SWK 5002| Week 9: Policy Analysis and Recomendations

1

Policy Selection and Background

Tierainie C. Johnson, MS, MCAP

Capella University

SWK 5002- Social Welfare History Policy Practice

Professor Anna Richmond, LAPSW, LISW

May 10, 2026

2

Policy Selection and Background

Social policy is largely concerned with social justice. However, policies aimed at tackling

issues in society can also lead to inequality and oppression. The policy dynamic of social work is

critical in recognizing the advantages and the unforeseen outcomes of policies in the social work

field. The Controlled Substances Act is one of the key federal policies that exemplify this

tension. The policy was introduced in 1970 in response to the need by the United States to

regulate the use and distribution of drugs (Lampe, 2025). Despite aiming to safeguard the health

of the population and minimize drug abuse, the policy has been widely criticized as having

disproportionately impacted the Black and Hispanic communities and contributed to systemic

inequality. Substance use and incarceration for drug-related problems are long-standing social

justice issues that are both intersectional in nature and combine with race, socioeconomic status,

and access to medical care and legal services. The issue is not new, but an extension of historical

trends of discrimination embedded within legal and political systems. This paper explores the

mission and objectives, programs and services, and the history of the Controlled Substances Act.

Purpose of the Policy

The main aim of the Controlled Substances Act is to regulate the production, distribution,

and use of some drugs using a hierarchical classification system. This system classifies

substances into five schedules rooted in their accepted medical use, potential abuse, and potential

to cause dependency (Ortiz and Preuss, 2024). Schedule I drugs are the most dangerous and do

not have an endorsement under medical use, and the likelihood of abuse is high. Conversely,

Schedule V substances are considered to be less risky and have accepted medical use. The policy

was developed to create a unified federal effort to regulate drugs, replacing inconsistent state

regulations and giving them clear guidelines on rules of enforcement and control.

3

As Otiz and Preuss (2024) describe, the policy is a health intervention aimed at

decreasing substance abuse and safeguarding communities. Nevertheless, practically, it has acted

more as a criminal justice policy. Instead of focusing on treatment and prevention of controlled

substances, the law focuses on the punishment of possessing, distributing, and manufacturing

controlled substances. Studies have shown that such a punitive process has not helped decrease

the rate of drug use but instead has also caused a rise in mass incarceration (DEA, 2025).

Programs and Services Provided Through the Policy

The Controlled Substances Act supports numerous programs and services aimed at drug

enforcement, prevention, and treatment. The most conspicuous one is enforcement programs,

which involve federal and state agencies that control the drug-related activities, carry out

investigations, and prosecute individuals violating drug laws (Lampe, 2025). Such attempts

include surveillance, arrests, and imprisonment, which form the backbone of the policy

implementation.

Prevention programs are also part of the policy framework and entail a public education

campaign that discourages drug use. In many cases, these programs address the youth and strive

to address the issue of raising awareness of the dangers of using the substance. Though

prevention programs are important, it is often dominated by the enforcement programs that limit

their overall effectiveness.

Moreover, the policy offers assistance with treatment services. These services include

substance-abuse rehabilitation programs, counseling, and medication-assisted therapeutic

programs for individuals with substance abuse. However, these services are not equally

accessible, particularly among marginalized populations (Lampe, 2025). High cost, absence of

insurance, the fact that there are not enough treatment centers, and stigma are some of the

4

barriers that many individuals have to face. Consequently, services offered by the policy fail to

sufficiently respond to the needs of all the impacted populations.

Target Population for Programs and Services

The target population groups covered in programs and services in the Controlled

Substances Act would include individual users of controlled substances, persons at risk of use of

controlled substances, and victims of crime related to drug use. Ideally, this policy is applicable

to all people irrespective of race or socioeconomic status. However, in actuality, its impacts have

disproportionately affected the Black and Hispanic communities.

As Rouhani et al. (2023) report, there is a comparatively equal distribution of drug use

across racial lines. Minority groups have a significantly higher likelihood of being arrested,

convicted, and imprisoned for committing drug crimes. Such a disproportion refers to structural,

deep-rooted ills of the criminal justice system. The criminal justice system has long-term

implications on many people in these communities, including job loss, housing insecurity, and

social stigma. The findings are also part of the poverty and inequality cycle that leaves the

affected individuals in a difficult situation where they can hardly reconnect with society.

Connection Between the Policy and the Social Justice Problem

The Controlled Substances Act is directly related to the social justice issue of racial

inequality in the enforcement of the act and the mass incarceration. The problem has been

lingering for decades and appears to be a general tendency of systemic discrimination in the

United States (Sonderlund et al., 2022). Although the policy was meant to deal with drug abuse,

the implementation of the policy has helped cause unequal results among various racial and

ethnic groups.

