A recent story on the large number of sober houses and halfway house programs operating in New London raised several concerns, among them the fact that no one has a handle on how many there are and where they are all located. Based on her reporting, Day Staff Writer Karen Florin placed the number at “more than 30.”

These houses, where multiple and an ever changing numbers of patients are supposed to have the best opportunity to recover from alcohol or drug addiction, provide a special challenge for first responders. Police and fire personnel should know in advance of a call what they are dealing with.

The city should consider an ordinance that would require the registering of these homes, including updated contact information about the personnel in charge, the organization running the facility, and its ownership.

The story also left troubling doubts about how serious some of these operations are in their stated mission to get people the support they need to get sober. Accounts in the reporting include instances of drug overdoses in the homes and of those serious about recovery having to live in an environment where fellow residents continue to use.

The state has never done a good job of documenting the effectiveness of programs like those run by Stonington Institute in achieving the goal of lives freed from addiction. Are people truly being helped or are these halfway houses constantly rotating individuals back through the program, generating revenues for these for-profit operations? The legislature should demand answers.

The nonprofit Southeastern Council on Alcohol and Drug Dependence appears to provide a better model, in its commitment to helping clients get sober, in assuring a manager is on duty, in its frequent substance abuse testing of clients and in keeping city officials informed about its halfway houses.

Recovery is difficult. And certainly many placed in these sober houses lack the proper motivation, often under order of the courts rather than due to honest acknowledgement that they need help and must change. That is no excuse for those operating the homes, however, not to do their job right and to protect those committed to getting sober.

The recent article suggests the need for closer monitoring by both the state and city.