Jammu and Kashmir’s proposed Rehabilitation and Socio-Economic Reintegration Scheme for Drug Abuse Victims is a welcome attempt to look at addiction beyond treatment rooms and police records. For too long, the response to drug dependence has remained limited to detoxification, counselling and law enforcement. These measures are necessary, but they do not complete the process of recovery. A person may leave a de-addiction centre physically stable, yet still return to the same unemployment, family conflict, stigma and social isolation that made recovery difficult in the first place.
The proposed three-year framework recognises this uncomfortable reality. It treats recovery as a long process that requires medical care, emotional support, family acceptance, education, skills, employment and regular follow-up. This is the right direction because addiction does not affect health alone. It damages relationships, confidence, livelihoods and a person’s place in society. The first phase, centred on treatment and stabilisation, will be crucial. Medical support and counselling must be combined with an Individual Rehabilitation Plan suited to the needs of each beneficiary. Every case is different. A school dropout, an unemployed youth, a married person with dependants and someone suffering from serious health complications cannot be placed under one standard formula. Rehabilitation must respond to the person, not merely the diagnosis. The second phase, which focuses on education, skill development, employment and family reintegration, may prove to be the most important. Many recovering individuals relapse because they return to an empty routine, financial stress and social rejection. Without work, purpose and encouragement, recovery can become fragile. Livelihood assistance should therefore not be treated as a secondary benefit. It must be seen as one of the strongest protections against relapse. The third phase, based on long-term monitoring and social inclusion, is equally necessary. Recovery is rarely smooth or predictable. There may be setbacks, emotional pressure and moments of weakness. Regular counselling, community support and timely intervention can help a person remain connected to treatment and prevent a temporary setback from becoming a complete relapse. The proposed Rehabilitation Monitoring Portal can improve coordination among departments and help track whether beneficiaries are actually receiving treatment, counselling, training and livelihood support. It can also help the administration understand which interventions are working. However, confidentiality must remain non-negotiable. Personal details of recovering individuals cannot be allowed to become a source of embarrassment, discrimination or public exposure. The scheme’s inter-departmental approach is another strong feature. Addiction cannot be handled by the Health or Social Welfare Department alone. Education, Skill Development, Employment, Police, district administrations and community organisations must work together. Official coordination must also move beyond meetings and paperwork. Delays, unclear responsibilities and routine file movement can weaken even the best policy. Families will have a major role to play. A person returning from treatment needs supervision and responsibility, but also patience and trust. Constant suspicion, humiliation and rejection can push a recovering individual back into isolation. Families should therefore receive counselling so they can support recovery without becoming either harsh or careless. The involvement of trained women volunteers and committed government employees can make the programme more approachable, especially in areas where families hesitate to seek help. Yet volunteers must be carefully selected, professionally trained and regularly guided. Good intentions alone are not enough when dealing with addiction, trauma and relapse. Starting the scheme in two badly affected districts, one in each division, is a sensible decision. The pilot should be assessed honestly. Weaknesses in staffing, training, funding, coordination and service delivery must be identified before the scheme is expanded across Jammu and Kashmir.
The real test will not be the number of people registered on a portal or the number of review meetings held. It will be the number of individuals who remain drug-free, return to education or work, rebuild family ties and regain dignity. People affected by addiction need more than sympathy. They need a dependable path back to life. This scheme can provide that path, but only if compassion is matched by professional support, accountability and sustained implementation. Moreover, the initiative deserves firm appreciation, but its success will require trained professionals, assured funding, and strict monitoring and community ownership. Authorities must act with urgency, protect confidentiality and ensure that every recovering individual receives dignity, livelihood support and a genuine second chance.