HomeMy WebLinkAbout1969-05-15; Narcotics and Drug Study Committee Ad Hoc; MinutesCITY OF CARLSBAD
Minutes of:
Date of Meeti ng:
Time of Meeting:
Place of Meeting:
NARCOTICS and DRUG STUDY
May 15, 1969 (Thursday)
12:00 Noon
Twin Inns Restaurant
COMMITTEE
PRESENT
ABSENT:
Mr. Kenneth Fare, Chief Probation Officer, San Diego
County, Mr. William Sergent, San Diego County Probation
Dept., Carl H. Neiswender, Committee Chairman & Council-
man, Douglas Deason, Secretary & representative Carlsbad
High School, Dr. Harvey Tuomi , Dr. Reid Binder, Gene
Thibault, rep. Magnolia Elementary School, William Moore
rep. Valley Junior High School, Dr. E. R. Hertweck, Psy-
chology Dept. Mira Costa J.C., Capt. Wallace Rossall,
Carlsbad Law Enforcement.
Rev. Larry DeWein (report received
Secretary that Rev. DeWein has been
York.)
from Congregation
transferred to New
Mr. Neiswender opened the meeting by introducing Mr. Kenneth Fare,
Chief Probation Officer, San Diego County and Mr. William Sergent,
Supervising Probation Officer, San Diego County. Mr. Neiswender
stated that the purpose of this meeting is to develop a good com-
prehensive plan and to present some thoughts of the Committee to
Mr. Fare and Mr. Sergent to determine if they are constructive
enough and feasible enough to accomplish the Committee's goals.
He then turned the meeting over to Mr. Fare and Mr. Sergent to
relay to the Committee some facts from the Probation Department
and a new plan which the Probation Department is experimenting with.
Mr. Fare stated that the number of referrals to his Department have
increased over the last few years due to substance abuse and sighted
the following statistics:
1965
1966
1967
1968
13
5
158
2,400
referral cases
He stated Probation is not any different from any other practice,
such as Education, Medicine, etc. Just as these professions must
change techniques and experiment, so must the Probation Department.
Mr. Fare also stated that the Probation Department now has a new
program which they are experimenting with and for which Mr. William
Sergent is directly responsible, one which he initiated and which,
thus far, since its initiation has proven very successful. He then
asked Mr. Sergent to explain the program to the Committee.
Mr. Sergent stated that the program is in its third month of opera-
tion and all early signs of its successful ness are very promising.
He stated he felt that the program may very well lead into other
areas; schools, medicine and other behavior problems.
Mr. Sergent then proceeded in detail to explain the new program
the San Diego County Probation Department now has in effect and
stated that they are still in the experimenting stage so that some
changes may be made as the program progresses.
April 10, 1969
A new narcotics program developed by the San Diego County Probation
Department and now being offered by this agency on a limited scale
to selected juvenile narcotics and drug abuse offenders appears suc-
cessful from all early indications. Additionally, the program, with
minor modifications, appears to lend itself to use by various agen-
cies and communities at minimal expense. Finally, although its
current use is now restricted to juvenile narcotics offenders, its
potential for use in other areas (juvenile shoplifting, school behav-
ior problems, etc.) appears unlimited. Thus, we are most happy to
share the following information with you:
PROGRAM The program format is quite simple in nature. The total
CONTENT: program consists of four separate meeting sessions in
which attendance by the minor and his parents is mandatory,
Locally, meetings occur on Tuesday night each week and continue for
four successive weeks. Meetings begin promptly at 7:00 p.m. and end
at 9:00 p.m. Thus, participating minors and parents are subjected
to a total eight hours exposure to the program from their initial
enrollment until completion of the course,
FIRST At the initial session, a guest lecturer, a juvenile
SESSION: officer provided by the San Diego Police Department, gives
a formal presentation on the subject of drugs from a law
enforcement point of view. His presentation ma^ include visual aid
materials and time is allo+tedfor a question-answer period. In any
case, the guest lecturer is allotted a maximum time of one hour.
Following his presentation, participating parents and youngsters
are arbitrarily divided into smaller discussion groups for informal
group discussions headed by individual members of our staff. It is
in these group discussions that the real heart of the program lies.
For obvious reasons, the groups are physically separated with each
individual group being provided as much privacy as meeting facilities
permit.
