Involuntary Commitment for Substance Use: Addiction Care Professionals Must Reject Enabling Coercion and Patient Harm.
Journal
Journal of addiction medicine
ISSN: 1935-3227
Titre abrégé: J Addict Med
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 101306759
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Historique:
pubmed:
15
5
2021
medline:
24
8
2021
entrez:
14
5
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Ethical and epidemiological concerns should mobilize addiction care providers to deploy their expertise and collective influence to challenge the use of state power to coerce people into treatment settings-especially when such settings often diverge from best clinical practices. Troublingly, with few notable exceptions, the voices of professional organizations on this issue have been largely lacking. This issue of the Journal includes a timely manuscript that sheds light on this resounding silence: "Civil Commitment for Substance Use Disorders: A National Survey of Addiction Medicine Physicians" by Jain et al. provides important and novel insights into the beliefs of physicians regarding civil commitment statutes. This study distributed a web-based survey to physician-members of the American Society of Addiction Medicine with questions gauging awareness of, attitudes toward, and experiences with civil commitment for individuals with substance use disorder. Surprisingly, the study found that the overwhelming majority of addiction medicine providers supported the application of civil commitment for substance use disorder-60.7% reported being in favor of its use whereas only 21.5% reported being opposed.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33989262
doi: 10.1097/ADM.0000000000000848
pii: 01271255-202108000-00005
doi:
Types de publication
Editorial
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
280-282Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 American Society of Addiction Medicine.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors report no conflicts of interest.
Références
Haley DF, Saitz R. The opioid epidemic during the COVID-19 pandemic. JAMA [Internet] 2020.
Health in Justice Action Lab. Laws Authorizing Involuntary Commitment for Substance Use. Health in Justice Action Lab [Internet]. 2018; Available from: https://lawatlas.org/datasets/civil-commitment-for-substance-users .
Beletsky L, Tomasini-Joshi D. “Treatment Facilities” Aren’t What You Think They Are. The New York Times [Internet]. 2019 Sep 3; Available from: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/03/opinion/opioid-jails-treatment-facilities.html .
Beletsky L, Parmet WE, Sarpatwari A. Expanding coercive treatment is the wrong solution for the opioid crisis (updated). Health Aff Blog [Internet] 2016.
Jain A, Christopher PP, Fisher CE, Choi CJ, Appelbaum PS. Civil commitment for substance use disorders: a national survey of addiction medicine physicians. J Addict Med 2021; 15:285–291.
Brooks RA. Psychiatrists’ opinions about involuntary civil commitment: results of a national survey. J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2007; 35 (2):219–228.
Klag S, O’Callaghan F, Creed P. The use of legal coercion in the treatment of substance abusers: an overview and critical analysis of thirty years of research. Subst Use Misuse 2005; 40 (12):1777–1795.
Massachusetts Department of Public Health. Section 35 Commission Treatment Statistics from BSAS Programs. Massachusetts Department of Public Health [Internet]. 2019; Available from: https://www.mass.gov/doc/presentation-on-dph-opioid-and-civil-commitment-data/download .
Christopher PP, Appelbaum PS, Stein MD. Criminalization of opioid civil commitment. JAMA Psychiatry 2020; 77 (2):111.
Relihan T. Nine briefly escape from state substance abuse facility amid move to Plymouth. The Enterprise [Internet] 2017.
Becker D. Civil commitment for addiction treatment led to loved one's suicide, family says. WBUR [Internet] 2019.
Christopher PP, Anderson B, Stein MD. Civil commitment experiences among opioid users. Drug Alcohol Depend 2018; 193:137–141.
van Boekel LC, Brouwers EPM, van Weeghel J, Garretsen HFL. Stigma among health professionals towards patients with substance use disorders and its consequences for healthcare delivery: systematic review. Drug Alcohol Depend 2013; 131 (1–2):23–35.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Syringe exchange programs–United States, 2005. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2007; 56 (44):1164–1167.
Marshall BD, Milloy M-J, Wood E, Montaner JS, Kerr T. Reduction in overdose mortality after the opening of North America's first medically supervised safer injecting facility: a retrospective population-based study. Lancet 2011; 377 (9775):1429–1437.
Walley AY, Xuan Z, Hackman HH, Quinn E, Doe-Simkins M, Sorensen-Alawad A, et al. Opioid overdose rates and implementation of overdose education and nasal naloxone distribution in Massachusetts: interrupted time series analysis. BMJ 2013; 346 (jan30 5):f174–f1174.
Samuels EA, Dwyer K, Mello MJ, Baird J, Kellogg AR, Bernstein E. Emergency department-based opioid harm reduction: moving physicians from willing to doing. Gerson LW, editor. Acad Emerg Med 2016; 23 (4):455–465.
Beletsky L, Ruthazer R, Macalino GE, Rich JD, Tan L, Burris S. Physicians’ knowledge of and willingness to prescribe naloxone to reverse accidental opiate overdose: challenges and opportunities. J Urban Health 2007; 84 (1):126–136.
Berk J. To help providers fight the opioid epidemic, “X The X Waiver”. Health Aff Blog [Internet] 2019.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Determination of need for syringe services programs. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [Internet] 2020.