# Drug Tests For Welfare Recipients? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 21, 2011, 12:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drug-tests-for-welfare-recipients/589784 "2011-07-21T00:47:11Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2011, 12:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drug-tests-for-welfare-recipients/589784/101 "2011-07-22T00:26:42Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > I have no problem with needs testing for anyone who receives government money. It’s an essential part of the program. > > But drug testing isn’t a good method of needs testing. Qin’s proposal wouldn’t do anything about a welfare recipient who’s wasting money on cigarettes or lottery tickets or comic books or baseball cards or tropical fish or collecting guns or NASCAR memorabilia - all of these people could get potentially off welfare if they spent their money more wisely but none of them will fail a drug test. Right. You can’t go too crazy and regulate EVERY aspect of a welfare recipient’s life. I mean, hell, if they stop for an ice cream cone every once in a while that’s no problem. But if they are so far off of the path that they are buying cocaine with public funds, then they are well off the beaten path of the basic purposes behind the welfare system and need to be put on another track. What that is I’m not sure, but it sure as hell isn’t continuing to give them public dollars to support their habit. ---
**Author:** ![Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/f04885/32.png) [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qin_Shi_Huangdi)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2011, 12:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drug-tests-for-welfare-recipients/589784/102 "2011-07-22T00:51:33Z")
> [@I\_Know\_Nothing](#): > > But it seems you only believe this about poor people. > > These laws are discriminatory and only serve to humiliate poor people. I’m still waiting for someone somewhere to attempt to pass a law requiring anyone receiving government money to submit to a drug test(Pell grants, federally subsidized loans, etc.) I don’t think that is going to happen. > [@Anne\_Neville](#): > > And then what? We’ve already got a shortage of foster families. > [@gonzomax](#): > > Most welfare recipients are children. Should we test them from birth? No, I meant adult recipients obviously. > [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > Don’t complain then if some poor guy with the same philosophy cuts your throat and loots your body. If you owe them no consideration, then they owe you no consideration. And expecting people to just sit in a corner and quietly starve to death is ridiculous. So…? A: Hey, can you give a dollar? B: Sorry, don’t have any. A: _Stabs B to death and then seizes his wallet_ > [@Merneith](#): > > Well that’s not what you’re proposing, is it? You’re not saying we should test them so that we can provide proper treatment options in addition to the money they need to eat or pay rent. You’re arguing that we should test them so that we can judge if they’re worthy to receive our charity. If you judge them to be unworthy, you want to cut off their support, possibly incarcerate them in a useless attempt to force them off their addictions, and if necessary, force their children into nursing homes. > > It’s an entirely twisted notion of charity, limited government, financial planning, addiction treatment, and well-being of children - all predicated on the idea that you’re entitled to judge those who most need your help. Well if we are going to treat them, we can’t just give them money since many of them will just use it on drugs and alcohol to hurt themselves. The mandatory drug testing laws can differ in severity and consequences. I do support treatment centres. ---
**Author:** ![Indygrrl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/58f4c7/32.png) [@Indygrrl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Indygrrl)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2011, 1:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drug-tests-for-welfare-recipients/589784/103 "2011-07-22T01:09:58Z")
> [@David42](#): > > The idea of teaching addicts that they have a permanently incurable disease is really nothing more than ensuring repeat business for drug treatment centers, who, if they reach their claimed goal, are out of business. (never trust a business who says its goal is to put itself out of business.) > > Other approaches have been much more effective, such as an approach that the addiction is a symptom which has underlying causes which _can be_ treated. Cite? I’d be interested in what approaches you are referring to, and their success rates. I’ve struggled with addiction my whole adult life, and I think most people who aren’t addicts have a tendency to oversimplify the issue because they just can’t understand it. It truly is something that’s hard to grasp when you haven’t been through it. Everytime the topic comes up, the comments make that very clear. I don’t say that to make excuses, I say it to express my frustration in the lack of effective treatment and the way people judge addicts so harshly, as if we have a moral failing instead of a physiological problem. I take responsibility for myself, but it doesn’t change the fact that I’m going to have to fight this thing for the rest of my life. Taking people’s benefits away because they fail a drug test is bullshit for a lot of reasons, and equating drug addiction with being some kind of lowlife degenerate is one of them. ---
