An original, demographically representative survey of 2,131 Americans estimates what drives public support for both supportive and punitive policies aimed at the opioid epidemic.

📋 Survey Design and Sample

The study uses a nationally representative survey (n = 2,131) to estimate determinants of public support for a range of policies intended to combat the opioid epidemic. The survey distinguishes between policies framed as supportive (services and treatment) and those framed as punitive.

🔎 Key Drivers of Attitudes

• Individuals who attribute the epidemic to the personal choices of people with substance use disorders, conservatives, and respondents high in racial resentment are consistently more likely to support punitive policies and less likely to favor supportive policies.
• Respondents with a personal connection to someone struggling with opioid use disorder generally favor supportive policies but display more nuanced (mixed) attitudes toward punitive measures.

📈 Levels of Support Observed

• Overwhelming majority support for all supportive policy options except supervised injection sites.
• Roughly 50% of respondents supported the set of punitive policy choices.

⚖️ Why It Matters

These results show that public opinion about opioid policy is shaped by blame attribution, political ideology, and racial attitudes, while personal experience with opioid use disorder increases support for assistance. The findings clarify which constituencies back punishment versus support and inform how stigma, ideology, and social ties may constrain or enable different policy responses to the opioid crisis.