Task force, billboards part of AG’s prescription drug abuse fight

IL Staff
September 24, 2012
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Billboards around Indiana are part of an awareness campaign about the dangers of prescription drug abuse announced Monday by Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller.

The signs in Allen, Jackson, Marion, Monroe and Scott counties will note that someone in the United States dies every 25 minute from a prescription drug overdose. The Indiana Department of Health estimates 654 Hoosiers die annually from prescription drug abuse.

A Prescription Drug Abuse Task Force chaired by Zoeller met for the first time last week. The task force includes lawmakers and representatives of law enforcement, health officials, pharmaceutical representatives, education providers and others.

A website launched Monday - - will provide updates on the task force’s work. Its launch coincides with “Wake Up to Medicine Abuse Week” through Saturday. The week also includes events in which Hoosiers can safely turn in unwanted prescriptions Saturday during National Prescription Drug Take-Back Day from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. To find the nearest collection site visit

"There has been a 500 percent increase in poisoning deaths in our state over the past 10 years," said Dr. Joan Duwve, IDH chief medical officer and co-chair of the task force. "And most of those are due to drug overdoses. This is a dangerous epidemic that is affecting every community in Indiana."  

“Prescription drug overdoses and the non-prescription use of medication is an epidemic that continues to have a stronghold in our communities,” Zoeller said. “It’s critical everyone work together to break away from this trend. I believe any solutions will require a comprehensive approach that includes education, training, treatment, tracking and enforcement.”



Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Lori, you must really love wedding cake stories like this one ... happy enuf ending for you?

  2. This new language about a warning has not been discussed at previous meetings. It's not available online. Since it must be made public knowledge before the vote, does anyone know exactly what it says? Further, this proposal was held up for 5 weeks because members Carol and Lucy insisted that all terms used be defined. So now, definitions are unnecessary and have not been inserted? Beyond these requirements, what is the logic behind giving one free pass to discriminators? Is that how laws work - break it once and that's ok? Just don't do it again? Three members of Carmel's council have done just about everything they can think of to prohibit an anti-discrimination ordinance in Carmel, much to Brainard's consternation, I'm told. These three 'want to be so careful' that they have failed to do what at least 13 other communities, including Martinsville, have already done. It's not being careful. It's standing in the way of what 60% of Carmel residents want. It's hurting CArmel in thT businesses have refused to locate because the council has not gotten with the program. And now they want to give discriminatory one free shot to do so. Unacceptable. Once three members leave the council because they lost their races, the Carmel council will have unanimous approval of the ordinance as originally drafted, not with a one free shot to discriminate freebie. That happens in January 2016. Why give a freebie when all we have to do is wait 3 months and get an ordinance with teeth from Day 1? If nothing else, can you please get s copy from Carmel and post it so we can see what else has changed in the proposal?

  3. Here is an interesting 2012 law review article for any who wish to dive deeper into this subject matter: Excerpt: "Judicial interpretation of the ADA has extended public entity liability to licensing agencies in the licensure and certification of attorneys.49 State bar examiners have the authority to conduct fitness investigations for the purpose of determining whether an applicant is a direct threat to the public.50 A “direct threat” is defined as “a significant risk to the health or safety of others that cannot be eliminated by a modification of policies, practices or procedures, or by the provision of auxiliary aids or services as provided by § 35.139.”51 However, bar examiners may not utilize generalizations or stereotypes about the applicant’s disability in concluding that an applicant is a direct threat.52"

  4. We have been on the waiting list since 2009, i was notified almost 4 months ago that we were going to start receiving payments and we still have received nothing. Every time I call I'm told I just have to wait it's in the lawyers hands. Is everyone else still waiting?

  5. I hope you dont mind but to answer my question. What amendment does this case pretain to?