**Author:** ![voltaire](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voltaire/32/313_2.png) [@voltaire](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/voltaire)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2011, 1:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drug-tests-for-welfare-recipients/589784/104 "2011-07-22T01:45:28Z")
> [@diggerwam](#): > > What I’m hearing is that some of these poor folks getting public money are beyond help. That it is far cheaper, and therefore better, to allow them to feed their addictions instead of attempting to help them become a productive member of society. > > You are really writing off these people. These people’s lives have value and that value cannot be tapped if they are on drugs. Not the occasional joint, but the heavier stuff. How do you find these people if you don’t drug test? I said before fail one test, get treatment, fail 3 times and you get benefits taken away. > > These folks can’t take the first step to improve their lives unless they have incentive to get off the drugs. You call the test humiliating, but I call it helping them. They aren’t going to stop unless they have incentive to stop. > > The elderly Social Security recipient has paid into the system all their lives, so no, I don’t care if grandpa tokes up once in a while. Subsidized farmers toking up once in a while, again so what, they are still busting their hump running a business. People in the projects w/ taxpayer paid food and shelter and kids, they have potential as human beings, but apparently it’s fine just to throw your hands up and give up. > > I don’t agree Like so many others that think radical changes to welfare are needed, you obviously have little to no clue about the issue you’re chiming in on. You apparently think welfare cash assistance is permanent/life-long, unconditional, and substantial - it is none of those things, far from it actually. You seem to think that people who apply for welfare easily get money with no questions asked and no other forms of help such as job-seeking assistance and counseling. I suggest doing some minimal research on the issue before pretending you know how to fix it’s (mostly imaginary) problems. Otherwise, your claims of only having these people’s best interests in mind seem to ring hollow, and your accusations that others are the ones that are “really writing off these people” look downright hypocritical. (The above applies for a few other people in this thread, but the general tone and content of this post just set me off. Seriously people, if you are going to criticize welfare programs, at least learn something about the subject.) ---
**Author:** ![Zeriel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/58956e/32.png) [@Zeriel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeriel)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2011, 1:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drug-tests-for-welfare-recipients/589784/105 "2011-07-22T01:54:04Z")
> [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](#): > > So…? > A: Hey, can you give a dollar? > B: Sorry, don’t have any. > A: _Stabs B to death and then seizes his wallet_ That, in macrocosm, describes a notable number of 20th-century revolutions in the third world. > [@](#): > > Well if we are going to treat them, we can’t just give them money since many of them will just use it on drugs and alcohol to hurt themselves. The mandatory drug testing laws can differ in severity and consequences. I do support treatment centres. Would you kindly address the fact that in [a recent study](http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/03/31/us-alcoholics-homes-idUSTRE52U7GZ20090331), alcoholics given an allowance and a spot in a halfway home and allowed to drink anyway **drank less** and cost the government less than alcoholics turned away if they drank? > [@Mary Larimer](#): > > We also found that these benefits increase over time and that they are possible without requiring that participants stop drinking. And yet, the longer the participants stay in the housing program, the less they drink. Tag a low-key, non-mandatory treatment program on that after these guys have a few months to settle down and start drinking less on their own, and I think you might just [del]waste the taxpayers money on evil addicts[/del] hit all possible good outcomes. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2011, 2:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drug-tests-for-welfare-recipients/589784/106 "2011-07-22T02:00:55Z")
How often should we drug test these people. Once a month, every 6 months? Michigan has a 48 month lifetime for receiving welfare. Should we test them during the last year? You really think things through QIN. I guess you hate the poor quite a bit. ---
