Like a lot of other former Marylanders, I was under the impression that prevention and treatment efforts in the city of Baltimore had achieved a reasonable degree of success, at least in terms of reducing the number of drug- related fatalities.
Turns out I was wrong. In many ways, the drug problem in Baltimore is more serious than before. And we’re talking about a city already notorious for chronic addiction, to the point of having three award-winning TV series dedicated to its portrayal.
Somehow, the situation has worsened? What happened?
That’s the subject of a series of New York Times articles, from 2025.
Baltimore’s Overdose Crisis
Warning: it’s not fun reading. Some of the titles:
”Almost 6000 dead in six years…”
“ They entered treatment. Drugs, overdoses, and deaths followed.”
“…overdose deaths have plagued one generation of Black men for decades.”
“In Baltimore’s senior homes, overdoses plague a forgotten generation.”
“… the City’s strategy is silence.”
It’s that last one that really got my attention. What do they mean, the City isn’t talking? Why not?
Per the story: “The city has declined to divulge its plans or hold hearings on one of the worst public health crises in the United States, saying it does not want to jeopardize its lawsuit against drugmakers.”
Oh. It’s on the advice of their attorneys. Who no doubt are hoping for a much larger infusion of money from yet another lawsuit, and worry that public discussion and debate might interfere.
Admittedly, the lawyers have had some success. By opting out of the statewide lawsuit in favor of a separate action, the City has already managed to win $45 million from a settlement with a lesser Pharma firm. That’s instead of the $7 million payout they would have gained from sticking with the State.
Of course, a hefty chunk of that $45 million will go to the City’s expensive private attorneys. The City still comes out ahead.
And further riches may await, in yet another lawsuit against Big Pharma— this time, on a far larger scale.
Sounds like the proverbial pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.
Anyway, that’s the reason given for staying silent and avoiding public discussion of Baltimore’s past efforts to lower overdose rates. They argue it would actually jeopardize their position, legally-speaking.
Who knows? They might be right. Stranger things have happened in the world of litigation.
At the same time, people do keep overdosing and dying, apparently in record numbers. It isn’t difficult to understand the advocacy community’s desire for open public debate, of the transparent sort that might spur Government to take more direct action to address Baltimore’s many, many drug-related problems— now, rather than later.
Seriously, can you blame them?
