In 2017, 19.7 million Americans reported suffering from some form of substance abuse disorder (American Addiction Centers). This number only increases every year, especially among younger demographics. Within this number is the 65% of drug inmates that reported having a substance addiction at the time of incarceration (NIDA). Many people feel strongly that addiction is a choice, and that drug users should be imprisoned in order to protect society and reduce crime; however, some would argue that incarceration is ineffective in treating addiction, and rehabilitation is a more productive option. In her op-ed about the most effective approach to drug abuse “Addiction Should be Treated, Not Penalized,” Nora Volkow argues for the rehabilitation side of the issue. She notes the recent studies that proves addiction as an involuntary disease, and that imprisonment only adds to the cycle of continuous drug relapse. Drug addiction should be recognized by the public as an illness that is only made worse by imprisonment; thus, addicts should be pipelined into treatment programs with focus on rehabilitation rather than being punished. 

Some might argue that imprisoning drug offenders creates a safer society, and reduces crime levels. A study on addict imprisonment found that, “incarcerating drug offenders is found to be almost as effective in reducing violent and property crime as locking up other types of offenders'' (Picker 2). If certain crime rates are lowered after imprisoning drug offenders, it can be concluded that they are a significant part of the demographic that commits these crimes.  A reduction of these crimes can create a safer society. Opposers to this issue might also argue that addiction should not be an excuse for illegal actions. Michael Davis, Chief Editor of the Texas  Law Review argues that,  “A drug addict’s addiction is no defense to drug crimes,” (1) due to the fact that addiction should solely prove a motive not a defense. Many people believe that addiction is voluntary, and regardless of the person's character, it shouldn’t excuse drug offenders from punishment. 

Nevertheless, these arguments do not amount to significant proof against rehabilitation rather than imprisonment. Though imprisonment may reduce property crimes, it only contributes to a cycle of re-offenses. A study on alternatives to prison in Belgium discusses how, “previous research showed that drug offenders who are sentenced to prison even have the highest recidivism rate and reoffend also more quickly than other type of offenders” (Plettinckx 1). Imprisonment simply provides a temporary solution to the overarching problem of addiction. Locking up addicts will not cure their addiction, but will just keep them from committing crimes for that set amount of time they are incarcerated. If society truly wanted to create collective safety then they would focus on curing addiction as it is the root of the issue. Secondly, despite the fact that the law does not accept addiction as a defense, there are many modern studies proving that it is not as voluntary as some people think. In the article “(Mis)Treating Substance Use Disorder with Prison,” lawyer and bioethicist Kaitlin Puccio explains how, “An individual may inherit an atypical response to opiates. Even if he desires to stop using heroin, he may be unable to do so as a result of genetic or biological predispositions. He is stripped of his autonomy in this sense” (4). Due to this evidence, addiction is not a fault of someone's character, but rather a disorder that some are unluckily more susceptible to. Though it may not be able to provide a complete excuse for a certain crime, it should at least give some context on a defendant's situation, and what kind of reform they need which may not be prison. 

Addiction is a disease that needs proper treatment for true rehabilitation, and prison is not effective in reaching this goal. In her study on drug treatment courts in Ottawa, Canada, Dr Tara Lyons explains that  “Addiction is considered to be a chronic, life-long and permanent disease that resides within individuals” (3). Addiction is an ongoing illness like any other, though many do not consider it so; furthermore, countless studies have proved that it is not completely voluntary, as previously mentioned. Like one would get treatment for diabetes or asthma, the same should be applied to the disease of drug addiction. In terms of addiction in prison, the National Institute on Drug Abuse found that, “More than half of people in prison have an untreated substance use disorder, and illicit drug and medication use typically greatly increases following a period of imprisonment” (Volkow 2-3). This indicates that incarcerated individuals are not getting the help they need to combat their addictions, and that prison is only making their situation worse; therefore, the use of prison in these instances is counterproductive because it leads to offenders being released in a poorer condition then when they started, and inferentially more likely to reoffend. 

Furthermore, there has been plenty of evidence on the most effective treatment strategies for addiction which are quite contrasting to a prison setting. A study by the Indian Journal of Science and Technology explored the impacts of color, light, and overall environment on an addicted patient's recovery. It found that the “Environmental quality is mainly obtained through

structural design, and in addition to the perceived meanings of the environment, a sense of community and communication within a place has a great importance in developing patient satisfaction (Easy and Naseri 5), and that “isolation increases the dependence on pre-treatment addiction” (Easy and Naseri 6). This emphasis on a productive environment with a sense of community is almost the opposite of prison. Addicts need support and nurturing conditions in order to overcome this disease. It seems counterintuitive to place someone in a setting that lacks in all of these aspects that have been proven effective in addiction treatment. In addition, research from the National Association of Addiction Treatment Providers on the best methods shows that there is no one size fits all approach. Patients require different comprehensive approaches such as group counseling, twelve step facilitation, or cognitive behavioral therapy (Huett 1-3). Many of these might not be readily available in prison. The article also illustrates how “Family involvement is key to the resolution of any chronic health issue, and addiction is no exception” (Huett 3). Family visitation is also very limited in prison, leaving incarcerated individuals on their own in combating their drug abuse. Overall, prison and punishment goes against the ideal structure for successful addiction recovery, and environments focused on rehabilitation will better foster a return to healthy life. 

Substance abuse is a disease that requires proper treatment, not punishment. Overall, prison is a poor solution to addiction due to the fact that it contributes to recidivism among offenders, and is an unfair punishment for people dealing with this involuntary illness. Prison is a near opposite of all the treatments and environments that have been proven effective in combating drug abuse, and will not produce desired results among addicts. In fact, it’ll only continue the endless cycle of relapses, imprisonments, and ultimately overdoses. Perhaps it seems safer to lock up drug addicts, but why not help them? America will be a safer and more productive country if we help those battling addiction move forward, rather than leaving them behind.