Decriminalization vs. Legalization of Controlled Substances: Definitions, an Argument and the Portugal and Oregon Examples

Discussion: Decriminalization vs. legalization of controlled substances

Define the terms “decriminalization” and “legalization” of controlled substances. Make an argument in favor of or opposed to one of these strategies. Provide an example of a jurisdiction where this strategy is being used. Is it successful at reducing substance abuse in that jurisdiction?

Original example for study purposes (about 720 words). This model argues in favor of decriminalization; you can take the opposing position if you support it with evidence.

Definitions

Decriminalization means removing criminal penalties for possessing small amounts of a controlled substance for personal use while keeping the drug illegal. Possession may still bring a civil fine, a referral to treatment or another administrative response, but it does not lead to arrest, a criminal record or jail. Manufacturing and selling drugs remain crimes. Legalization goes further: it makes the production, sale and use of a substance lawful and regulates it, much like alcohol and tobacco, often with licensing, age limits and taxes. Many U.S. states have legalized cannabis for adult use, but no U.S. state has legalized drugs such as heroin or methamphetamine.

My Position: In Favor of Decriminalization Paired With Treatment

I support decriminalizing personal possession of drugs when it is combined with a strong treatment and harm reduction system. Substance use disorder is a health condition, and arresting people for possession rarely helps them recover. A criminal record can make it harder to find a job and housing, which are two of the most important supports for recovery. Criminal enforcement also falls unevenly on poor communities and communities of color, and it consumes police, court and jail resources that could be spent on serious crime. At the same time, I do not support full legalization of “hard” drugs, because commercial markets could increase availability, marketing and use, as the opioid epidemic showed when legal prescription opioids were aggressively promoted.

Example: Portugal

Portugal decriminalized the personal possession of all drugs in July 2001. Possessing more than about a ten-day supply is still treated as trafficking, but people found with smaller amounts are referred to regional “Commissions for the Dissuasion of Drug Addiction,” panels that typically include legal, health and social work professionals. The commissions can encourage treatment, impose fines or other sanctions or take no action, and the reform was accompanied by expanded treatment, harm reduction and social reintegration services (Hughes & Stevens, 2010).

Has it been successful? The evidence suggests that Portugal’s approach reduced several drug-related harms. Hughes and Stevens (2010) found that after decriminalization, Portugal saw reductions in problematic drug use, drug-related harms such as HIV infections among people who inject drugs, and prison overcrowding, along with increased uptake of treatment. They noted only small increases in reported drug use among adults, and these were similar to trends in neighboring countries. In other words, decriminalization did not cause the explosion in drug use that critics predicted, and it reduced the harms associated with drug use.

However, Portugal’s model is not a cure. Recent reporting describes rising overdoses over the past three years, with cocaine involved in most fatal cases, and wastewater testing has found increasing cocaine use in some areas, such as Almada (Cardoso, 2026). These trends suggest that decriminalization must be continually supported with funding and adapted to new drug markets.

A Cautionary Comparison: Oregon

Oregon’s Measure 110, approved by voters in 2020, decriminalized possession of small amounts of drugs and promised expanded treatment funded by cannabis tax revenue. Implementation was slow, few people used the treatment hotline, and public drug use became more visible during the fentanyl crisis. In 2024, the legislature restored criminal penalties for possession, effective September 1, 2024, while creating “deflection” programs that steer people to treatment. A study published in JAMA Psychiatry found no statistically significant change in fatal overdose rates in Oregon during the first year after decriminalization compared with similar states (HealthDay, 2023), and a 2025 state audit found that the program lacked reliable data, coordination and consistent deflection options across counties (Right Now Oregon, 2025).

The difference between Portugal and Oregon supports my position. Portugal paired decriminalization with a structured referral system and treatment capacity, while Oregon removed penalties before building the treatment system. Decriminalization is most successful as part of a public health strategy, not as a stand-alone change.

Conclusion

Decriminalization treats drug use as a health issue rather than a crime, while legalization creates regulated legal markets. Portugal’s experience shows that decriminalization combined with treatment can reduce drug-related harms without large increases in use, although new challenges require ongoing investment. Oregon’s experience shows that without a strong treatment system, decriminalization can lose public support. For these reasons, I support decriminalization of personal possession as part of a well-funded, health-centered strategy.

References

Cardoso, I. (2026, March 18). Why Lisbon and Porto are beating Europe’s drug problem—but Almada tells a troubling story. The Portugal Post. https://theportugalpost.com/posts/why-lisbon-and-porto-are-beating-europes-drug-problembut-almada-tells-a-troubling-story

HealthDay. (2023, September 29). Drug decriminalization not tied to change in fatal drug overdose rates. https://www.healthday.com/healthpro-news/public-health/drug-decriminalization-not-tied-to-change-in-fatal-drug-overdose-rates-2665747809.html

Hughes, C. E., & Stevens, A. (2010). What can we learn from the Portuguese decriminalization of illicit drugs? British Journal of Criminology, 50(6), 999–1022. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azq038

Right Now Oregon. (2025, December 17). Audit says Measure 110 falls short on coordination and measurable outcomes, reforms necessary. https://rightnoworegon.com/2025/12/17/audit-says-measure-110-falls-short-on-coordination-and-measurable-outcomes-reforms-necessary

More model assignments posted today

• Harley-Davidson brand management case
• Milestone 7 branding strategy
• Psychology job advertisement assignment
• Sport communication and leadership study guide
• Technology and crime