Portugal’s model decriminalized possession but compelled users into assessment and sanctioned non‑compliance, while investing heavily in treatment. Oregon and British Columbia removed criminal penalties without a robust sanction‑and‑diversion system or adequate capacity, and disorder surged.
— It shifts drug policy debate from 'criminalize vs decriminalize' to the specific enforcement and treatment mechanisms required for decriminalization to work.
Isegoria
2025.09.29
78% relevant
The article cites Oregon’s 2021 drug decriminalization followed by proliferating open‑air markets and overdose deaths in Portland as evidence that decriminalization without sanctions/diversion and treatment capacity backfires—mirroring the argument that Portugal’s success hinged on compulsion plus services.
Isegoria
2025.08.26
93% relevant
The article details Portugal’s dissuasion commissions and sanction powers (bans, fines, property confiscation, wage garnishment) that coercively divert users to treatment, and contrasts this with Oregon’s Measure 110, where 81% ignored tickets, treatment capacity was lacking, overdoses rose ~50% (2021–2023), and policy was reversed in 2024.
2025.08.25
95% relevant
The piece contrasts Portugal’s dissuasion commissions and coercive treatment with Oregon and British Columbia’s consequence‑free decriminalization, tying those design differences to overdose and disorder spikes and subsequent policy reversals.
Adam Zivo
2025.08.22
100% relevant
Portugal’s 'dissuasion commissions' with powers like wage garnishment and property sanctions contrasted with Oregon/BC’s largely consequence‑free approach.
2025.08.21
85% relevant
By backing Mayor Eric Adams’s Compassionate Interventions Act and citing a U.S. survey (lower dropout under involuntary treatment) and a Thai study (year‑long cessation linked to compulsory detention), the piece argues that coercive elements can make treatment effective—mirroring the claim that decriminalization only works with sanctions and mandated assessment.