ILNews

Zoeller: Problem-solving courts may help fight Rx abuse

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller said a newly formed prescription drug abuse task force will examine whether special problem-solving courts may be a venue for fighting prescription painkiller abuse.

Zoeller announced the initiative in a statement Friday, a day after he attended a graduation ceremony for defendants who successfully completed the Adult Drug Court program in Clark Superior Court 2 in Jeffersonville, where Judge Jerry Jacobi presides.

“In supporting greater resources for specialty courts, one of my goals will be to examine the effectiveness and possible expansion of drug courts, veteran courts and other problem-solving courts that recognize the underlying root causes of some crimes and help offenders to resolve them,” Zoeller said in a statement. “This approach gives certain types of offenders the opportunity and motivation to live productive, crime-free lives in the future.

“In addition to the problems with illegal drugs, prescription painkiller abuse is an epidemic according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,” Zoeller said. “We must focus on treatment and alternatives to incarceration as a priority, and the possible expansion of drug courts could play an important role. I believe this is a worthwhile concept that the Legislature should have the opportunity to learn more about.”

On Sept. 24, Zoeller announced formation of a prescription drug abuse task force to examine the problem of abuse and diversion of addictive prescription medications. The group consists of 60 people representing law enforcement, public health, the legislative branch, social services and pharmacists.

The task force, which Zoeller chairs, will recommend changes to state laws and regulations in advance of the 2013 session of the Indiana General Assembly. Smaller committees within the task force will study specific issues. Zoeller said the task force will look at using specialty court supervision programs such as drug courts in the treatment of prescription drug abuse and addiction. If those are found effective, then the task force would offer recommendations on how such programs might be developed in counties where they don’t exist.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

  • RX DRugs
    Well, I see the state of Indiana has found yet a nother way to squander (WASTE) our tax dollars. Presciption drug task force, what a joke, no state or federal agency will ever win the war on drugs, legal or illegal. Every time you take a 1 dealer down, 10 more take his place. Governments think they can solve every problem by passing a law. There are so many laws on the books that even the people that wrote and/or enacted the laws, don't know what the laws are. In addition to that every member of congress, the senate and the supreme court has violated the law, it may have been speeding, not making a complete stop at a stop sign etc. The fact is if you write or enact laws, you are a hypocrite of you break any law, no matter how minor it is!

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
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
2015 Distinguished Barrister &
Up and Coming Lawyer Reception

Tuesday, May 5, 2015 • 4:30 - 7:00 pm
Learn More


ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. The $320,000 is the amount the school spent in litigating two lawsuits: One to release the report involving John Trimble (as noted in the story above) and one defending the discrimination lawsuit. The story above does not mention the amount spent to defend the discrimination suit, that's why the numbers don't match. Thanks for reading.

  2. $160k? Yesterday the figure was $320k. Which is it Indiana Lawyer. And even more interesting, which well connected law firm got the (I am guessing) $320k, six time was the fired chancellor received. LOL. (From yesterday's story, which I guess we were expected to forget overnight ... "According to records obtained by the Journal & Courier, Purdue spent $161,812, beginning in July 2012, in a state open records lawsuit and $168,312, beginning in April 2013, for defense in a federal lawsuit. Much of those fees were spent battling court orders to release an independent investigation by attorney John Trimble that found Purdue could have handled the forced retirement better")

  3. The numbers are harsh; 66 - 24 in the House, 40 - 10 in the Senate. And it is an idea pushed by the Democrats. Dead end? Ummm not necessarily. Just need to go big rather than go home. Nuclear option. Give it to the federal courts, the federal courts will ram this down our throats. Like that other invented right of the modern age, feticide. Rights too precious to be held up by 2000 years of civilization hang in the balance. Onward!

  4. I'm currently seeing someone who has a charge of child pornography possession, he didn't know he had it because it was attached to a music video file he downloaded when he was 19/20 yrs old and fought it for years until he couldn't handle it and plead guilty of possession. He's been convicted in Illinois and now lives in Indiana. Wouldn't it be better to give them a chance to prove to the community and their families that they pose no threat? He's so young and now because he was being a kid and downloaded music at a younger age, he has to pay for it the rest of his life? It's unfair, he can't live a normal life, and has to live in fear of what people can say and do to him because of something that happened 10 years ago? No one deserves that, and no one deserves to be labeled for one mistake, he got labeled even though there was no intent to obtain and use the said content. It makes me so sad to see someone I love go through this and it makes me holds me back a lot because I don't know how people around me will accept him...second chances should be given to those under the age of 21 at least so they can be given a chance to live a normal life as a productive member of society.

  5. It's just an ill considered remark. The Sup Ct is inherently political, as it is a core part of government, and Marbury V Madison guaranteed that it would become ever more so Supremely thus. So her remark is meaningless and she just should have not made it.... what she could have said is that Congress is a bunch of lazys and cowards who wont do their jobs so the hard work of making laws clear, oftentimes stops with the Sups sorting things out that could have been resolved by more competent legislation. That would have been a more worthwhile remark and maybe would have had some relevance to what voters do, since voters cant affect who gets appointed to the supremely un-democratic art III courts.

ADVERTISEMENT