**Author:** ![David42](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/5f9b8f/32.png) [@David42](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David42)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2011, 2:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drug-tests-for-welfare-recipients/589784/107 "2011-07-22T02:09:13Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > Congress treated the Constitution as though it was law? What were they thinking? > > It says it right in the Constitution “promote the general welfare” just after “establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defence”. > > Now you might think that five laws were enough to promote the general welfare. Others might think it took seventy-two laws. But the Constitution set a goal not a limit. It’s a preamble explaining the need for the following enumerated powers. What you’re saying is like saying “We the people…” is a law. ---
**Author:** ![Zeriel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/58956e/32.png) [@Zeriel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeriel)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2011, 2:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drug-tests-for-welfare-recipients/589784/108 "2011-07-22T02:13:40Z")
> [@gonzomax](#): > > You really think things through QIN. I guess you hate the poor quite a bit. I don’t think misunderstanding the way welfare works (especially given all the bad propaganda from sources he’s likely to have been taught are reliable) implies a hate for the poor. Nor does, on the surface, a desire to prevent the poor from using what assistance they do receive for drugs. I’ll be interested to see how he feels about the studies that show better results from not banning the addictive substance, though. ---
**Author:** ![Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/f04885/32.png) [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qin_Shi_Huangdi)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2011, 2:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drug-tests-for-welfare-recipients/589784/109 "2011-07-22T02:37:04Z")
> [@Zeriel](#): > > I don’t think misunderstanding the way welfare works (especially given all the bad propaganda from sources he’s likely to have been taught are reliable) implies a hate for the poor. Nor does, on the surface, a desire to prevent the poor from using what assistance they do receive for drugs. I’ll be interested to see how he feels about the studies that show better results from not banning the addictive substance, though. I don’t support banning consuming or possessing drugs actually although I support banning hard drugs from being manufactured, grown, sold, or distributed. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2011, 2:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drug-tests-for-welfare-recipients/589784/110 "2011-07-22T02:37:26Z")
> [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](#): > > [QUOTE=Der Trihs] > Don’t complain then if some poor guy with the same philosophy cuts your throat and loots your body. If you owe them no consideration, then they owe you no consideration. And expecting people to just sit in a corner and quietly starve to death is ridiculous. So…? A: Hey, can you give a dollar? B: Sorry, don’t have any. A: _Stabs B to death and then seizes his wallet_ [/quote] Fisrt, it’s more like: A: Hey, can you give a dollar? B: Go crawl into a corner and die, vermin. See this money? It’s mine, and you can’t have any of it, and I have it because God likes me and hates you! _\_ A: _Stabs B to death and then seizes his wallet_ And second, as pointed out this “I’ve got mine, screw everyone else” attitude is exactly the sort of behavior that’s led to revolutions and violence all over the world. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2011, 2:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drug-tests-for-welfare-recipients/589784/111 "2011-07-22T02:47:33Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > Fisrt, it’s more like: > > A: Hey, can you give a dollar? > B: Go crawl into a corner and die, vermin. See this money? It’s mine, and you can’t have any of it, and I have it because God likes me and hates you! _\_ > A: _Stabs B to death and then seizes his wallet_ > > And second, as pointed out this “I’ve got mine, screw everyone else” attitude is exactly the sort of behavior that’s led to revolutions and violence all over the world. So the lesson here is – stab A to death first, and _ **then** _ spit on him? I was all for mutual noninterference, but, well, you’re scaring me, here. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2011, 3:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drug-tests-for-welfare-recipients/589784/112 "2011-07-22T03:38:28Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#): > > So the lesson here is – stab A to death first, and _ **then** _ spit on him? Not really. That just makes C, D and E start a revolutionary cell and blow up B’s car with him in it. ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2011, 3:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drug-tests-for-welfare-recipients/589784/113 "2011-07-22T03:41:20Z")
