The civil commitment hearing: Applying the law therapeutically.

2001 ◽  
pp. 291-308 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bruce J. Winick
Keyword(s):  
Civil Commitment ◽  
The Law

Civil Commitment under the Federal Narcotic Addict Rehabilitation Act

1988 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 595-624 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Lindblad
Keyword(s):  
Civil Commitment ◽  
Rejection Rate ◽  
National Network ◽  
Treatment Providers ◽  
Treatment And Prevention ◽  
The Law ◽  
Rehabilitation Act ◽  
Program Costs ◽  
High Rejection Rate ◽  
Better Than

The Federal Narcotic Addict Rehabilitation Act (NARA) provided for compulsory treatment and supervised aftercare of narcotic addicts. The law was passed amid controversy as to whether addiction should be controlled by enforcement efforts or through treatment and prevention. Through NARA, treatment was permitted for offenders as a pre-trial civil commitment instead of prosecution for addicts convicted of specific crimes and for voluntary applicants. The law was complex in its implementation because each treatment category had burdensome legal and logistical particularities. Numerous “gatekeepers” screened and selected clients for admission resulting in frequent disagreement about clients' eligibility. Because capacity was limited during preliminary program development, many potential clients were rejected from the program. The program suffered criticism because of its high rejection rate and because of perceived high program costs. NARA was a relatively short-lived program superseded by other legislation Still, much was learned from the program and a national network of treatment providers resulted. Civil commitment proved to be an effective way of bringing narcotic addicts into treatment, and evaluations of those admitted show they did as well as or better than those treated in other settings.

Ethical Challenges: Less About Moral Wrongdoing and More About Communication Breakdown

2015 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 72-84 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paula Leslie ◽  
Mary Casper
Keyword(s):  
Ethical Challenges ◽  
Speech Language Pathology ◽  
Thickened Liquids ◽  
Communication Breakdown ◽  
Professional Duty ◽  
Language Pathology ◽  
The Law ◽  
Personal Case

“My patient refuses thickened liquids, should I discharge them from my caseload?” A version of this question appears at least weekly on the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association's Community pages. People talk of respecting the patient's right to be non-compliant with speech-language pathology recommendations. We challenge use of the word “respect” and calling a patient “non-compliant” in the same sentence: does use of the latter term preclude the former? In this article we will share our reflections on why we are interested in these so called “ethical challenges” from a personal case level to what our professional duty requires of us. Our proposal is that the problems that we encounter are less to do with ethical or moral puzzles and usually due to inadequate communication. We will outline resources that clinicians may use to support their work from what seems to be a straightforward case to those that are mired in complexity. And we will tackle fears and facts regarding litigation and the law.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document