Why We’re Suing to Ensure People Held at Grand Traverse County’s Jail will be Provided with Prescription Medication for Treatment of Opioid Use Disorder 
By Syeda Davidson 

Imagine being in excruciating pain, forced to endure needless agony as the people responsible for your care cruelly block access to desperately needed medication that would relieve your suffering.  

Cyrus Patson doesn’t need to imagine that nightmare scenario. He experienced it firsthand earlier this year while being held in Michigan’s Grand Traverse County Jail. And he – along with others in similar circumstances -- will be forced to endure it again unless the jail immediately changes its policies. 

The affliction plaguing Mr. Patson, a 21-year-old white man, is clinically referred to as “opioid use disorder (OUD),” a chronic brain disease characterized by the persistent use of opioids despite their harmful consequences. To treat Mr. Patson, his personal physician prescribed Suboxone, a medicine widely used to prevent the painful withdrawal symptoms associated with opioid addiction. Despite repeated entreaties from Mr. Patson’s physician to provide him with desperately needed medication, jail officials chose to let him suffer in agony. 

With the potential of another stint in jail looming, Mr. Patson is again facing the prospect of being forced to endure the life-threatening torture of withdrawal and the increased likelihood of a potentially fatal relapse if jail officials continue to refuse to provide people like him with Suboxone. Healthcare experts widely agree that it and other medications are the only appropriate way to treat OUD. 

Mr. Patson is far from alone in fearing what will happen if he’s again denied the medication he so desperately needs. 

Stephen Rich, who is also facing the possibility of serving time in the Grand Traverse County Jail, is another one of the millions of Americans afflicted with OUD. Now 51, he became addicted to opioids while in his 20s after being prescribed powerful pain medication when he broke his back in a work-related accident. When the prescriptions stopped, he was already addicted and turned to heroin. Addiction cast a pall over his life for decades. A pipefitter by trade, his drug use made it impossible to remain steadily employed. Relations with his family suffered. 

Then, two years ago, he began taking Suboxone under the care of a physician. The medication was transformative. 

“For me, Suboxone has been a miracle,” he says. “It changed the way my mind works. I’m no longer always thinking about getting the next high. It allowed me to finally start living a normal life again.”  

Awaiting sentencing on charges unrelated to drug use, he’s terrified of what will happen if, like Mr. Patson, jail officials refuse to provide the Suboxone he’s been prescribed. The inevitability of being forced to go through withdrawals if that happens haunts him. Even worse, he says, is the likelihood of relapse once he’s out of jail. 

“If the jail forces me to go off Suboxone, I think, without a doubt, I will be looking to get high again as soon as I’m released,” he says.  

Which means the possibility of an overdose looms, as people who have recently endured cold turkey withdrawal from OUD medication like Suboxone are particularly vulnerable to overdosing due to the reduced tolerance to opioids that results from being on the medication. On the other hand, it has been shown that providing incarcerated people with Suboxone and other medications designed to treat OUD greatly reduces the chances of that happening.  

 “A recent Rhode Island Department of Corrections study examined the effect that providing medications for OUD during incarceration had on overdose deaths post release. After the program’s implementation, post-incarceration deaths decreased 61% compared with the previous year,” The Pew Charitable Trusts noted in a report about the issue released last year. “Indeed, the reduction in deaths post-release among incarcerated persons accounted for much of the state’s 12% reduction overall in overdose deaths.” 

Using Suboxone and similar medications to treat incarcerated people with OUD is far from novel.  

The New York City Department of Correction has provided medications for treatment of the disorder since 1987. California, Vermont, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Washington, along with Rhode Island, have all successfully launched similar programs. 

As reported in the Detroit Free Press, the Michigan Department of Corrections began using Suboxone and similar medications in 2019. 

“In an important move that reinforces addiction as an illness — not a moral failing — for which everyone deserves treatment, Michigan is joining the national trend of offering medication-assisted treatment (MAT) to prison inmates. …. The medications reduce cravings and soften withdrawal symptoms and are considered the gold standard in opioid addiction treatment,” the paper noted. 

Denying effective treatment to people such as Mr. Patson and Mr. Rich isn’t just dangerous. It is also illegal. Like numerous other courts, a federal appeals court ruled in 2019 that a person incarcerated in a Maine jail was entitled to MAT, and withholding it was a violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. 

That same assertion is made in a lawsuit the ACLU of Michigan and the law firm Goodwin Procter have filed in federal court on Mr. Patson’s behalf. The lawsuit also contends that denial of the medication needed to treat Mr. Patson’s disorder is a violation of his Eighth Amendment protections against cruel and unusual punishment.  