> [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](#): > > I think it would be a good idea to forcibly institutionalzie those type of people. What do you mean by “those type of people”? :dubious: Have you ever KNOWN any addicts, or anyone using welfare, **Qin**? ---
**Author:** ![PandaBear77](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/edb3f5/32.png) [@PandaBear77](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PandaBear77)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2011, 3:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drug-tests-for-welfare-recipients/589784/114 "2011-07-22T03:44:10Z")
> [@voltaire](#): > > Like so many others that think radical changes to welfare are needed, you obviously have little to no clue about the issue you’re chiming in on. You apparently think welfare cash assistance is permanent/life-long, unconditional, and substantial - it is none of those things, far from it actually. You seem to think that people who apply for welfare easily get money with no questions asked and no other forms of help such as job-seeking assistance and counseling. > > I suggest doing some minimal research on the issue before pretending you know how to fix it’s (mostly imaginary) problems. Otherwise, your claims of only having these people’s best interests in mind seem to ring hollow, and your accusations that others are the ones that are “really writing off these people” look downright hypocritical. > > (The above applies for a few other people in this thread, but the general tone and content of this post just set me off. Seriously people, if you are going to criticize welfare programs, at least learn something about the subject.) You got that right,\*\* voltaire. \*\* I’ve been on welfare, AND I’ve been a welfare caseworker. (In my final year as a caseworker, I busted fraudsters.) People on Food Stamps DO get benefits with relatively few questions asked, to be fair (or at least this is how it was a few years ago, I’m no longer a caseworker so it could be the rules have changed). When I was a caseworker I wasn’t allowed to call bullshit on someone even when I knew they were lying to my face about their income. If someone claimed to be self employed, we had to take their word for it when they said they made only $300 a month yet they had a $500/mo apartment plus utilities to pay. (As far as sharing information with other agencies went, if we knew a client was working AND drawing unemployment, we weren’t allowed to tell the unemployment office that was on the 2nd floor of our building. If we knew a client had just got married to someone with an income and was drawing SSI, we couldn’t tell Social Security about it.) Even when people were busted committing fraud, in most situations nothing was ever done. Prosecutors aren’t going to waste time prosecuting someone for that unless it’s a truly enormous amount of money (my biggest bust DID get prosecuted - they’d scammed at least 40 grand in Food Stamps alone). The government could be doing a LOT more to stop people who abuse the system, but they won’t. Drug use among welfare recipients? Puhleze. If you want to make a REAL dent in the amount of money being wasted on welfare programs, go after mothers who claim the father of their child is nowhere to be found in order to get benefits, and all the while he’s working full time and sleeping in her bed every night. I saw waaaay more of that in my office than I did people coming in high. Welfare “checks,” though (what used to be called AFDC and is now, I believe, still called TANF), are miniscule. When I was on it, it was $340 a month. I survived by living off of student loans. Plus I was subject to a home visit pretty much any time they wanted to, plus a bunch of other rules - some reasonable, some downright ridiculous. Nobody on welfare is having fun being on welfare … except those who are scamming the system and have hidden income. (And just as an aside – my biggest, ballsiest fraudsters? White upper middle class.) If you are poor enough to legitimately be on welfare, it’s a miserable experience. Those who are legit don’t need any more humiliation than they already feel every time they walk into the welfare office. ---
**Author:** ![tumbleddown](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e9bcb4/32.png) [@tumbleddown](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tumbleddown)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2011, 5:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drug-tests-for-welfare-recipients/589784/115 "2011-07-22T05:55:29Z")
> [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](#): > > Well if we are going to treat them, we can’t just give them money since many of them will just use it on drugs and alcohol to hurt themselves. This right here is what we call **concern trolling**. You don’t care if people hurt themselves, you only care if welfare recipients “hurt themselves” with “your” money. If you cared about people “hurting themselves” with drugs and alcohol you’d not be targeting the