Carrots Vs. Sticks

It looks like my sister-in-law gets out of jail next Monday. She has all the serious charges against her grouped together in an agreement that formally puts her into Drug Court. From here it will be a matter of whether she can stick with the rehab, testing, appearances and all that goes with it in order to get the carrot being offered to her.

The carrot is to have all those charges reduced or dropped if she graduates from the program. The associated stick is the potential sentencing on the guilty pleas she has made on those same charges.

The part that I'm worried about is the possibility of hovering half way between carrot and stick, or doing just enough to stay in the program, but lingering on forever without graduating or being booted. I would prefer the finality of either option to the vague limbo of the in between.

Of course my view is colored by the fact that I'm looking at it from her kid's viewpoint. Uncertainty is hard on us all, but as adults we tend to have more control over it. Kids don't have that same level of responsibility or the capabilities to change their environment, so they have to rely on what we as adults do for or to them. The hard part is that it's not something you can plan out and schedule. We don't know how things will stand next week, next month or next year.

Our job is to keep things stable at home, and to give kids a normal environment where they can play, learn and grow.

Stigma Vs. Appeal

We have in our state the Utah Methampheteamine Joint Task Force whose job is to reduce the use of meth across the state. They're using the Montana Meth Project as an example of a successful program that has done well with its own stated goals of:

1. Increase the perceived risks of meth use
2. Decrease the perceived benefits of meth
3. Increase parent-child discussions on meth
4. Increase the social disapproval of meth use

Now for the question of the day. How do we increase the social disapproval of drug abuse in order to reduce the number of new users, while still not stigmatizing existing users so they are more reluctant to come forward for treatment?

I think I've got a pretty good handle on the first three personally, but that fourth one can be tricky. Where's the balance? Can people be made to think it's a vile habit and exert peer pressure to avoid meth without making users more afraid to get the help they need? Do we just sacrifice a few current users in order to scare away those who haven't started yet? Quite a moral conundrum.

Free Lunch

Sometimes there is such a thing as a Free Lunch. Cathy Free writes for the Deseret News here in the Salt Lake City area. A couple of weeks back, she met with my wife for lunch (hence the Free Lunch name) to discuss our story and how we're learning about the resources available to those who care for the children of others.

I am normally wary of news reporters of all sorts because of how badly I've seen stories mangled for the sake of adding hype to draw readers, but both my wife and I have respect for Cathy based on reading her past articles. A short visit during lunch can hardly do to learn such a complicated story in depth, but the story as told is pretty close.

Kelly's goal from the meeting wasn't to show off or stand in the spotlight. She's not like that. The thought would horrify her. Our hope is that the article will raise awareness of the issues we're going through, and to help those who are lost in the sea of questions as they raise the children of relatives, or are forced to deal with the fallout of drug addiction.

When they hear of us raising the nieces and nephew, lots of people say "I could never do that." Given the choice of seeing children tossed into a life of poverty and drug abuse, or taking them in and raising them as your own, it's a choice I think many people could make. It's a choice many do make. For some, there's no option but to do it. Give yourself some credit for what you would do when there doesn't seem to be a good alternative.

Edit: A recovered addict (Thanks for the email, J.D.) was concerned about what looked like a really harsh attitude toward drug addicts in the intro to the article, and that it wasn't a productive way of portraying the issue. Kelly and I agree completely, and it was simply a case of the conversation not being transcribed as accurately as it could have been. Reading the rest of the entries we've posted here should give a much more clear view of our attitudes and efforts.

Drug Court

The mother of our kids-in-care is getting ready for Drug Court. That's a program that lasts a year or more with intensive drug testing, rehabilitation, and training. It's a program where they plead guilty to one or more charges, and the judge puts off enforcement of sentencing and releases them into a treatment program for drug rehabilitation. If they graduate from the program, the charges are all dropped.

This is a positive step, although she'll be facing some difficult issues. It's easy to think clearly and plan while in the forced detox of jail. The hard part is actually following through after release when the temptations are always at hand. Then there are the issues of needing a place to stay, and a job.

Explaining all of this to children is tough. How do you tell kids ranging from 5 to 10 years old that their mother is in a program that will last at least a year before she can get out from under a list of felony charges? The timeframe is mindboggling to kids that age, and I don't have any idea how to meaningfully describe the charges in anything better than vague terms.

The kids deserve to know how things are going, but it's a delicate balance to describe things in a way that will mean something to each child. I can't tell them they'll be staying with their parents eventually, because I have no idea if that's true. I can't say they'll overcome their addictions. What I can say is that their parents love them very much, that they want to overcome their problems, and that it's good to write encouragements to them.