Drug monitoring won’t solve opioid issue

Missouri has been the lone holdout and in many ways, that may not be a good thing.

All of the other states have statewide prescription drug-monitoring databases which help physicians, pharmacists and other health care professionals determine when the last time a patient has filled habit-forming narcotics, and if they have done so more than needed (at another pharmacy or office). They are essentially databases to help health care professionals identify and, in theory, treat those who have addiction issues … in theory.

The Show-Me state has been the lone holdout, and lawmakers have basically argued for the holdout due to privacy concerns and Big Brother-like overreach. Of course, many Missourians seem to think the database/prescription drug-monitoring program would be a good idea and a good start in helping treat prescription abuse/addiction issues. And they would be correct, if the following were true:

- Physicians and other health care providers always had both the best interests and privacy concerns of their patients in mind. In this situation, Doc Smith deeply cares about his patient, sees a potential abuse addiction issue, and takes appropriate, caring action to help Susie Doe in the best manner possible.

- Prosecutors were able to actually prioritize and understand that addiction is just that, more often than not, and that addicts typically need compassion and treatment, rather than ridicule and prosecution.

- There were resources readily available for those who are under-insured or uninsured who are dealing with addiction issues.

- States that had similar drug-monitoring programs had significantly lower abuse rates than Missouri (Tennessee, Alabama and West Virginia have the worst in the nation, according to the CDC), due to the effective use of a similar database.

If any of these were true, it would make sense to implement a statewide drug monitoring system.

But the sad facts show just the opposite.

Health care professionals are often overworked and undertrained as it is, and certainly are limited in their understanding of addiction issues, unless they have gone through specific training on those issues.

Prosecutors are given far too much discretion when it comes to what is classified as a “crime” and are often quick to lump all addicts into a “criminal element” type category, potentially resulting in the further burdening of an impossibly overloaded and ridiculously inept criminal justice system.

Combine that with what could be best described as a horrendous lack of resources for those who are in any socioeconomic class but the top and the fact that databases seem to have no real effect on preventing addiction, and we have another potential set of regulations in the works that will do nothing except allow lawmakers to pat themselves on the back for more worthless regulation.

Does that mean Missouri should be the lone holdout and continue to allow addicts to doctor-shop in our state? Probably not. But until we get serious about helping those with addiction issues, this jumping on the bandwagon is just a diversion, rather than addressing the issue in earnest.

Christopher Dixon lives in Springfield. He can be reached at electiopublishing.com.