The narcotic drug problem

by Ernest S. Bishop

A half dozen years ago I had a long, severe attack of gallstones and inflammation of the gall-bladder. I suffered so much pain that the physicians gave me morphine for nearly a year. When I got better I tried my very best to get along without the drug, but could not. I came to a physician in New York for treatment who had made a special study of drug addiction and is a recognized authority on that subject. However, he could not help me at that time on account of a recurrence of my gall-bladder inflammation with severe jaundice and fever.

Since that time I have tried repeatedly to stop and reduce the quantity of the drug, but have found it impossible because of the physical pain and exhaustion due to the lack of the drug. This is unbearable. I have since then kept my daily amount of morphine medication at a minimum which permitted me to work and to maintain good health and bodily function. The idea which I have heard so often expressed, that addicts tend to increase their daily intake of narcotic, is certainly untrue in my case, and there seems to me no reason nor temptation to do so. I have simply found the smallest amount which would keep me from physical suffering, and have experienced no difficulty in maintaining that dosage, except in occasional emergencies of gall-bladder attacks or other crises, after which I found it a simple matter to discontinue the excess dosage. As I have never experienced the slightest pleasurable or sensually enjoyable sensations from the administration of morphine, there seems to me no foundation for this prevalent idea of tendency to increase. It may be true of the degenerate who has become addicted, but it certainly is untrue in my case, and must be untrue of the thousands like me whose misfortune it has been to become afflicted with this condition.

Recently I have again consulted specialists, and it seems that with my condition I must continue the administration of morphine for the present, and perhaps for the rest of my life. Physical conditions render present attempts to discontinue its use impractical, undesirable and dangerous.

Now what am I to do under the present “Drug Habit” laws of this State? I am a lawyer long past middle age—have held important state and judicial positions, and many positions of responsibility and trust. It would be ruinous to me if my addiction condition became public.

This law was enacted to control the drug traffic and to stop the evils which are connected with it. In many respects it is an excellent law, but the provisions which require the record of the name, age and residence of the addict to be filed in the Board of Health Office is outrageous. It does not affect the underworld, for they don’t care and avoid registration by not going to those who have to register them. But see the position of a man who has a good reputation and standing in the community—forever recorded in the records of the State Board of Health as a “dope fiend,” even though his condition is not the result of his own acts or desires and absolutely beyond his control.

This part of the law which requires the recording of the name, age and residence of the addict should be repealed. The only effect of these provisions is to record the addict as what everybody considers a “dope fiend” or force him to go to the smugglers for his drug. He must either place his good name and social and economic position in constant jeopardy or in some way or other evade the law with its attendant penalty, and constant fear of detection. I should not be surprised if it finally develops to be the fact that a majority of decent sufferers from this condition have chosen the latter course as the lesser of evils.

I am informed that the Health Department has recently issued monthly registration blanks to physicians, demanding, in addition to the name, age and residence of the addict, the date and amounts of each prescription together with other information as to the individual cases treated. This makes conditions still more obnoxious and unbearable. Furthermore, this action of the authorities of the Board of Health is unwarranted and illegal. There is nothing in the powers of the Board of Health which permits them such action, and such action is without any justification in the letter of the law or in any possible interpretation of the spirit and intent of the law.

The data demanded were submitted to the Legislature as provisions in the law when the bill was being considered, and were rejected. The Health Department is usurping the powers of the Legislature, which it has no authority to do. The law plainly states what the physician shall report and the Board of Health has no power to require additional matters. Such action constitutes illegal interference with the rights of physician and patient as to matters of treatment and as to violation of professional confidence. It is my opinion that a narcotic addict might have grounds for legal procedure against a physician who furnished such information as the Health Department demands.

Conditions in New York today, affecting the honest addict, constitute in effect persecution of the sick. It is bad enough to be afflicted with this disease. Agonizing as gall-stone attacks have been, the physical suffering from lack of morphine in an addict is worse. Added to this is the knowledge that your name is on file at Albany, and perhaps elsewhere, as an addict. You know that disclosure of your condition will ruin you and disgrace your family. You are potentially subject to leakage from those records and the attendant possibilities of blackmail and other persecution. Such conditions tend to force and undoubtedly have forced many innocent and honest addicts of good social and economic standing to become criminals by obtaining their necessary opiate medicine through illegal channels.

Something certainly should be done to remedy existing conditions and existing laws. The great State of New York should not place its unfortunate sick in their present position.