To the Editor:

Back on Oct. 3 at WCU’s Opioid Town Hall, I found myself applauding Sen. Jim Davis, R-Macon, for his evolution from a “just say no” stance on drugs to a pro-harm reduction position. It’s nothing short of a miracle to have such a drastic change in point-of-view in such a short amount of time. I (and the senator himself) credit that miracle to the empirical evidence presented to the senator by Tessie Castillo, a harm reduction expert. Sen. Davis claims to be a data-driven person, and with Castillo’s extensive knowledge of the facts surrounding harm reduction, a thinking person would find it difficult to oppose harm reduction efforts after spending time with her. 

Where the senator does not embrace data is in championing the Death-By-Distribution (DBD) bill that went into effect Sunday, Dec. 1. Sen. Davis says he helped draft Death-By-Distribution because Bill Hollingsed came to him as Chief of Waynesville Police and said, “I’m tired of putting young people in body bags.” While that is a compelling statement from a highly-respected law enforcement officer, it is not data. The data on death-by-distribution laws is that they put more young people in body bags. The four states with the strictest death-by-distribution laws (W.V., Ohio, Ill., Penn.) have fatal opioid overdoses that continue to increase in contrast to the rest of the nation, which are finally beginning to plateau. 

With DBD now in effect, based on the data, we can fully expect the opioid overdose death rate to change in our state for the worse. There is concern also that the 2013 Good Samaritan (Good Sam) Law will be kneecapped by the DBD statute. The provisions that protect caller and overdose victim from legal repercussions in a 911 response are already largely disregarded — people who need medical treatment often find themselves handcuffed as soon as they come-to or find themselves with charges, parole violations, etc. when Good Sam protects them from such. What should be a medical issue continues to have punitive repercussions. 

So, in this marginalized population, who are already resistant to seeking medical attention when they need it, DBD will further alienate them from medical care as now an association with an overdose victim could mean a murder charge. “Don’t run, call 911,” is effectively out the window. When asked for comment on DBD’s effect on Good Sam, Sen. Davis claimed he’d made especially certain to not dilute Good Sam when authoring DBD, but when pressed to say how exactly he’d protected Good Sam, Sen. Davis replied, “I’m not a lawyer.” This answer is troublesome to folks who want to see overdose deaths decline. 

Then Sen. Davis went on to say the intention of DBD is to remove “bad players.” “Bad players” is really more accurately “desperate players” in a very not fun game of punishing people with a serious medical condition called Substance Use Disorder. And desperate players do desperate things, such as leaving their friends to die if they face the possibility of 40 years in prison for sharing drugs. That is how I lost my cousin 10 years ago, and while my initial response was anger directed at the people she was doing drugs with, that anger was misdirected. And data, cold hard facts, are what altered my view of the situation.  It would not do my heart or society any good to have the kids my cousin was partying with put in a cage, punished. Substance Use Disorder is punishment enough. The thing that will heal my heart and society is to put resources toward evidence-based solutions to support people living with Substance Use Disorder.

Jesse-lee Dunlap

North Carolina Harm Reduction Coalition (NCHRC)