Last update - 00:00 08/10/2007
Human dignity
By Haaretz Editorial
It is doubtful that a more resonant, or chilling, way could have been found to raise the issue of the distress of Israeli drug addicts than the story of 200 mothers who formed an association to demand that their addicted children be sent for forced treatment (Haaretz Magazine, October 5). The mothers' story once again brought out the dry statistics, which are disturbing in and of themselves: Some 300,000 Israelis use drugs, of whom about 100,000 are addicts and/or alcoholics. But especially chilling were the human stories the mothers told about their children: young men and women who were led by a combination of economic and emotional pressure into erasing their humanity, selling their bodies or committing crimes to obtain drugs. These are the people we all encounter begging on city streets, and most of us simply look away.
Their mothers, brave women who have decided to save their children even at the price of being stigmatized, are now demanding that we look them in the face. The fact that all are immigrants from the former Soviet Union has two implications. On the one hand, their children's deterioration attests to a particularly problematic situation among this group of immigrants (the percentage of drug users among immigrant teens is two and a half times the percentage among veteran Israeli teens). This stems, according to the Anti-Drug Authority, from a combination of absorption difficulties, the single-parent families that are characteristic of these immigrants, and discriminatory treatment of those who are not Jewish according to Jewish law. This last factor ought to be particularly disturbing because it depends entirely on the behavior of the society they are entering: The young immigrants are not responsible for the fact that the state legislated the "grandchild clause," and the argument over this clause should not be waged on their backs.
On the other hand, the fact that the mothers have organized - something that other sectors with similar problems did not do in the past - demonstrates the exceptionally positive side of the Soviet immigration: initiative and willingness to take responsibility instead of just blaming the government, even if this puts them at risk socially. Moreover, they are making a legitimate demand that only the state can satisfy.
And indeed, the state should pick up the gauntlet and formulate a comprehensive national program that, for the first time, would include compulsory treatment of drug addicts who are not capable of deciding for themselves. The Finance Ministry, which is constantly demanding cutbacks in social services, must remember that cutbacks on this issue would cost the taxpayers far more than they save, due to the frequent property crimes committed by addicts and the cost of their subsequent jail terms.
Compulsory treatment naturally raises problems. First, it would require legislation to define who constitutes an addict the state may treat forcibly. It is also necessary to ensure that the law is not exploited by people seeking to get rid of unwanted relatives. But the fundamental question - whether the state even has the right to compel addicts to undergo treatment - ought to be answered affirmatively. The dangers that addicts pose to society, along with the fact that their own mothers are the ones making the request, should lead to the conclusion that in this matter, a person's human dignity takes precedence over his liberty.