Consequences and costs of shutting off methadone

In the face of rising fiscal conservatism, many states and localities with sizable addict populations have reduced or eliminated public funding for methadone maintenance (MM) programs and permitted private-fee-for-service programs to replace them. The social and economic costs of these changed funding policies with reference to the California experience were analyzed. A two-and-a-half year follow-up of a sample of San Diego MM clients (195 men, 129 women) terminated from a public subsidized program compared outcome results to clients from publicly funded MM programs in Orange, Riverside and San Bernardino counties (129 men, 131 women). In a secondary analysis, San Diego clients who transferred into private (fee-for-service) treatment programs were compared with those who did not transfer. Major adverse consequences were found for clients unable or unwilling to transfer to private programs: higher crime and dealing rates, more contact with the criminal justice system, and higher rates of illicit drug use were demonstrated by nontransfer clients. Moreover, the savings resulting from a reduction of MM program costs were nearly offset by increased direct costs for incarceration, legal supervision, and other government-funded drug treatment. Indirect costs were not assessed.