[Women, addiction and rehabilitation: Reflections from the northwestern border of Mexico]. / Mujeres, adicción y rehabilitación: Reflexiones desde la frontera noroeste de México.

Since the recognition of addiction as a mental illness, studies concerning treatment and therapeutic models have tended to focus on its psychiatric and psychological dimensions. The aim of this article is to highlight the centrality of the social dimension, not only as potential trigger of addictive behaviors and of stigma regarding these behaviors, but also as a variable that permeates diagnosis and treatment. The reflections are based on fieldwork carried out in rehabilitation centers for drug-consuming women in the border city of Tijuana, northwestern Mexico. The results show that the predominant therapeutic models in the city are based in and reproduce the traditional role of women. The social implications of this finding are analyzed, and it is suggested that these centers could be better utilized in the process of building a society with greater gender equality.

The Alcohol Mandatory Treatment Act: evidence, ethics and the law.

The Northern Territory Alcohol Mandatory Treatment Act 2013 (AMT Act) permits mandatory residential alcohol rehabilitation for up to 3 months. International guidelines and human rights law confirm that mandatory rehabilitation should only be used for short periods. Evidence concerning the efficacy of long-term mandatory alcohol rehabilitation is lacking, and minimal data concerning the efficacy of the scheme have been released. Specific legal issues also arise concerning the AMT Act, including its potentially discriminatory application to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. The program only permits referral by police, despite the fact that it is ostensibly a medical intervention. Use of a treatment as a method of effectively solving a public intoxication problem is highly dubious, and should be of concern to the medical community. Given that more cost-effective and proven measures exist to combat alcohol dependence, the utility of the AMT Act is questionable.

Arguments in favour of compulsory treatment of opioid dependence.

Twelve agencies of the United Nations, including the World Health Organization, have issued a joint statement that calls on Member States to replace the compulsory detention of people who use opioids in treatment centres with voluntary, evidence-informed and rights-based health and social services. The arguments in favour of this position fall into three broad categories: Compulsory treatment centres infringe on an individual's liberty, they put human beings at risk of harm, and evidence of their effectiveness against opioid dependence has not been generated. The United Nations statement underscores that although countries apply different criteria for sending individuals to compulsory treatment centres, detention often takes place without due process, legal safeguards or judicial review. This clearly violates internationally recognized human rights standards. Furthermore, people who are committed to these centres are often exposed to physical and sexual violence, forced labour and sub-standard living conditions. They are often denied health care, despite their heightened vulnerability to HIV infection and tuberculosis. Finally, there is no evidence, according to the statement, that these centres offer an environment that is conducive to recovery from opioid dependence or to the rehabilitation of commercial sex workers or of children who have suffered sexual exploitation, abuse or lack of care and protection. The author of this paper sets forth several arguments that counter the position taken by the United Nations and argues in favour of compulsory treatment within a broader harm reduction strategy aimed at protecting society as well as the individual concerned.

Douze agences des Nations Unies, parmi elles l'Organisation mondiale de la Santé, ont émis une déclaration commune qui appelle les États membres à remplacer la détention obligatoire des consommateurs d'opioïdes dans des centres de traitement par des services sanitaires et sociaux volontaires qui s'appuient sur des données probantes et soient fondés sur le droit. Les arguments en faveur de cette position se répartissent en trois grandes catégories: les centres de traitement obligatoire empiètent sur la liberté de l'individu, ils exposent les êtres humains à des risques et la preuve de leur efficacité contre la dépendance aux opioïdes n'a pas été démontrée. La déclaration des Nations Unies souligne que même si les pays appliquent des critères différents pour l'envoi des individus dans des centres de traitement obligatoire, leur détention survient souvent sans procédure régulière, protection légale ou contrôle juridictionnel. Cet état de fait contrevient clairement aux normes des droits de l'homme reconnues au niveau international. En outre, les personnes remises à ces centres sont souvent exposées à des sévices physiques et sexuels, à du travail forcé et à des conditions de vie inférieures aux normes. Ils se voient souvent refuser des soins de santé en dépit de leur vulnérabilité accrue à l'infection par le VIH et à la tuberculose. Enfin, il n'y a aucune preuve, selon cette déclaration, que ces centres offrent un climat propice à la récupération de la dépendance aux opioïdes ou à la réinsertion des professionnels du sexe ou des enfants victimes d'exploitation sexuelle, de maltraitance ou de manque de soins et de protection.L'auteur de ce document de travail avance plusieurs arguments contraires à la position adoptée par les Nations Unies et milite en faveur d'un traitement obligatoire participant d'une stratégie élargie de réduction des risques visant à protéger la société, mais aussi l'individu concerné.

Doce agencias de las Naciones Unidas, entre ellas la Organización Mundial de la Salud, han emitido una declaración conjunta que insta a los Estados miembros a reemplazar la retención obligatoria en centros de tratamiento de personas que hacen uso de opiáceos por servicios sociales y sanitarios voluntarios, basados en pruebas científicas y en sus derechos. Los argumentos a favor de esta postura se clasifican en tres amplias categorías: Los centros de tratamiento obligatorio atentan contra la libertad individual, ponen a las personas en riesgo y no existen pruebas de su eficacia contra la dependencia de opiáceos. La declaración de las Naciones Unidas enfatiza que, aunque cada país aplica criterios distintos a la hora de enviar a los individuos a los centros de tratamiento obligatorio, es frecuente que la retención se lleve a cabo sin el debido proceso, la seguridad jurídica ni el examen judicial correspondiente, lo que viola claramente las normas de los derechos humanos reconocidas a nivel internacional. Además, las personas internadas en dichos centros se ven expuestas, con frecuencia, a violencia física o sexual, trabajos forzados y condiciones precarias de vida, y es frecuente que se les niegue la atención sanitaria a pesar de ser más vulnerables a la infección por VIH y a la tuberculosis. Por último, no hay ninguna evidencia, de acuerdo con la declaración, de que dichos centros ofrezcan un ambiente propicio para la recuperación de la dependencia a los opiáceos o para la rehabilitación de trabajadores sexuales o de niños que han sufrido explotación sexual, abusos o falta de cuidado y atención.El autor del presente artículo describe numerosos argumentos que rebaten la posición adoptada por las Naciones Unidas a favor de un tratamiento obligatorio en el ámbito de una estrategia más amplia enfocada a la reducción del daño y cuyo objetivo es proteger tanto a la sociedad como al individuo afectado.

