I've been a resident of two sober houses in New London and one in Groton. Your criticism of these sober houses' lack of proper management and effective regulation is well deserved. However, the problems run much deeper than the state might be willing to consider.

Anyone who has lived in a sober house knows that the landlord's primary concern is money. From the moment you arrive, your ability to pay rent is the landlord/house manager's biggest concern, and you are constantly under pressure through not-so-subtle threats to make sure it is paid.

Most sober houses have residents sign an agreement which, along with a promise to pay rent on time, may include mandatory attendance of 12-step meetings and in some cases church, as a requirement for living in the house. These stipulations are rarely enforced and seem to have been added to impress whatever regulatory agency might come snooping around. It's obvious from the start that the landlord's focus is money. Your actual recovery is rarely a concern.

Oversight, supervision, and management of these sober houses is a responsibility often given to one of the residents, usually a long-timer, but in some case simply someone who's older than the others, or whose personality lends itself to the job of collecting money and keeping people in line.

A sober house in Groton was recently closed when the owner of the house passed away. The house manager at the time robbed the remaining residents of their rent money and moved to Massachusetts. That sober house, in particular, had a string of house managers who took advantage of the fact that the owner was ill and took the residents rent money for themselves.

For anyone who has lived in a sober house, such examples are not surprising. Neither is the use of drugs and alcohol in these houses. Sober houses are usually the easiest places to find drugs or at least find someone who will get you drugs.

What the state doesn't understand and probably doesn't want to consider, is that sober houses are nothing more than cheap rent alternatives for people unable to secure an apartment. If you have a job and can afford the rent plus a deposit, it beats living in the homeless shelter. However, the drawbacks include not knowing who you'll be sharing a room with and not having much of a choice in the matter. Landlords fill their beds with anyone who has the money to pay, without considering potential conflicts.

Anyone who finds himself or herself in a situation that requires the services of a sober house is in a position of being taken advantage of. Fresh from rehab or detox, with nowhere to live, possibly unemployed and broke, you don't have many options. You find yourself at the mercy of whatever support the state offers and have to jump through a seemingly endless number of hoops to get it. At the same time, your landlord is reminding you of the rent, you're trying to get to meetings, look for jobs, meet with probation, and figure out some way to eat.

In my experience, a sober house will offer no assistance whatsoever other than providing — for a price — a place to sleep. What a recovering addict needs above all is support, not another greedy landlord with his hand out, adding stress to the addict’s already over-stressed life.

Daniel Beyfuss lives in Groton.