poorest of the poor for your allegedly public-interest minded testing scheme. It’s fundamentally dishonest to pretend that this is about anyone’s wellbeing because the end result of any such scheme would be people left mired in deeper poverty, children left without food, shelter and safety and _suffering_. All so the “taxpayers” can [strike]save[/strike] spend a (lot of) buck(s). > [@PandaBear77](#): > > People on Food Stamps DO get benefits with relatively few questions asked, to be fair (or at least this is how it was a few years ago, I’m no longer a caseworker so it could be the rules have changed). I don’t know what state you’re in, but in Pennsylvania, there is one omnibus application for all aid programs, food stamps, medical assistance and TANF. Even though only a part of the information is used to determine eligibility for food stamps, you cannot submit an incomplete application even if you don’t want (or know you don’t qualify for) any other aid. The amount of information that one must provide is substantial; the online application is estimated to take someone of average reading ability and web form usage savvy a minimum of 90 minutes to complete. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2011, 6:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drug-tests-for-welfare-recipients/589784/116 "2011-07-22T06:21:42Z")
> [@David42](#): > > It’s a preamble explaining the need for the following enumerated powers. What you’re saying is like saying “We the people…” is a law. So the government was formed because of a need for those powers. But you feel the government that resulted doesn’t have those powers. What did it mean when they wrote _“The Congress shall have power - To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States”_? Or for that matter when it said _“The Congress shall have power - to pay the Debts and provide for the common defence and general Welfare of the United States.”_ ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2011, 6:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drug-tests-for-welfare-recipients/589784/117 "2011-07-22T06:29:31Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > Right. You can’t go too crazy and regulate EVERY aspect of a welfare recipient’s life. I mean, hell, if they stop for an ice cream cone every once in a while that’s no problem. But if they are so far off of the path that they are buying cocaine with public funds, then they are well off the beaten path of the basic purposes behind the welfare system and need to be put on another track. What that is I’m not sure, but it sure as hell isn’t continuing to give them public dollars to support their habit. My opinion is that if they’re going so far off the path that they’re buying cocaine, then they’re breaking the law. And we have an existing system for dealing with people who break laws. There’s no reason why the welfare system should be involved in drug crime investigations anymore than we should have the police determining who’s eligible for food stamps. And there’s certainly no reason why we should treat every welfare recipient as a suspected drug user. ---
**Author:** ![David42](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/5f9b8f/32.png) [@David42](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David42)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2011, 8:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drug-tests-for-welfare-recipients/589784/118 "2011-07-22T08:11:40Z")
> [@Indygrrl](#): > > Cite? I’d be interested in what approaches you are referring to, and their success rates. > > I’ve struggled with addiction my whole adult life, and I think most people who aren’t addicts have a tendency to oversimplify the issue because they just can’t understand it. It truly is something that’s hard to grasp when you haven’t been through it. Everytime the topic comes up, the comments make that very clear. I don’t say that to make excuses, I say it to express my frustration in the lack of effective treatment and the way people judge addicts so harshly, as if we have a moral failing instead of a physiological problem. I take responsibility for myself, but it doesn’t change the fact that I’m going to have to fight this thing for the rest of my life. > > Taking people’s benefits away because they fail a drug test is bullshit for a lot of reasons, and equating drug addiction with being some kind of lowlife degenerate is one of them. Oh, you shouldn’t take anything I say to mean I want welfare recipients piss-sniffed. I have a hatred of the drug war and the industry it has spawned. I assure you that I went through full blown addictions. First, for fifteen years I took everything I could get my hands on. Then for five years I settled into some pretty serious alcoholism (a fifth a day) though I quit most other drugs. That was followed by 3 years of a $100-$200 a day crack habit. I tried (standard) treatment but that pretty much left me feeling hopeless with the message of incurable disease. Chris Prentiss’ book _The Alcohol and Addiction Cure_ is the other approach I mentioned. Please don’t take what I say as blaming addicts for a moral failing, I’m