5

This social justice issue is a continuation of historical inequalities that have never been

resolved completely. Criminalization of drug use has resulted in an unequal distribution of

incarceration and other adverse consequences related to social and economic disadvantage

towards the marginalized communities. Such inequalities do harm the processes of social justice,

as they restrict access to opportunities and perpetuate inequality. As Cohen et al. (2022) indicate,

the policies towards punishment for drugs do not work better compared with public health

policies that emphasize treatment and harm reduction. The Controlled Substances Act did not

prove effective in addressing the actual causes of substance abuse, such as poverty, trauma, and

lack of access to healthcare (Cohen et al., 2022). Consequently, the policy still creates a social

justice issue of its own that the policy was meant to address.

Historical Issues and Context of the Policy

The Controlled Substances Act was adopted during a period of many social and political

changes in the late 1960s and early 1970s. Through this period, related issues such as the

perceived threats to the population and the growing visibility around substance use informed

policymakers to seek stringent regulatory actions. Congress passed the legislation with very

strong bipartisan support and was signed into law by Richard Nixon, who framed drug abuse as a

national crisis. As much as the policy was presented as a required public health response, it was

also influenced by political interests and societal biases. Other academics show that the systemic

enforcement measures were disproportionately directed elsewhere at Black communities and

political activists (Manneh, 2025).

The policy voting outcomes showed that there was a vast majority among political

parties, which is possibly an indication of a single attitude towards drug control. Leadership in

the legislature at that time pointed out that they needed to have a comprehensive framework that

6

would regulate the use of the substances and reduce crime. The policy was also expanded over

the years as tougher sentencing legislation reforms were introduced, and inflexible measures of

enforcement were also put in place. These tendencies enhanced a punitive approach and resulted

in significant increases in incarceration rates among the minority population. Such inequalities

are beginning to be accepted and reforms encouraged by policymakers today, although it is a

slow and uneven process.

The historical aspects of the policy continue to shape the implementation process. The

emphasis on enforcement has directed resources to policing and incarceration at the expense of

prevention and treatment services (Washington, 2021). This lack of balance has constrained the

efficiency of the policy in addressing substance use as a health issue in society. In addition, the

historical context of racial disparities has created a mistrust factor among the affected

communities, which contributes to the resistance to responses and support.

Conclusion

The Controlled Substances Act illustrates that a policy formulated to address a burning

social problem can contribute to inequality and injustice. Even though the policy was developed

to regulate drug usage and have a positive impact on the overall health of the population, its

implementation has disproportionately impacted marginalized populations and has increased

systemic inequalities. The policy has placed a lot of emphasis on enforcing the programs and

services instead of placing much emphasis on preventing and treating, which the policy has not

addressed.

7

References

Cohen, A., Vakharia, S. P., Netherland, J., & Frederique, K. (2022). How the war on drugs

impacts social determinants of health beyond the criminal legal system. Annals of

Medicine, 54(1), 2024–2038. https://doi.org/10.1080/07853890.2022.2100926

DEA. (2025). The controlled substances act. Www.dea.gov. https://www.dea.gov/drug-

information/csa

Lampe, J. R. (2025, January 22). The Controlled Substances Act (CSA): A Legal Overview for

the 119th Congress. Congress.gov. https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R45948

Manneh, T. (2025, June 2). Controlled Substances, controlled people: How drug laws reinforce

colonial power structures. Drug Science. https://www.drugscience.org.uk/controlled-

substances-controlled-people

Ortiz, N. R., & Preuss, C. V. (2024). Controlled Substance Act. In www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov.

StatPearls Publishing. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK574544/

Rouhani, S., Tomko, C., Silberzahn, B. E., Weicker, N. P., & Sherman, S. G. (2023). Racial

disparities in drug arrest before and after “de facto” decriminalization in Baltimore.

American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 65(4).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2023.04.004

Sonderlund, A. L., Charifson, M., Ortiz, R., Khan, M., Schoenthaler, A., & Williams, N. J.

(2022). A comprehensive framework for operationalizing structural racism in health

research: The association between mass incarceration of Black people in the U.S. and

adverse birth outcomes. SSM - Population Health, 19, 101225.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssmph.2022.101225

8

Washington, M. (2021, November). Beyond Jails: Community-Based Strategies for Public

Safety. Vera Institute of Justice. https://www.vera.org/beyond-jails-community-based-

strategies-for-public-safety