lose all all all
power over themselves and and become
victims of this terrible frightening
disease wait let me finish this is what
you believe this terrible frightening
disease after which they cannot stop
taking drugs if you really believed that
then you would presumably think the best
thing would be they never ever came in
contact with those drugs
would it be wise to deter them from
doing so by a Stern and effective
criminal justice system which actually
persuaded them it was unwise to take the
drugs in the first place when do I get
speak if you really believe when can I
speak speak okay so I didn't come here
to be quiet neither did I I didn't I
didn't come here to listen to ludicrous
things like that either so will you tell
me why it's ludicrous if you're so close
I will I will the American Medical
Association diagnosed at a disease in
1976 so you're saying that that's
incorrect yeah look I'm people the
medical profession is constantly doing
extraordinary things the American
Psychiatric association said for years
that
homosexuality they were wrong all kinds
of things are said by medical Prof key
thing is we've had this policy for 50 50
years we've had this policy of of my
life is the OB treating addiction as a
crime 50 years and we now know that it
doesn't work it doesn't work anywhere in
the world increasingly in the US Uruguay
and elsewhere and in Europe things are
changing my life is I I'm a I'm a drug
addict I'm a person that if I have a
drink I can't
stop and so it would be following your
ideology that I'm choosing to do that
that I'm choosing that's exactly my not
my ideology it is my belief yes you do
choose it is and it's a belief that you
wrote in your book correct you have a
choice whether whether you drink or not
you have a choice your book is the only
book in modern times that has this
ideology so doesn't that teach you
something well quite often quite often
unfashionable ideas are unfashionable
because they are unpopular with with
with with influential people doesn't
necessarily bother me the you tell me
what the objective diagnosis is to to
establish the existence of addiction in
the human
body it's an allergy of the body and
it's
an of what we're supposed to be grown
men here and you're making faces like
the guy like the guy who's wearing the
pants that you were talking about
earlier I'm expecting you to come out in
the pants in a minute it's a objection
it's an exception of your mind and an
allergy of your body so this is what
happens to me I start thinking about
alcohol I can't stop I can't stop
thinking about it what's the objective
physical proof of this inability to stop
the there's a considerable proof this is
partly a genetic problem isn't your
argument is that it's Willow course it's
willpower people all the people people
constantly stop
both drinking and taking
drugs wrong were not involve will on
your part not to do it now isn't
it I'm in control of the first drink and
so I do all these things to protect
myself from not having the first drink
sure but once I have that drink the
allergy of the body kicks in this is all
documented alcoholism proof Then I then
I can't stop after that problem with P I
mean I'm allergic
it doesn't mean I I I have I have to
drink but you have to look at the
evidence what is this what is this what
is this allergy it's it's analogy of
your body it's just it's just it's just
not that your aspiring Point not that
your aspiring Point wasn't wasn't genius
but uh but you don't know what you're
talking about that's right you've got to
look at countries that have done it
differently come up with asked him to
come up with an objective an objective
diagnosis the presence of this force in
his body knows yourself is the reverse
of objective myself and 10 million other
alcoholics and addicts across Across
America and across the world are having
having these problems people people have
problems with drugs and drink people
people like taking them and they don't
want to stop taking them but it doesn't
mean they have a disease that needs to
be treated so the American Medical
Association is wrong in your opinion if
if the American Association says it's a
disease yes yes of course they're wrong
it is there's an IM fashion at the
moment right there's an immense fashion
at the moment right there's immense
fashion at the moment for for for for
simply for for dismissing the ability of
people to take control over their own
lives and to make excuses for them we
have far from 50 from 50 years been
treating alleged addiction as a disease
as as a crime we've been treating it as
a disease and the result is we have many
many more drug users than we did when
this policy started the medical the
medical evidence shows that addiction is
in part A genetic problem and in part an
environmental one if you've got parents
with an addiction you then have and if
you then have abuse sexual abuse child
abuse you'll be brought up in a
children's home lots of foster parents
you've got this genetic problem anyway
the evidence is very very clear you have
a medical health problem and countries
that have addressed this and dealt with
it as a health problem are doing a lot
better than we are we can save money we
can say we can reduce crime we can get
people better stop having them on
benefits we can have them paying taxes
if we want to save money and help people
then we know how to do it since we
follow since we' followed your policies
more and more people have been taking
dangerous and damaging drugs since we
since we since we've ceased ceased
treating drug possession as a crime and
have and have more or less ceased either
arresting or Prosecuting people
possessing drugs since we have
classified drug takers as people with a
medical problem we have had more and
more of let me ask can that possibly be
right give him one quick put down if you
want to you go ahead you're making a
point that is ludicrous as saying that
Peter Pan was real well you keep saying
that but you you cannot come up with an
objective definition of the thing which
I was toce an argument may be useful to
you which is this that isn't the point
about drug courts that you that people
have to be compelled to get clean and
that in itself tells you something yeah
they don't have to be compelled well
they have to be compelled you have to
have the will you have to you have to
have the willingness to change drug
courts don't do much better than
voluntary treatment drug courts do
fairly much the same that's not true
either it's not as crazy as what he's
saying but it's not true either well
there is research evidence to show that
that you do as well roughly with
voluntary treatment as you do in drug
courts but actually they've got to want
to do it they have and and and to be
well enough to do it and
St but they've got to have reached a
stage have sufficient support sufficient
treatment now this is very complicated
cleaned up simple will it's much more
complicated they have to be sober to
make that decision they can't be they
can't be intoxicated to make that DEC
how is it that people ever cease to be
addicts if what you say is true well
Santa um yeah I it's it's it's terribly
clever but this is a very serious
subject and you treat it with immense
levity how is it how is it that if if
what you say what you say the policy
which you so smugly and and and and and
and loftily advocate this policy which
has led to disaster in in in Western
countries for for decades how is it that
if what you say the policy how how is it
that people because it has it it has led
to a laxness in in the law which is
which has meant many many more people
taking the terrible risk of taking the
drugs which you say are addictive and we
all agree are damag that is simply not
true and We Know It And the research
shows it quite simple all you got to do
Peter is a bit of reading of the
evidence and you will find read
something other than book okay all right
that's enough thank you he cannot he
cannot argue seriously
تصفح المزيد من مقاطع الفيديو ذات الصلة
The Debate About Harm Reduction Programs For Addicts
Scottish government aims to legalise drug possession | 5 News
Matthew Perry shares his incredible story of survival and why fame wasn't the answer to his problems
09 Drug Abuse Common Issues
The harm reduction model of drug addiction treatment | Mark Tyndall
What Causes Addiction
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)