not, and Prentiss never talks like that either. Prentiss says that addiction is better seen as a symptom of something else, which can be addressed treated and cured. Even if that approach is not true, I can tell you personally that thinking in the manner he suggested allowed me to solve my addiction problems. All urges are gone now. It’s not a stay-away-from-drugs deal either; I used to drink til I was broke or it was all gone or the liqour store closed, once I started, no stopping, the ol one-drink-is-too-many-and-a-thousand-are-not-enough. I can have one drink or two now and stop, not desiring more, and its mostly unattractive. I think changing substances of abuse was a good thing for me. It made me realize that “alcohol” didn’t have ahold of me, since it was easily replaceable with cocaine. With cocaine, alcohol made no never mind to me. then I realized that “cocaine” didn’t have a hold of me either–it was _ **something else** _. I didn’t know what, but my thinking about my addiction had gotten me that far when I read Prentiss’ book. I figured more unhelpful shit like I’d read in the past, but I was surprised to find this book was completely different. With the reasoning I already had in place I was a prime candidate for Prentiss’ message. He said to find the underlaying causes that make a person want to take drugs in an unreasonable manner the addict must keep asking himself WHY, over and over, (one must be honest with oneself) one keeps wanting to take drugs. Finding out why is the hard part. Once you find out why you want to you will find the reason to be something irrational that has always bothered you, Recognize it as irrational and then change your mind. Indygrrl, this worked for me. My urges and cravings are gone. It may not work for just everyone, although Prentiss claims it just about does. There are a very few who may have chemical imbalances that are behind the addiction and this process doesn’t really work. For the rest of us, there are often emotional reasons we take drugs to excess. Denying that emotional reason is very much part of the problem; we take the drugs to hide it from ourselves. This process can be temporarily emotionally painful. At the very least, one reason it may work is because it is HOPEFUL. The message you’re sick and can’t be cured is not, and in fact is negative. If nothing else that message of HOPE worked for me. I did what Prentiss suggested and I put that crack pipe down and never wanted it again. I hope something I said here can help you in your struggles. ---
**Author:** ![diggerwam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/919ad9/32.png) [@diggerwam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/diggerwam)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2011, 10:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drug-tests-for-welfare-recipients/589784/119 "2011-07-22T10:44:17Z")
OK, you got me. I don’t know how the ins and outs of capital W Welfare works. But currently I work for a company that deals with subsidized housing. Tenant pays miniscule portion of the rent, but the government (Rural Development or HUD) pays the rest and often times utilities. Welfare might have a time limit, but these folks don’t. The majority of the people in these complexes have been there since the 90’s. That is definitely a way of life. If they qualify for this assistance, then I assume they are getting additional government help. Overall, government should figure out why these folks have been in this situation for so long, and if drugs/alcohol are a contributing factor, then the government should do what it takes to help these people, including taking benefits away to encourage proper behavior. If education is found to be a contributing factor, then the government should provide job training. The goal ought to be to let folks find a way out of this government subsidy, this should not be a permanent lifestyle. ---
**Author:** ![Eonwe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eonwe/32/240_2.png) [@Eonwe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eonwe)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2011, 11:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drug-tests-for-welfare-recipients/589784/120 "2011-07-22T11:33:25Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#): > > This, my friends, is the core of the modern Democratic perspective: we will fight tooth and nail to take away your money and give it to folks who use drugs and don’t work – because then _ **we** _ can sleep soundly, knowing that people who obey the law and work for a living are no longer getting what they deserve. > > That’s a winning slogan if ever I heard one! You’re missing my main point (which I see that **Little Nemo** has pointed out): Ensuring that the “undeserving” don’t get what they don’t “deserve” (based on arbitrary moral judgments) is more important than saving money; IOW, it is worth it to _spend_ money to achieve this goal. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drug-tests-for-welfare-recipients/589784.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drug-tests-for-welfare-recipients/589784.md?page=7)