This bill would significantly harm public health, increase preventable disease and overdose deaths, and undermine evidence-based responses to West Virginia’s substance use crisis. By making syringe services programs (SSPs) unlawful, the legislation reverses proven interventions without offering an effective alternative.

1. Syringe Services Programs Save Lives and Prevent Disease

SSPs are one of the most well-studied public health interventions in the United States. They reduce the transmission of HIV, hepatitis B, and hepatitis C by providing sterile injection equipment and safe disposal of used syringes. Eliminating SSPs will predictably increase outbreaks of blood-borne disease—a risk West Virginia has already experienced. 

The costs of treating HIV or hepatitis C vastly exceed the modest costs of operating SSPs. This bill shifts costs from prevention to long-term medical treatment, burdening taxpayers and the health care system.

2. The Bill Undermines Harm Reduction While Claiming to Preserve It

Although the bill allows “harm reduction services” to continue, it explicitly prohibits the core intervention that makes harm reduction effective for people who inject drugs: access to sterile syringes. 

Removing syringe access while permitting referrals, education, and screenings misunderstands how harm reduction works in practice. SSPs are often the only point of contact between high-risk individuals and the health care system. Without syringe access, many participants will not engage at all—making referrals and education far less effective.

3. Increased Risk of Overdose and Death

SSPs are a major pathway for:

-Naloxone distribution 

-Overdose prevention education 

-Early engagement in treatment

When SSPs close, overdose deaths rise—not because drug use increases, but because people are pushed into more dangerous, isolated use. This bill removes trusted access points at a time when West Virginia continues to face one of the highest overdose mortality rates in the nation.

4. Criminalization Will Worsen, Not Solve, Community Concerns

The bill replaces regulation with prohibition and punishment, including daily civil penalties and injunctive relief. This approach:

-Pushes syringe distribution underground 

-Discourages safe disposal 

-Increases public needle litter 

-Reduces transparency and oversight

Regulated SSPs allow the state to set rules, require reporting, and address community concerns. Making programs unlawful removes those controls entirely.

5. The Transition Period Is Inadequate and Illogical

The bill allows a 120-day “transition of care” period while explicitly banning syringe services during that time. This creates a contradictory and ineffective transition:

-Patients are told to transition away from services they can no longer receive 

-Providers are prevented from using their primary engagement tool

-Continuity of care is disrupted rather than supported

This will result in abrupt disengagement, not thoughtful transition.

6. This Bill Ignores Evidence and Expert Consensus

Medical, public health, and addiction treatment organizations consistently support SSPs as a critical component of comprehensive substance use response. Repealing an entire regulatory framework and declaring SSPs unlawful disregards decades of evidence in favor of ideology. 

Public policy should be guided by outcomes, not optics.