ISLAND VOICES
Remove stigma of addiction

Alan Johnson is chief financial officer and managing director of Hina Mauka Recovery Center.

Let's consider whether our employers' drug and alcohol policies really serve us well. Almost one out of 10 people suffers from abuse or addiction, statistics from 1998 and 2002 Department of Health surveys indicate. Other sources suggest that about 70 percent of those abusing alcohol and drugs are still in the workforce. We calculate that to be an astounding 60,000 to 70,000 abusers actively employed in Hawai'i.

Given the increasing devastation that excessive alcohol and drug abuse brings to individuals and their families, we contend that they are, at best, mediocre performers. When you consider that the family members' productivity could also be impaired as they try to deal with such traumatic, hurtful disruptions in their families, the impact to the workforce is probably much higher than what the numbers suggest.

Most employers' drug and alcohol policies specifically address the issue through two means: (1) determining whether the employee's performance meets minimum standards and/or (2) alcohol and drug testing. They are generally resolved through disciplinary procedures.

Although some employers offer referrals to an Employee Assistance Program, most employers lack the tolerance and patience it takes for an employee to make it through treatment. Sadly, almost all cases result in termination.

Random drug tests can help "catch" users, though the cost of testing everyone frequently is cost-prohibitive, so only a few are ever identified.

The result is that these two so-called "benevolent" practices are actually punitive and merely promote the denial and stigma aspects of a disease.

What the existing employer policies fail to adequately address is that the growing number of mediocre performers who are battling the whirlwind effects of abuse will not respond well to the usual management efforts to improve productivity.

We suggest that employers follow scientific "best practices" to implement policies that defuse the stigma of addiction by treating it as a disease. Employers could mount campaigns to encourage abusers to seek treatment using their existing medical coverage with time off at the company's expense. After all, it is an investment into a potentially highly productive, grateful, loyal employee.

Once the staff can trust that no one (who continues to meet minimum standards) is terminated and recognizes the many positive changes that occur when those employees find "recovery," they will realize that the company is investing into their well-being at a deeper level. Morale, teamwork and loyalty are bound to improve.

As the individuals in recovery find their inner strength and become more motivated, they will influence others to make more meaningful contributions to the company's mission. On the other hand, their recovery will bring about peer pressures to help identify other abusing staff and encourage them to seek professional help.

The cost advantages will be phenomenal as well. As taxpayers, we are paying for addiction through medical, judicial and quality-of-life considerations. Once we remove the stigma of addiction in the workplace, we will treat individuals at the earlier stages of this disease when it is less expensive and less devastating to the individual and their families.

In 1968, Hawai'i became the first state to recognize what the medical field has irrefutably declared: Addiction is a disease. When we treat this as a disease in all facets of our communities, including the work environment, then we may have a fighting chance to overcome this raging epidemic.