The need to make effective treatment available to people being held in Michigan’s jails is abundantly clear. As pointed out in the lawsuit: 

“The opioid epidemic has been devastating communities for decades, and its reach continues to grow at an exponential rate. In 1999, 118 people in Michigan died from opioid overdoses. By 2018, that number had grown to 2,036. Nationally, opioid overdoses are the leading cause of death for Americans under 50 years old. In 2019, 70,630 people died from drug overdoses—and 70% of those deaths involved an opioid. Every day, 136 people die from an opioid overdose—equivalent to one person every 10.5 minutes.” 

The terrible consequences of denying effective treatment are also clear. In one particularly horrifying incident, video from Macomb County Jail shows the death throes of David Stojcevski, jailed for failing to pay $700 in traffic fines. In the video, Mr. Stojcevski can be seen sprawled naked on the floor of his cell, convulsing for days as he went through withdrawals from medicine prescribed by his physician to treat his opioid use disorder, which his jailers refused to provide. As a consequence, 17 days after being locked up, Mr. Stojcevski was dead. 

Although no organization tracks how many people die from drug withdrawal in jail Mother Jones magazine in 2017 magazine found 20 lawsuits, filed during the previous two years, alleging that an incarcerated person had died from opiate withdrawal complications. That number likely represents just a fraction of all jail withdrawal deaths, the magazine reported. 

Fortunately, Mr. Patson survived his ordeal this past summer, but there is no guarantee he will survive if forced to undergo cold turkey withdrawal again. Mr. Patson described his experience this summer to the Traverse City Record-Eagle newspaper this way: 

“Your bones – it’s like they’re bruised. You’re sweating and freezing at the same time. You can’t sleep. Your anxiety is just insane. You have no appetite, just diarrhea and vomiting. It kills.” 

No one should be subjected to that kind of torture. A victory in Grand Traverse County will put jail officials across the state on notice that the time has finally come for them to recognize the many benefits of providing medication to people with opioid use disorder and put an end to this senseless cruelty. 

ACLU of Michigan Legal Director Dan Korobkin Named Michigan’s 2021 Lawyer of the Year

A group of his peers has just confirmed what everyone familiar with legal director Dan Korobkin’s long history of achievement with the ACLU of Michigan already knows: He’s among the very best at what he does.

Last Thursday, at an awards ceremony honoring leaders in the law, Dan was named Michigan Lawyers Weekly’s Lawyer of the Year for 2021.

“You would be hard-pressed to find someone who won’t tell you that Dan is one of the most brilliant legal minds in Michigan and, perhaps, the nation,” the publication pointed out in an article announcing the award.

It is an incredible – and incredibly well-deserved -- honor. Raised in Michigan with a degree from Yale Law School, Dan was described this way by Michigan Lawyers Weekly:

“With his credentials, Korobkin could easily work almost anywhere that he chooses in the legal field. Yet he has consistently chosen a career where he can dedicate his expertise to serving the public. Korobkin’s work with the ACLU, an impact organization that serves underrepresented populations, shows he is someone who cares less about the recognition he receives for his work and more about making a difference.”

As the magazine also noted, Dan’s “advocacy and leadership, particularly in the civil rights arena, span a variety of issues, from LGBT rights to freedom of speech and religion to criminal law reform.”

Included among his many accomplishments is successfully litigating Hill v. Snyder, a 10-year fight challenging the practice of sentencing juveniles to life in prison without the possibility of parole.

Having joined the organization as a staff attorney in 2008, Dan became the ACLU of Michigan’s legal director two years ago. In that position, Dan oversees all the cases handled by the organization’s team of attorneys and outside counsel. Always modest, he deflected praise to the organization overall.

“This is really the time to recognize the work of all of my colleagues who have made this possible, doing civil rights and civil liberties work all over the state to protect people’s constitutional rights,” he said.

A man with impeccable integrity and the highest ethical standards, he also possesses a playful sense of humor, a gentle demeanor, and a long-held love for “Star Trek: The Next Generation.”

We could not be more proud, or grateful, to have Dan as a colleague and one of this organization’s most steadfast leaders. The desire to defend civil rights and achieve justice is part of his fiber.

“I have always been acutely aware of the impediments and injustices faced by so many others, as well as our own obligation, as a society, to help clear away those impediments and see justice done,” he said. “The most noble tradition and calling of the legal profession is to put those ideals into action.”

He’s certainly done that.

Allowing all Michigan residents to obtain driver’s licenses – including immigrants without documentation – benefits the entire state 

By: Resilda Karafili 

As someone who came to the United States at 9 years old as an undocumented immigrant, I know firsthand how much hardship is endured by people prevented from getting a driver’s license because of their immigration status.  

Because of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, and a lawsuit filed by the ACLU of Michigan, I’ve also experienced the life-altering impact being able to drive legally can have. 

All my experiences have taught me this: Michigan will be a safer, more prosperous place if everyone – including all immigrants without documentation – can access driver’s licenses. 

