Nonstopdrivel
13 years ago

Posted by Lenora M. Lapidus, Director, Women's Rights Project at 5:44pm

The War on Drugs = A War on Women and Families
 


June 2011 marks the 40th anniversary of President Richard Nixon's declaration of a "war on drugs" — a war that has cost roughly a trillion dollars, has produced little to no effect on the supply of or demand for drugs in the United States, and has contributed to making America the world's largest incarcerator. Throughout the month, check back daily for posts about the drug war, its victims and what needs to be done to restore fairness and create effective policy.

The "war on drugs" has had a devastating impact on women and families, who have been greatly affected by policies like mandatory minimum sentences, prosecution of low-level drug offenses, increased conviction and imprisonment of those with relationships to drug dealers, and criminalization of women with drug addiction and mental health problems and histories of sexual abuse.

As the ACLU report "Caught in the Net" details, the number of women with convictions, especially low-level drug-related convictions, has skyrocketed. Over the past two decades, the number of women in prison increased at a rate nearly double that of men. Women of color are disproportionately affected: African-American women are more than three times as likely as white women to be incarcerated, and Hispanic women are 69 percent more likely. Two thirds of women state prisoners are the mothers of minor children.

When individuals leave prison, they face a host of barriers to obtaining housing, employment, education and subsistence benefits for themselves and their children — including bars on receiving governmental assistance based on prior drug convictions. Women of color, who are disproportionately poor and often bear the primary responsibility for raising their children, are disproportionately dependent on the government to satisfy their basic human needs through programs like public housing, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families and Medicaid, and therefore are particularly impacted by governmental bans on receiving such assistance based on prior drug convictions.

Women also are affected by policies targeting members of their families who are involved in the criminal justice system. For example, women who live in public housing may be evicted if a member of their household engages in criminal activity, and people with criminal histories are frequently denied admission to public housing in the first place. In 2002 alone, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development reported that 46,657 applicants for conventional, project-based public housing were denied admission because of "one strike" criteria (the policy of excluding people with criminal records from public housing). Advocates believe the number of people actually denied housing is, in fact, far higher, because would-be applicants are often turned away by housing officials before they even fill out an application.

Many public housing authorities additionally maintain lists of "banned" individuals who are not allowed on the premises — some of these banned individuals have criminal drug convictions or went through the juvenile justice system; others were arrested but never prosecuted or convicted of any offense. Once someone is on the list, he or she is not allowed on the property of the public housing authority, even if invited by a resident of the housing complex. As a result, residents of some public housing properties are not allowed to invite members of their families to come to their homes to help care for children or elderly relatives, or to visit with family at holidays or important gatherings. These banning policies tear families apart.

Recently, the ACLU successfully challenged one such banning policy in Annapolis, Maryland, where Dalanda Moses had lived in public housing with her family for most of her life. In 2009, she and her boyfriend, James Alexander, had a baby girl named Mariah. Because James was on the housing authority's banned list after being arrested for a drug offense, he was not permitted to visit Dalanda while she was pregnant. During her pregnancy, Dalanda suffered from health problems; nevertheless, the Housing Authority for the City of Annapolis (HACA) told Dalanda's mother that she and Dalanda would be evicted if James came to their home. As a result, James had to pick Dalanda up away from her home in order to take her to doctors' appointments. After Mariah was born, Dalanda was forbidden from inviting James into her home to help feed and care for their daughter. Dalanda was ultimately forced to move off HACA property - away from her own mother and sister — so that James could help raise their baby and be a part of her family.

As Dalanda's story illustrates, public housing authorities' banning policies — which affect a large number of people who have been charged with low-level drug offenses, and particularly poor women of color — force people to choose between affordable housing and spending time with their families.

Thankfully, the problems in Annapolis have been rectified, and families living in public housing there will no longer be torn apart by unfair banning policies. Unfortunately, public housing authorities across the United States continue to utilize bans of this type, either as official policies or as a matter of practice — including in New York, Massachusetts, Washington, Vermont, Illinois, Alabama, Minnesota, West Virginia, Maine, Oregon, and many other states.

It is time for this war on families to end. The 40-year-old "war on drugs" has been a war of little success but huge casualties. The collateral damage of this war far exceeds any benefits. We must reform this country's drug policies to stop fighting our own citizens and instead enact policies that help those individuals who need mental and physical health care to cure addictions (approximately 80 percent of women in state prisons have substance abuse problems), and that provide jobs and economic opportunity for all members of our society so that dealing drugs is no longer the best-paying job available. It is time for our government to work to improve the lives of all members of our community rather than continuing to fight this war against poor women of color and their children.


UserPostedImage
all_about_da_packers
13 years ago
It is refreshing to see the critical thought presented in this article.

