Posts Tagged ‘Sober Living Homes’

There is a new program airing on VH1 called Sober House with Celebrity Rehab’s Dr. Drew Pinsky.

There is a new program airing on VH1 called Sober House with Celebrity Rehab’s Dr. Drew Pinsky. The show follows Celebrity Rehab clients through the extended care, or transitional living, experience. Throughout extended care/sober living rehab history owners of rehabs have been approached by various media organizations requesting permission to document the sober living experience with cameras. Every extended care rehab I have worked at has been approached. While the offer is always tempting, most rehabs have always declined because we feel that the sensationalization of clients struggling with a serious addiction isn’t really ethical. There are arguments to be made for both sides though. On the one hand it exploits a person’s personal struggles with addiction, but on the other hand it educates the public on the process of addiction and the rehab experience. With the new show Sober House the public will, for the first time, be able to see where the real work of staying sober starts. Everyone in the treatment business knows that 30 days of primary treatment is not enough for anyone. That is why every primary 30 day facility in the Nation, with the exception of a few, now offers extended care treatment. Sober living and extended care treatment is exponentially more intense and requires much more operational man power than people think. Most people think that “sober living” is just what the name implies, a residence where people who are sober live together. But, it is actually much more! Running a sober living, or transitional addiction treatment program, requires a much more experienced and savvy staff than primary treatment requires. The freedom a sober living arrangement allows makes it much harder to keep track of a client’s progress and because clients are experiencing the “real world” for the first time sober, it creates a plethora of crisis that the treatment staff has to deal with on a daily basis. So I expect Dr. Drew’s new show, Sober House, to be much more interesting than Celebrity Rehab could ever be. For additional information contact info@hawaiiislandrecovery.com

 

If you are suffering from addiction please call Hawaii Island Recovery at 866-906-6911.

What Is Alcohol Abuse

What are drinking problems? How serious is alcohol abuse among young people? What is the trend in drunk driving? What help is available for alcoholism?
To some college students, heavy drinking that leads to vomiting is not alcohol abuse but simply having a good time and being “one of the gang.”
To many whose religion requires abstinence, simply tasting an alcohol beverage is not only alcohol abuse but a sin.
To many activists, a married couple quietly enjoying a drink with their dinner is guilty of abusing alcohol if they happen to be twenty years of age.
To the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, an accident is alcohol related (and implicitly caused by alcohol abuse) if a driver who has consumed a drink is sitting at a red light and rear-ended by an inattentive teetotaler.
In American Society
Our historical background and multi cultural population have created wide and strong disagreements in American society over what constitutes alcohol abuse.
Our Colonial tradition taught us that alcohol is the “good gift of God” to be used and enjoyed by all, including small children.
Our temperance and Prohibition experiences taught us that alcohol is “demon rum,” the cause of almost all poverty, crime, violence, and other problems. So convinced were they that alcohol was the cause of virtually all crime that, on the eve of Prohibition, some towns went so far as to sell their jails. Temperance systematically promoted both fear and hostility toward alcohol beverages, much of which continues to this day.
Repeal of Prohibition left us with a society in which the majority of people enjoy alcohol beverage in moderation, but a large minority (today about 1/3) of the population abstains. And a substantial proportion of American abstainers favor imposing prohibition again on the entire population . The prohibition impulse has never died and has re-emerged in a different form today.
Alcohol policy actually results not from science, logic, or evidence, but from a continuing struggle between those who wish to use alcohol beverages and those who don’t want them to. Repeatedly throughout our national life, movements have emerged to promote abstinence by persuasion, but failing to succeed, they have then resorted to coercion. The current neo-prohibition movement attempts to reduce consumption in general and to prevent it entirely among targeted groups, such as those under the age of 21.

And Young People
Prohibition for those under the age of 21 currently enjoys wide support in the United States and is imposed by force of law. Often it is enforced with a vengeance. “Carter Loar, a senior at Park View High School in Loudoun County, Virginia was suspended for ten days in February for violating the school’s alcohol policy.” Carter’s violation was using mouthwash at school. School officials confiscated the contraband and “He was charged with violating the school’s alcohol policy which prohibits the possession or use of alcohol on school property. As part of his ten day suspension, Carter was required to attend a three day Substance Abuse Program sponsored by Loudoun County.”
Mr. Loar was a victim of “zero tolerance,” which is now all the rage. But what does such a zealous level of intolerance accomplish and what messages does it send our young people? It probably achieves about as much as the scare tactics characteristic of the temperance movement and is almost certainly counter-productive.
One apparent message is that those who promote such intolerance have lost touch with youth, another is that they are unrealistic and impractical, and another is that their alcohol education messages are not credible.
Youthful Drinking
While a continuing barrage of newspaper articles, TV shows, and special interest group reports claim that drinking among young people is a growing epidemic, the fact is quite the contrary. Drinking among young people, like drinking among the larger population, is actually on the decline. For example, look at the statistics on drinking among high school students.
The proportion of high school seniors who have ever consumed alcohol is down.
The proportion of high school seniors who have consumed alcohol within previous year is down.
The proportion of high school seniors who have consumed alcohol within previous 30 days is down.
The proportion of high school seniors who have recently consumed alcohol daily is down.
The proportion of high school seniors who have consumed 5 or more drinks on an occasion within previous two weeks is down.
Drinking among young people continues to drop. For example, the proportion of young people aged 12 through 17 who have consumed any alcohol during the previous month has plummeted from 50% in 1979 to 16% in 2006, according to the federal government’s annual National Survey on Drug Use and Health. Thus, while one in two were drinkers in 1979, significantly fewer than one in five were in 2006, the most recent year for which statistics are available. College student drinking attracts much attention in the press. But the proportion of college freshmen who drink continues to decrease. Freshmen entering college in 2006 reported the lowest rates of drinking in the 41-year history of the national college Freshman Survey. The proportion reporting occasional or frequent beer drinking dropped to an historic low, down 43% since 1982.
Drunk Driving Fatalities
While we must do even more to reduce drunk driving, we have already accomplished a great deal. Alcohol-related traffic fatalities have dropped steadily.
The U.S. has a low traffic fatality rate (drunk, as well as sober) and is a very safe nation in which to drive. And it’s been getting safer for decades. There are now fewer than one and a half deaths (including the deaths of bicyclists, motorcyclists, pedestrians, auto drivers, and auto passengers) per one hundred million vehicle miles traveled. Alcohol-related traffic fatalities have dropped from 60% of all traffic deaths in 1982 down to 39% in 2005 (the most recent year for which such statistics are available).
Alcohol-related traffic fatalities per vehicle miles driven has also dropped dramatically — from 1.64 deaths per 100 million miles traveled in 1982 down to 0.56 in 2005 (the latest year for which such statistics are available).
The proportion of alcohol-related crash fatalities has fallen 35% since 1982, but the proportion of traffic deaths NOT associated with alcohol have jumped 53% during the same time. We’re winning the battle against alcohol-related traffic fatalities, but losing the fight against traffic deaths that are not alcohol-related.
The declining proportion of accidents involving intoxication is good news. However, we can do even more to reduce drunk driving deaths. Through our individual actions we can do much right now to protect ourselves and others.
Health Problems
While the moderate consumption of alcohol is associated with better health and longer life than is abstinence, the heavy consumption of alcohol, especially over a period of many years, can lead to serious health problems and even death.
Fetal Alcohol Syndrome
Fetal Alcohol Syndrome (FAS) is an irreversible condition associated with excessive consumption of alcohol by pregnant women and is, therefore, completely preventable. Each and every case of FAS is a needless tragedy. Victims suffer serious physical deformities and often mental deficiencies. And, they suffer these problems for their entire lives. While most cases occur among alcoholics who consume alcohol heavily throughout their pregnancies (usually in combination with smoking and often illegal drug use), no one knows for certain what level of alcohol consumption is safe for a pregnant woman.
The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists recently conducted a study including 400,000 American women, all of whom had consumed alcohol during pregnancy. Not a single case of FAS occurred and no adverse effects on children were found when consumption was under 8.5 drinks per week. While it would appear that moderate consumption is safe, the safer choice would be to abstain.
Of course, tobacco and illegal drugs are clearly to be avoided, and a pregnant woman should maintain good nutrition and see her physician on a regular basis throughout her pregnancy.
Cirrhosis
Cirrhosis is probably the most widely recognized medical complication of chronic alcoholism. It is a grave and irreversible condition characterized by a progressive replacement of healthy liver tissue with scars, which can lead to liver failure and death. Fortunately, the abuse of alcohol is down and so is cirrhosis.
Death rate for cirrhosis fell dramatically between 1970 and 1992, the most recent year for which information is available. During that period, death from cirrhosis:
dropped 29.8% among black men
dropped 15.3% among white men
dropped 47.9% among black women
dropped 33.3% among white women
Help is Available
Numerous other health problems are associated with heavy alcohol consumption, which should be avoided. Many people find organized programs very useful in helping them reduce their consumption to moderate levels. For those who either choose or need to quit drinking entirely call Today Hawaii Island Recovery at 866-515-5032 or visit our website at www.hawaiiislandrecovery.com

 

If you are suffering from addiction please call Hawaii Island Recovery at 866-906-6911.

Drug addiction is a treatable disorder. Through treatment that is tailored to individual needs, patients can learn to control their condition and live normal, productive lives.

Treatment Methods
Drug addiction is a treatable disorder. Through treatment that is tailored to individual needs, patients can learn to control their condition and live normal, productive lives. Like people with diabetes or heart disease, people in treatment for drug addiction learn behavioral changes and often take medications as part of their treatment regimen.
Behavioral therapies can include counseling, psychotherapy, support groups, or family therapy. Treatment medications offer help in suppressing the withdrawal syndrome and drug craving and in blocking the effects of drugs. In addition, studies show that treatment for heroin addiction using methadone at an adequate dosage level combined with behavioral therapy reduces death rates and many health problems associated with heroin abuse.
In general, the more treatment given, the better the results. Many patients require other services as well, such as medical and mental health services and HIV prevention services. Patients who stay in treatment longer than 3 months usually have better outcomes than those who stay less time. Patients who go through medically assisted withdrawal to minimize discomfort but do not receive any further treatment, perform about the same in terms of their drug use as those who were never treated. Over the last 25 years, studies have shown that treatment works to reduce drug intake and crimes committed by drug-dependent people. Researchers also have found that drug abusers who have been through treatment are more likely to have jobs.
Types of Treatment Programs
The ultimate goal of all drug abuse treatment is to enable the patient to achieve lasting abstinence, but the immediate goals are to reduce drug use, improve the patient’s ability to function, and minimize the medical and social complications of drug abuse.
There are several types of drug abuse treatment programs. Short-term methods last less than 6 months and include residential therapy, medication therapy, and drug-free outpatient therapy. Longer term treatment may include, for example, methadone maintenance outpatient treatment for opiate addicts and residential therapeutic community treatment.
In maintenance treatment for heroin addicts, people in treatment are given an oral dose of a synthetic opiate, usually methadone hydrochloride or levo-alpha-acetyl methadol (LAAM), administered at a dosage sufficient to block the effects of heroin and yield a stable, noneuphoric state free from physiological craving for opiates. In this stable state, the patient is able to disengage from drug-seeking and related criminal behavior and, with appropriate counseling and social services, become a productive member of his or her community.
Outpatient drug-free treatment does not include medications and encompasses a wide variety of programs for patients who visit a clinic at regular intervals. Most of the programs involve individual or group counseling. Patients entering these programs are abusers of drugs other than opiates or are opiate abusers for whom maintenance therapy is not recommended, such as those who have stable, well-integrated lives and only brief histories of drug dependence.
Therapeutic communities (TCs) are highly structured programs in which patients stay at a residence, typically for 6 to 12 months. Patients in TCs include those with relatively long histories of drug dependence, involvement in serious criminal activities, and seriously impaired social functioning. The focus of the TC is on the resocialization of the patient to a drug-free, crime-free lifestyle.
Short-term residential programs, often referred to as chemical dependency units, are often based on the “Minnesota Model” of treatment for alcoholism. These programs involve a 3- to 6-week inpatient treatment phase followed by extended outpatient therapy or participation in 12-step self-help groups, such as Narcotics Anonymous or Cocaine Anonymous. Chemical dependency programs for drug abuse arose in the private sector in the mid-1980s with insured alcohol/cocaine abusers as their primary patients. Today, as private provider benefits decline, more programs are extending their services to publicly funded patients.
Methadone maintenance programs are usually more successful at retaining clients with opiate dependence than are therapeutic communities, which in turn are more successful than outpatient programs that provide psychotherapy and counseling. Within various methadone programs, those that provide higher doses of methadone (usually a minimum of 60 mg.) have better retention rates. Also, those that provide other services, such as counseling, therapy, and medical care, along with methadone generally get better results than the programs that provide minimal services.
Drug treatment programs in prisons can succeed in preventing patients’ return to criminal behavior, particularly if they are linked to community-based programs that continue treatment when the client leaves prison. Some of the more successful programs have reduced the rearrest rate by one-fourth to one-half. For example, the “Delaware Model,” an ongoing study of comprehensive treatment of drug- addicted prison inmates, shows that prison-based treatment including a therapeutic community setting, a work release therapeutic community, and community-based aftercare reduces the probability of rearrest by 57 percent and reduces the likelihood of returning to drug use by 37 percent.
Drug abuse has a great economic impact on society-an estimated $67 billion per year. This figure includes costs related to crime, medical care, drug abuse treatment, social welfare programs, and time lost from work. Treatment of drug abuse can reduce those costs. Studies have shown that from $4 to $7 are saved for every dollar spent on treatment. It costs approximately $3,600 per month to leave a drug abuser untreated in the community, and incarceration costs approximately $3,300 per month. In contrast, methadone maintenance therapy costs about $290 per month.

If you are suffering from addiction please call Hawaii Island Recovery at 866-906-6911.

The state of California’s 8-year-old program that mandates treatment instead of prison sentences for drug offenders is dramatically decreasing California’s jail population and saving taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars, according to a study released Wednesday.

The study, prepared by the left-leaning Justice Policy Institute in Washington, echoes another report released by UCLA earlier this month that also touted huge taxpayer savings through doing away with prison sentences in favor of treatment. That report said the program, which was passed by voters in 2000 as Proposition 36, saved California $173 million in its first year and $2.50 for every dollar invested since then.

 

The report by the Justice Policy Institute, which seeks alternatives to incarceration, said the rate of imprisonment for drug possession offenses has decreased by more than 34%. It also said that dire predictions of a rise in violent crime with the passage of Proposition 36 were unfounded.

 

“It really helps to put a context to the debate,” said Jason Ziedenberg, the executive director of the Justice Policy Institute. “I think people need to understand how many people were in prison in 2000 as opposed to how many there are today and that there has been progress.”

 

The release of the two reports comes at a critical juncture for supporters who contend that the $120 million earmarked for Proposition 36 by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger when funding runs out this summer is not adequate.

 

They contend that, because of inflation and an increase in costs for services, the money does not stretch far enough.

“It really needs to be at $209 million just to be bare-bones adequate,” said Margaret Dooley, statewide coordinator with the Drug Policy Alliance, which is seeking an increase in funding for the program. She said she and others would descend on the capital later this month to drum up support for the additional funding, which she believed would be forthcoming because lawmakers would be unable to point to a downside.
She also said she was confident of support from the more than 60,000 people arrested but kept out of prisons and jails because of Proposition 36.

 

Scott Ehlers, a coauthor of the Justice Policy Institute report, said he and others believe that the next goal should be to expand the reach of Proposition 36 to include those arrested for nonviolent crimes related to drug abuse, such as theft to purchase drugs.

He also said he did not anticipate any calls for major trims in the program.
“I don’t see anyone calling for a rollback by any means because I think the treatment is more cost-effective than sending people to prison,” he said.

 

Among other findings of the report are that spending on drug treatment in the state since 2000 has doubled, and that there has been a larger increase in drug treatment clients here than in the rest of the country. Also, the California prison population of drug offenders has been reduced from 27% to 21%, close to the national average.

 

Ziedenberg said the reason the Justice Policy Institute focused on California, as it does in many of its studies, is that”12% of the prison population is locked up there.”

He also said lawmakers will have to face the question whether they want to pay now for expanded drug treatment or later for additional prison facilities to handle the overrun.
“The main thing is for more money to be put in,” he said. “The thing we hear from people in California is that this is a good start.” TO GET HELP NOW WITH ADDICTIONS CALL HAWAIIISLANDRECOVERY AT 866-906-6911.

Scientific research since the mid-1970s shows that drug abuse treatment can help many drug abusing offenders change their attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors towards drug abuse, avoid relapse, and successfully remove themselves from a life of substance abuse and crime.

It is true that legal pressure might be needed to get a person into treatment and help them stay there.  Once in a treatment program, however, even those who are not motivated to change at first can eventually become engaged in a continuing treatment process.Untreated substance abuse adds significant costs to communities, including violent and property crimes, prison expenses, court and criminal costs, emergency room visits, child abuse and neglect, lost child support, foster care and welfare costs, reduced productivity, unemployment, and victimization.

The cost to society of drug abuse in 2002 was estimated at $181 billion, $107 billion of which was associated with drug-related crime. Successful drug abuse treatment in the criminal justice system can help reduce crime as well as the spread of HIV/AIDS, hepatitis, and other infectious diseases. It is estimated that for every dollar spent on addiction treatment programs, there is a $4 to $7 reduction in the cost of drug-related crimes. With some outpatient programs, total savings can exceed costs by a ratio of 12:1.1

Extent of the Problem

The connection between drug abuse and crime is well known. Drug abuse is implicated in at least three types of drug related offenses: (1) offenses defined by drug possession or sales, (2) offenses directly related to drug abuse (e.g., stealing to get money for drugs), and (3) offenses related to a lifestyle that predisposes the drug abuser to engage in illegal activity (e.g., through association with other offenders or with illicit markets).In 2003, nearly 6.9 million adults were involved with the criminal justice system, including 4.8 million who were under probation or parole supervision (Glaze & Palla, 2004, www.ojp.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/ppus03.pdf).  In its 1997 survey, the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) estimated that about 70 percent of State and 57 percent of Federal prisoners used drugs regularly prior to incarceration (Mumola, 1999, www.ojp.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/satsfp97.pdf).  A 2002 survey of jails found that 52 percent of incarcerated women and 44 percent of men met the criteria for alcohol or drug dependence (Karberg & James, 2005,www.ojp.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/sdatji02.pdf).

 

Juvenile justice systems also report high levels of drug abuse. A survey of juvenile detainees in 2000 found that about 56 percent of the boys and 40 percent of the girls tested positive for drug use at the time of their arrest (National Institute of Justice, 2003, www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/adam/welcome.html).The substance abusing offender may be encouraged or legally pressured to participate in drug abuse treatment. Even so, few drug abusing offenders actually receive treatment. The 1997 BJS survey showed that fewer than one-fifth of incarcerated offenders with drug problems had received treatment in prison (not including participation in self-help or drug education).Untreated substance abusing offenders are more likely to relapse to drug abuse and return to criminal behavior. This can bring about re-arrest and reincarceration, jeopardizing public health and public safety and taxing criminal justice system resources. Treatment offers the best alternative for interrupting the drug abuse/criminal justice cycle for offenders with drug abuse problems.

Effective Treatment for Criminal Offenders

Studies show that treatment can cut drug abuse in half, reduce criminal activity up to 80 percent, and reduce arrests up to 64 percent.2 Based on a review of this and other scientific literature on drug abuse treatment and criminal behavior, in 2006 NIDA released Principles of Drug Abuse Treatment for Criminal Justice Populations. This publication discusses 13 principles proven through research to help criminal justice organizations tailor treatment programs to better serve their populations.

 

In brief, these principles are:

1. Drug addiction is a brain disease that affects behavior.
2. Recovery from drug addiction requires effective treatment, followed by management of the problem over time.
3. Treatment must last long enough to produce stable behavioral change.
4. Assessment is the first step in treatment.
5. Tailoring services to fit the needs of the individual is an important part of effective drug abuse treatment for criminal justice populations.
6. Drug use during treatment should be carefully monitored.
7. Treatment should target factors that are associated with criminal behavior.
8. Criminal justice supervision should incorporate treatment planning for drug abusing offenders, and treatment providers should be aware of correctional supervision requirements.
9. Continuity of care is essential for drug abusers re-entering the community.
10. A balance of rewards and sanctions encourages prosocial behavior and treatment participation.
11. Offenders with co-occurring drug abuse and mental health problems often require an integrated treatment approach.
12. Medications are an important part of treatment for many drug abusing offenders.
13. Treatment planning for drug abusing offenders who are living in or re-entering the community should include strategies to prevent and treat serious, chronic medical conditions, such as HIV/AIDS, hepatitis B and C, and tuberculosis.

 

Drug Abuse Treatment can be incorporated into criminal justice settings in a variety of ways. These include treatment as a condition of probation, drug courts that blend judicial monitoring and sanctions with treatment, treatment in prison followed by community-based treatment after discharge, and treatment under parole or probation supervision. Outcomes for substance abusing individuals can be improved by cross-agency coordination and collaboration of criminal justice professionals, substance abuse treatment providers, and other social service agencies. By working together, the criminal justice and treatment systems can optimize resources to benefit the health, safety, and well-being of individuals and the communities they serve.For more information, see Principles of Drug Abuse Treatment for Criminal Justice Populations: A Research-Based Guide at www.drugabuse.gov/DrugPages/cj.html.

If you are suffering from addiction please call Hawaii Island Recovery at 866-906-6911.