A native of Albania, I was sent by my parents to live with my grandparents in Michigan in 2000. My homeland was just emerging from a bloody civil war and remained a dangerous place. My family wanted me to be safe and have as bright a future as possible. I did all I could to fulfill that promise, working hard in high school and getting accepted to the University of Michigan, where I majored in psychology, sociology, and political science. 

Attending the university wasn’t easy. Because I lacked documentation, I was unable to obtain any financial assistance and had to pay the much higher tuition required of foreign students. Adding to that immense financial burden was the fact that I had to live on campus rather than make the short commute from my home because there was no public transportation available. I couldn’t get a driver’s license, and there was no way I’d get behind the wheel of a car without one. 

As I contemplated my future, I felt hopeless. Despite being near graduation with a triple major and a nearly perfect GPA, I was unsure where I could work without employment authorization, which I couldn’t obtain because of my immigration status. I felt that all my hard work and the financial contribution of my family was for nothing. 

Fortunately, as I prepared to graduate, the trajectory of my life dramatically improved because of two things. First, the implementation of the DACA program in 2012 allowed DREAMers like me to remain in this country and find work without constantly fearing deportation.  

The other was a 2012 lawsuit filed by a coalition of civil rights organizations that included the ACLU of Michigan. I was one of the plaintiffs in that lawsuit, which challenged the state’s policy of denying driver’s licenses to immigrant youth covered by DACA. Within months of that suit being filed, the Michigan Secretary of State reversed course and allowed DREAMers to obtain driver’s licenses. 

In a flash, a new world opened up to me. 

People who have always been able to drive have no idea how difficult life is without a license. I felt caged. Finally getting a license was like being handed a key to get out of that cage. I reveled in the new-found sense of freedom being able to drive provided. 

I ultimately found work at a firm specializing in immigration law, first as a legal assistant then moving up to become a senior paralegal and office manager. It is a place I love working at, but I would have never landed here if I didn’t have a license that allowed me to make the commute. 

I was also able to help care for my ill mother, who had immigrated to this country and become a citizen, and my U.S. citizen stepfather when he was diagnosed with the cancer that eventually took his life. Without the ability to drive, they would have had no way to get to and from their many doctor and hospital appointments. If I didn’t have my license, I don’t know what they would have done. 

Today, I still work at the law firm and now also attend law school at the University of Michigan. Life is moving in a good direction. I no longer feel hopeless. Instead, I’m looking forward to becoming a lawyer, something I had dreamt about for decades. 

I can say with certainty I wouldn’t be where I am today without a driver’s license, and am profoundly grateful to everyone who helped make that possible, including the ACLU of Michigan. I feel like the sun is shining down on me, and have the ACLU to thank for that.  

But there’s a large, dark cloud that continues to hang over all of Michigan. Although I can legally drive, there are tens of thousands of people without documentation in this state who are barred from being able to do something so essential.  

It wasn’t always that way. Until 2008, all Michiganders had the ability to obtain a driver’s license after passing a driver’s test and meeting other requirements. Then the Michigan Legislature changed the law, and life immediately became infinitely harder in immigrant communities throughout the state. 

This change made us all less safe and less prosperous. 

In “Taking Our Foot Off the Brakes” – a 2019 report produced by the nonprofit Michigan League of Public Policy – the benefits of allowing driver’s licenses for all residents are spelled out. A big one is this:  

“Over the course of three years, 55,000 Michiganders would apply for a driver’s license, leading to 20,000 new vehicle purchases. These new licenses and vehicles would boost state revenue by $13.5 million and contribute $12 million in recurring revenue, $9 million of which would be from sales and gas taxes related to vehicle ownership. Over the course of 10 years, this policy would generate nearly $100 million for the state of Michigan.” 

In addition to generating revenue, changing the law would also increase safety. 

“To register a passenger vehicle in Michigan, one must have auto insurance,” the report notes.  “Roads are safer for everyone and accidents are resolved more smoothly when more drivers have passed a standardized driving test and are insured.” 

It is hard to fathom why, given all these benefits, our lawmakers still haven’t embraced a change where everybody doesn’t just win, but we all win big. Whatever the motivation, failing to expand access to driver’s licenses hurts Michiganders.

To address the problem, two pieces of legislation designated the “Drive SAFE” bills (HB 4835 and HB 4836) were introduced in the Michigan House earlier this year. Sadly, those bills have yet to be heard in committee. We can ill afford to miss this opportunity to do what 17 other states have already done and make driver’s licenses accessible to every resident. 

Although I found a way to survive without a license as a student, many people are compelled to drive – whether they have a license or not – because they have families to provide for and need a car to get to work in a state that is sorely lacking in public transit. 

Thanks to the work of many, I woke up one morning to a world opened wide because of the newfound ability to obtain something as basic as a driver’s license. Every Michigander should be able to share in the same freedom and opportunity to thrive.