Here’s how jail-based health treatment failed my family: Guest commentary

As the child of a formerly incarcerated person, I’ve lived with the consequences of a failed law-enforcement system that believes jails can be places for rehabilitative treatment and care. This illusion eventually cost my dad his life.

My dad was a poor man of color raised in the smallest city in Los Angeles County. He served long sentences for drug-related crimes and parole violations. Being locked up exacerbated his existing physical and mental health issues. There were no services to greet him at the gate when he was released, and so imprisonment became law enforcement’s version of treatment. When he tried to find a job and a home, he was rejected at every turn because of his felony record.

At a meeting in Sacramento earlier this month, the Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC), a small board dominated by law-enforcement officials, appointed the chairs of the committee who will recommend where to spend the millions of dollars of savings generated through Proposition 47, the law passed one year ago that reclassifies certain low-level crimes from felonies to misdemeanors. Sixty five percent of this money must be allocated to diversion, mental health, and substance use treatment programs, giving California an opportunity to improve health outcomes for thousands of families.

But at that same meeting, despite testimonials from dozens of community members like myself whose lives have been harmed by incarceration, the BSCC voted to allocate $500 million in jail construction funds to counties across the state. Given that many of these new jail projects are being promoted as mental health treatment centers, sheriffs may soon be lining up to make the case for needing Prop. 47 funds to run these facilities. Awarding funds to expand jails makes no sense when national conversations have turned toward reducing jail populations.

The committee appointed by the BSCC to direct spending of Prop. 47 funds has the power to ensure that those savings go to treatment and care in the community, changing the culture surrounding substance use and mental health. This is the approach that finally worked for my dad.

When my dad was released for the last time in 2007, it was support from other formerly incarcerated people also grappling with substance-use and mental health conditions that helped him stay out of jail. He found his way to Homes for Life, a community-based organization in Southern California providing affordable housing and counseling for homeless and mentally-ill people. Living in a caring community empowered him to enroll in Long Beach City College’s Substance Abuse and Addiction Counseling degree program. It is bittersweet knowing that my dad didn’t find the resources he needed until he was 50 because society prioritizes punishment over healing.

Driving home to Southern California from Oakland this past spring, I prepared myself to see my dad for the first time in 20 years. It would also be the last time. I wept reflecting on 20 years of lost opportunities for our family because a poor brown man’s health conditions made him a criminal.

The real crime is the failure of law enforcement to know the difference between health care and incarceration. There is no happy ending to our story. My dad died without realizing his capacity to be a father and contribute to his community. I only find solace knowing he left this world trying to be the best person he could be.

My dad’s story is not exceptional. Families and neighborhoods continue to be torn apart by the same system that claims keeping communities safe means building more cages for people, when what they really need is comprehensive health care not administered by law enforcement.

Instead of accepting money for new jails, counties should reject the funding and give people with mental health and substance use conditions what my dad didn’t get: a fair chance at health, and a fair chance at life.

Angela Aguilar is a masters in public health candidate and a doctoral student in ethnic studies at the University of California, Berkeley.
Via: http://www.dailynews.com/opinion/20151124/heres-how-jail-based-health-treatment-failed-my-family-guest-commentary

Smoking declines in California, but smokeless tobacco use rises among youth

Though the prevalence of cigarette smoking among California high school students has declined over the past decade, smokeless tobacco use has risen among high school students, from 3.1 percent in 2004 to 3.9 percent in 2010, according a report released Thursday.

The report, by Ron Chapman, state health officer and director of the California Department of Public Health, attributed the increase in part to a rise in the promotion and availability of snuff and other smokeless tobacco products.

The study found that the prevalence of smoking was higher at schools in neighborhoods with five or more stores that sell tobacco than at schools in neighborhoods without any stores selling tobacco.

The study also documented a rise in the illegal sale of tobacco to minors. According to the survey, 8.7 percent of retailers sold tobacco to minors this year, up from 5.6 percent in 2011.

"For the first time in the last three years, tobacco retailers are selling tobacco to our youth more often," Chapman said in a conference call with reporters Thursday morning.

Sales of non-cigarette tobacco and nicotine products have risen dramatically over the last decade, from $77.1 million in 2001 to $210.9 million in 2011, according to the report.

"Tobacco use takes a tremendous toll on our state, from both a health and economic perspective," Chapman said in the report. "Smoking kills more people than alcohol, AIDS, car crashes, illegal drugs, murders and suicides combined."

While the adult smoking rate has been cut in half since 1988, from 23 percent to 12 percent of California adults, there remain about 3.6 million smokers in the state, and tobacco use kills more than 34,000 Californians every year, according to the report.

Tobacco-related health care expenses will cost the state $6.5 billion this year, or about $400 per taxpayer, according to the study.

California men continue to smoke at a higher rate, 14.9 percent, than women, 9.3 percent, according to the survey. Black and Latino men smoke at higher rates – 18.9 percent and 15.5 percent respectively – than white men, but Asian men smoke at slightly lower rates.

The report said the tobacco industry spent about $656 million on marketing in 2010.

The study comes after the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported in May that California used relatively little of the billions of dollars in tobacco money it has to prevent kids from smoking or to help smokers quit.

Chapman said the state has been "very successful" using what money it has to reduce smoking rates.

via The Sacramento Bee

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2012/12/14/5053713/smoking-declines-in-california.html#storylink=cpy