Can we please, please actually stick to NSD's point this time: laws related to drug offenses are antiquated (it is also questionable if they were ever truly relevant in the first place). The issue is not people doing a crime without serving punishment, rather it is an attempt to get at laws that are frankly punishing minor non-violent offenses done away with. These laws, as the article nicely outlines, are offering minimal benefits.

And I would hope that the staunch right-wing crowd, who often unfairly view debates of loosening drug-laws as an invitation of letting serious criminals off the hook, would be able to at least list alternatives to this problem if they disagree with ending the "war on drugs".
The NFL: Where Greg Jennings Happens.
Fan Shout
packerfanoutwest (2h) : Inactives tonight for the Pack: Alexander- knee Bullard - ankle Williams - quad Walker -ankle Monk Heath
packerfanoutwest (2h) : No Jaire, but hopefully the front 7 destroys the line of scrimmage & forces Rattler into a few passes to McKinney.
packerfanoutwest (3h) : minny could be #1 seed and the Lions #5 seed
Zero2Cool (5h) : We'd have same Division and Conference records. Strength of schedule we edge them
Zero2Cool (5h) : I just checked. What tie breaker?
bboystyle (5h) : yes its possible but unlikely. If we do get the 5th, we face the NFCS winner
Zero2Cool (5h) : Ahh, ok.
bboystyle (5h) : yes due to tie breaker
Zero2Cool (5h) : I mean, unlikely, yes, but mathematically, 5th is possible by what I'm reading.
Zero2Cool (5h) : If Vikings lose out, Packers win out, Packers get 5th, right?
bboystyle (5h) : Minny isnt going to lose out so 5th seed is out of the equation. We are playing for the 6th or 7th seed which makes no difference
Mucky Tundra (6h) : beast, the ad revenue goes to the broadcast company but they gotta pay to air the game on their channel/network
beast (7h) : If we win tonight the game is still relative in terms of 5th, 6th or 7th seed... win and it's 5th or 6th, lose and it's 6th or 7th
beast (7h) : Mucky, I thought the ad revenue went to the broadcasting companies or the NFL, at least not directly
Zero2Cool (7h) : I think the revenue share is moot, isn't it? That's the CBA an Salary Cap handling that.
bboystyle (7h) : i mean game becomes irrelevant if we win tonight. Just a game where we are trying to play spoilers to Vikings chance at the #1 seed
Mucky Tundra (7h) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv
Zero2Cool (8h) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno
beast (8h) : I agree that it's BS for fans planning on going to the game. But how does it bring in more money? I'm guessing indirectly?
packerfanoutwest (8h) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans
Zero2Cool (9h) : I see what you did there Mucky
Zero2Cool (9h) : dammit. 3:25pm
Zero2Cool (9h) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm
Mucky Tundra (9h) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground
Mucky Tundra (9h) : Yeah baby!
Zero2Cool (9h) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah
Zero2Cool (10h) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.
beast (10h) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue
Zero2Cool (11h) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's
Zero2Cool (11h) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.
packerfanoutwest (12h) : ok I stand corrected
Zero2Cool (12h) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th
Zero2Cool (12h) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?
beast (12h) : Saying no to the 6th lock.
beast (12h) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out
Zero2Cool (12h) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.
beast (12h) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games
beast (12h) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality
beast (12h) : We already have told you... if Packers lose all their games (they won't, but if they did), and Buccaneers and Falcons win all theirs
Zero2Cool (12h) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread
Zero2Cool (12h) : I literally just said it.
packerfanoutwest (12h) : show us a scenario where Pack don't get in? bet you can't
Zero2Cool (12h) : Falcons, Buccaneers would need to win final two games.
Zero2Cool (12h) : Yes, if they win one of three, they are lock. If they lose out, they can be eliminated.
packerfanoutwest (12h) : as I just said,,gtheyh are in no matter what
Zero2Cool (12h) : Packers should get in. I just hope it's not 7th seed. Feels dirty.
packerfanoutwest (12h) : If packers lose out, no matter what, they are in
packerfanoutwest (12h) : both teams can not male the playoffs....falcon hold the tie breaker
packerfanoutwest (12h) : if bucs win out they win their division
beast (12h) : Fine, Buccaneers and Falcons can get ahead of us
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2024 Packers Schedule
Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
Eagles
Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
Titans
Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
Rams
Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
CARDINALS
Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
Jaguars
Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
Bears
Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
49ERS
Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
DOLPHINS
Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
Seahawks
Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
Vikings
Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM
BEARS
Recent Topics
5h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

5h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

10h / Random Babble / Martha Careful

22-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / packerfanoutwest

19-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

19-Dec / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

18-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

17-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

17-Dec / Featured Content / Zero2Cool

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

16-Dec / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Mucky Tundra

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

Copyright © 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.