"A disease of frozen feelings": ethically working on emotional worlds in a Russian Orthodox Church drug rehabilitation program.

In a Russian Orthodox Church drug rehabilitation program in St. Petersburg, drug addiction was often described as a disease of frozen feelings. This image suggests that rehabilitation is a process of thawing emotional worlds and, thus, allows the emotions to flow once again. In this article I argue that "frozen feelings" is better understood as the unsocial emotional worlds many drug users experience, and that rehabilitation in this church-run program particularly focuses on the cultivation of an emotional world that supports sociality. This is done, I argue, by means of ethically training rehabilitants to learn how to control and manage their emotional worlds, and in so doing, rehabilitants become new moral persons better able to live in the social world.

The ethics of harm reduction.

The article attempts to set harm minimization within drug settings into a larger framework of harm minimization practices. It seeks to provide a plausible account of harm reduction and then explores four ethical challenges for harm reduction strategies.

“Eu dizia que era ela, ela dizia que era eu”: sobre o reconhecimento da queixa projetiva no atendimento clínico a mães e outros familiares de dependentes de drogas / “I said it was her, she said it was me

Esta tese apresenta aspecto fundamental do vínculo entre mãe (e outros familiares) e filho dependente de drogas. Parte-se de experiência clínica de mais de vinte anos, ou seja, do que é ouvido cotidianamente em tratamento de abordagem psicodinâmica oferecido a familiares(individual, casal, grupal) em ambulatório universitário especializado no atendimento a toxicômanos e familiares. Características comuns desta clientela são notórias, destacando-se o vínculo de dependência afetiva exageradamente estabelecido com o toxicômano (desde que este era bebê). Para compreender e embasar esta questão, a pesquisa foi relativa ao tema das relações objetais (Psicanálise), segundo Melanie Klein e Donald W. Winnicott. A questão central da tese refere-se à constatação clínica de que as queixas que o(s) familiar(es)expressa(m) nos atendimentos com relação ao dependente de drogas (sobre seus gestos,atitudes, problemas) são expressão do mecanismo de projeção. Isto é tão significativo e recorrente nos atendimentos que, nesta tese, é apresentado enquanto “regra”: as queixas dos familiares com relação ao dependente de drogas são “queixas projetivas”. Trata-se de algo inconsciente, desagradável ou incômodo de si mesmo, que o familiar só o reconhece em outro. Neste sentido, ao queixar-se de algo com relação a outro (nestes casos, o toxicômano), na realidade o paciente/familiar expressa algo que o incomoda sobre si mesmo. Destaque-se que o filho também tem, ou parece ter, estas características que motivam a queixa, mas que podem e devem ser atribuídas, também, ao familiar atendido. Isto, por ser inconsciente, não é reconhecido espontaneamente pelo paciente/familiar, indicando um rumo terapêutico a ser seguido: em lugar da orientação exata solicitada pelo paciente desde início do tratamento, sobre como lidar com o filho e a dependência a drogas, trabalha-se, justamente, o vínculo de dependência com ênfase no mecanismo de projeção...

Substance abuse treatment providers' beliefs and objections regarding contingency management: implications for dissemination.

Contingency management (CM) interventions are among the most effective methods for initiating drug abstinence, but they infrequently have been adopted by community drug and alcohol treatment programs. The primary purpose of this investigation was to determine the prevalence of specific beliefs that community treatment providers hold regarding contingency management interventions. We surveyed 383 treatment providers from three geographical areas of the United States regarding moral or ethical objections, negative side effects, practicality, limitations and positive opinions regarding tangible and social CM interventions. Results indicate that positive beliefs were surprisingly prevalent, with providers agreeing with an average of 67% of the positive statements regarding CM using tangible incentives and 54% indicating that they would be in favor of adding a tangible CM intervention to their treatment program. The most prevalent objections to incentive programs were that they cost too much, fail to address the underlying problems of addiction, and do not address multiple behaviors. Social incentives were viewed more favorably than tangible incentives and both were viewed more positively by providers who were supervisors, had advanced degrees, had more addictions experience, and had previous experience with tangible incentives. These findings have implications for improving the dissemination of this empirically-supported treatment.

Ethical issues in substance use intervention.

This essay offers an overview of some of the ethical questions raised by governmental and medical interventions into drug use. With respect to the former, it begins with the liberal assumption that constraints on free action are to be justified by reference to its deleterious impact on others, but then qualifies that assumption by noting the social requisites of free action. With respect to medical interventions, it focuses on the codes that have been developed for treatment providers and their clients, and explores the ethical underpinnings of several of their central provisions--informed consent, privacy, confidentiality, nondiscrimination, professionalism, and accountability.