SECOND The second session features a local physician (volunteer)
SESSION: who serves as guest lecturer. His purpose is to deliver
a drug presentation from a medical point of view. Here
again, he is restricted to a maximum one hour time limit before we
again break into the prearranged discussion groups. I should mention
here that the discussion groups are established prior to the initial
session. Once established, the groups and leaders remain unchanged
for the remaining sessions.
THIRD The third session calls upon a practicing attorney to
SESSION: serve as guest lecturer. He is made available by the
San Diego County Bar Association on a voluntary rotating
basis. His function is to provide those in attendance with a better
understanding of narcotics laws and the detrimental effects a nar-
cotic "record" may have upon the individual. He also comments
briefly upon Juvenile Court procedures and makes special mention of
the provisions for the sealing of juvenile records under Section ?8l
of the Welfare and Institutions Code. Here again he is allottedone
hour only prior to breaking up for group discussions.
FOURTH The fourth and final session is similar in format, but
SESSION: proves to be the highlight of the series. On this occa-
sion, we present as guest lecturers, two adult narcotic
addicts. Their purpose is obvious. They candidly describe the
effects narcotics have had on t.hei r lives. They relate of their
-2-
past experiences, time in prison, etc. In our opinion, it is in
this session that the youngsters begin to see the problem "like it
is." Following this presentation, we again break into our final
group discussion meetings.
AUTHORITY Assuming the offending minor and parents express interest
FOR PRO- in the above program, enrollment procedures are entered
GRAM: into under the provisions of Section 654 of the Welfare
and Institutions Code. Briefly, that section provides
for informal supervision by the Probation Officer. This is an in-
formal agreement with the Probation Officer and the family involved.
Once entered into, the informal supervision agreement provides our
authority for involvement in the case and continues for a period
not to exceed six months.
SCREEN- Screening procedures are still in a stage of infancy;
ING PRO- however, at this level of development we are excluding
CEDURE: from the program all minors involved in the sale and/or
furnishing of narcotics and drugs to others. Additionally,
we are not including those youngsters who are found to be in posses-
sion of extraordinarily large amounts of drugs. Finally, those
with known past narcotics histories are also excluded. Selected
for participation, therefore, are those youths under the age of
eighteen years who are referred for first time narcotics offenses
and where involvement appears minimal or experimental in nature.
The attitudes of the minor and parents are also a determining factor.
Finally, and for reasons to be described below, we require a provable
narcotics case against the youngster in question.
ATTEND- Assuming a provable narcotics case, no past narcotics
ANCE: history, and receptive attitudes on the part of the minor
and parent, the family is then very candidly given the
option of enrolling in the four session program or the filing of a
petition and submitting the case to the Juvenile Court for formal
disposition. Should they select the program in lieu of court, they
are advised that attendance is mandatory and that with no excuses
accepted, failure on the part of any parent or minor to attend any
session will immediately result in the minor's ejection from the
program and the immediate filing of a petition alleging the original
offense. Juvenile Court action would then follow.
To further support attendance requirements, the minor and parents
are required to sign a contract (copy enclosed) in which they agree
to the provisions requiring attendance or court. Incidentally, the
success or failure of the program seems to rest heavily upon the
degree of enforcement of attendance requirements. Thus far we have
experienced 100$ attendance at all sessions, which indicates excel-
lent structuring on the initial contact with the families involved.
The foregoing describes the program in its entirety. Since it is
newly developed and experimental in nature, it is too early to draw
conclusions regarding its validity. To provide for a means of deter-
mining the effectiveness of the program, therefore, we are now taking
the following courses of action.
Youngsters selected for the above program are in each case
MINA- selected through a screening procedure. Using the same
TION OF screening criteria, we are selecting other youthful nar-
VALIDXTY: on tics offenders in equal numbers who would normally
-3-
qualify for the program; however, these youngsters are becoming part
of a control group. They are not being enrolled in the program. They
are purposely being withheld from participation and other approaches
are being applied in the control group youngsters. At a later date
(approximately six months) our intention i s to compare by way of
record checks and follow up those youngsters now undergoing the pro-
gram with the control group. On the basis of the subsequent follow
up contacts, we hope to determine if the program is truly effective.
Secondly, at the time of initial enrollment, each youngster selected
for participation is subjected to an attifradinal questionnaire
developed by this department (copy enclosed). The youngster then
proceeds through the program and approximately one month after com-
pletion of the series, the minor is recontacted and is required to
retake the same attitudinal test. Differences in responses to ques-
tions on the second test as compared to the first test will be
attributed to changes in attitude on the part of the minor, thus pro-
viding a second means of determining program validity.
GROUP We again wish to emphasize that the heart of the program
COMPO- appears to lie in the group discussion sessions which com-
SITION: prise the final hour of each separate program. This is
where the real "work" occurs. For our purposes, we have
found it most beneficial and conducive to avoid placing any minor in
the same group with his or her parent. Therefore, a typical group
within our program would include approximately four-five minors and
an equal number of parents. In no one group would any minor sit in
the same group as his parents. This is a local standard only and
may not apply in other areas.
STAFF: Staffing for this program has proven to be the least of
the problems. On the basis of our experiences, special-
ized training in group techniques does not appear necessary. At the
present time we are using volunteer staff, none of whom have had prior
group experiences. This is not to say that such training on the part
of staff members would not be helpful. We merely wish to point out
that such a program can be accomplished with existing personnel and
within existing training backgrounds.
GUEST Here again this has proven to be no problem. All guest
LECTUR- lecturers have been more than anxious to participate on
ERS: a voluntary basis. Professional persons within the com-
munity have willingly donated time and effort with no
thought of reimbursement. I suspect that other communities would
experience similar offers if such a program is developed. Comments
should be made, however, upon the need for careful screening of
volunteer participants. Any guest lecturer who would prove to be
sympathetic toward the use of narcotics and/or dangerous drugs, even
on an experimental basis, would probably jeopardize the effectiveness
of the program.
COSTS: Since all participating staff members and guest lecturers
are at this time operating on a volunteer basis, there have
been no costs or expenses involved. Our participating staff members,
however, are given compensatory time off for the two hours they donate
each w»pik to takp part in the program..In any case, costs are not a
factor. i\ /KENME'STH/ F . FARE ^ChiJdfj Jroba±i|«i: Officer/
By :LU*/<^ ^UG^^A 'WILLIAM MY' SERGENT 'J
Supervising Probati/on Officer
-5-
Mr. Sergent concluded his explanation of the program and inquired
if there were any questions members of the Committee would like
answered.
Dr. Binder inquired how parents and children could be forced into
a program of this nature and Mr. Sergent stated this could be done
through the Probation Department and would require the permission
of the Chief Probation Officer and the Juvenile Court Judge. He
stated he was sure there would be no reason for such a program on
a local level in North County to be approved.
Dr. Tuomi stated that this is what the North County is in need of.
Some representation from the Probation Department locally.
Mr. Fare stated that there is now in operation a small department
in Vista and they hope within the next six years, they will have
a permanent place in the North County. He stated that there are
officers in the area of North County who would be interested in
helping with such a program for North County.
Discussion was held regarding other techniques used in local communi-
ties to try and solve the problems of Narcotics and Drugs and mem-
bers of the Committee were informed that the Probation Department
was not always notified of some of the action taken in certain
communities throughout San Diego County.
Dr. Hertweck inquired what the habits of those attending this pro-
gram were durrng their 15 minute break. He inquired if they sought
out the speakers or just what their actions were.
Mr. Sergent informed him they usually would have coke or candy or
whatever the machines had to offer and broke up into their own
little groups. They were not inclined to harrass the guest speakers
which is one reason why guest speakers continued to come back
again and again on a volunteer basis.
Cmn. Neiswender inquired if there was any particular age group
where the youth is predominantly experimenting and being exposed
to drugs and narcotics.
Mr. Fare stated that now is the time to grasp for youngsters in
the 5th and 6th grade because it is available to children of this
aqe group, and Mr. Sergent added that the average age of the youths
being processed through this program is 16^; some are 14, but what
must be remembered is alot of them have been experimenting with
drugs and narcotics long before they are caught.
Dr. Tuomi inquired of Mr. Fare if a program of this nature were
organized 1ocally, could it become an Extension of the Probation
Department.
Mr. Fare stated that it could but he would like some of the people
from the Probation Department to attend a local program, should it
be formed.
Mr. Sergent stated that although the program is successful now as
presented, they are still experimenting and are considering enter-
ing the parent and the child offender into the same group discussion
after the break to see if parent and child can communicate in such
a discussion group. He stated since the children attending these
programs have asked to continue the program after its fourth and
final week, and it is now impossible to do so, the Probation Depart-
ment would like to see the program extended at least a few weeks
1onger.
-6-
In conclusion, Mr. Fare and Mr. Sargent assured the Committee that
if a program of this nature or any program that is feasible is in-
troduced to North County, the Probation Department would offer any
assistance needed.
Adjournment: 2:00 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
NORA K. DANIELS
Recording Secretary