![]() There are obvious civil liberty and ethical implications of holding patients against their will and without informed consent. ![]() Other health care services in these facilities are often dismal. The care provided in state custody often fails to meet basic international standards for substance use disorder treatment. Legal protections afforded to people who come into contact with this system are few. have statutes on the books authorizing involuntary commitment for substance use. In many places, involuntary treatment for substance use is basically incarceration, rebranded some states operate civil commitment through their departments of corrections. When applied to people with addiction, involuntary (or “civil”) commitment laws and practices are often more expansive and arbitrary than the severe mental illness analogues. This legal mechanism has traditionally been used to place “temporary holds” on people in a mental health crisis. Under the banner of expanding treatment, policymakers and government officials are increasingly turning to involuntary commitment. ![]() As the overdose crisis continues to surge, access to evidence-based, affordable, and respectful substance use treatment remains limited.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |