The government’s decision to extend health insurance coverage for the rehabilitation of people addicted to illegal drugs has sparked heated debate in online communities. The decision was based on the belief that drug addiction is a disease that can be cured, but critics are questioning the appropriateness of covering treatment costs for “criminals” through public insurance.
The Ministry of Health and Welfare made the decision on 28 November in a bid to address growing concerns about drug addiction and change the perception of drug addiction as a treatable disease. The new policy is expected to take effect in the first half of next year.
Previously, national health insurance coverage was limited to those who had received a court order for treatment or probation. However, in recognition of the increasing prevalence of drug addiction, the ministry has decided to extend the scope to those under ‘treatment protection’.
People under treatment protection include those released from prison after being convicted of illegal drug use and juvenile drug addicts. The number of such people was around 420 last year.
For treatment covered by the National Health Service, patients usually pay about 30 per cent of the total cost, while the National Health Service covers the remaining 70 per cent.
In the past, drug addicts had to pay the full cost of their rehabilitation, as their health insurance did not cover the cost. However, the high costs associated with inpatient care and other forms of treatment have hindered their ability to actively pursue rehabilitation.
Those who support the government’s decision to extend health insurance coverage to more drug addicts say that it will be beneficial to society in the long term, as active treatment could reduce the number of repeat drug offenders.
Opponents, however, argue that the government should not bear most of the financial burden of treating people involved in criminal activity.
Social media platforms have become a battleground for opposing views, with comments such as: “Only hardworking people shoulder the burden,” “Drug addicts should face consequences,” “Help those with rare diseases and low-income people first,” and “Why should the entire nation share the burden of treating those who have committed illegal acts?”
One netizen expressed concern about potential abuse: “Receiving social benefits after taking drugs for pleasure is unacceptable. Drug suppliers will only benefit”.
On the other hand, supporters argue that the opposition’s perspective is short-sighted. They emphasise that the use of health insurance for drug treatment can make a positive contribution to society by enabling faster and more effective interventions.
The government’s decision to pay for drug treatment is based on the understanding that an enforcement-only approach makes it difficult to eradicate drug abuse.
The recidivism rate for people returning to drugs was 36 per cent in 2021, about 1.5 times higher than for other crimes, according to data from the Supreme Prosecutor’s Office.
“Despite past challenges due to limited budgets, we aim to increase treatment opportunities by expanding health insurance coverage and providing budgetary support for personal burdens,” said a Ministry of Health official.
“We plan to improve the quality of services, reduce the reluctance of medical professionals through appropriate compensation, and ensure timely payment and fee improvements for health care institutions.”
