As experts continue to study narcotics addiction and treatment programs, most agree that a sudden and complete removal of the drug is not an effective method to break the addiction. Instead, a gradual approach involving small doses of narcotics that are removed over time may be the best strateg, or the use of replacement therapy such as buprenorphine to ease withdrawal symptoms.

Narcotics, such as Morphine, OxyContin, and Percocet, are typically prescribed for pain and considered highly addictive because they give the user feelings of euphoria. The use of narcotics moves from medical to abusive when the patient’s relationships, home life and work life suffer, along with a compulsion to find and take narcotics – especially in increasing dosage amounts. The U.S. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services reports that prescription narcotics are the second most widely abused drug in the nation, with well over 5 million people admitting to using the drugs for non-medical reasons.

Withdrawal from narcotics can be severe. Hallmark symptoms include anxiousness, aggressive moods or irritability, quickened breathing, increased saliva, nose congestion and body aches. Vomiting or stomach discomfort may also be present; as well as increased perspiration, a sense of disorientation, body tremors and dilated pupils. Physicians may need to observe the patient for additional problems connected with abusing narcotics, such as heart valve infections, skin infections, pneumonia or liver problems. Tests to monitor the severity of physical damage during withdrawal include EKG testing, X-rays of the chest, taking blood counts and blood toxicology work.

In past decades, a commonly used drug administered to help patients with narcotic withdrawal has been methadone hydrochloride, a type of man-made opiate. The drug has been employed because methods for recovery that remove narcotics all together, such as acupuncture, have not been shown effective in breaking the cycle of narcotics addiction. Other treatment plans substitute narcotics for another kind of opioid, such as heroin, and then gradually reduce the opioid dosage.

The non-narcotic drug clonidine hypochloride has also been used. Treatment begins with an experimental dosage to test for adverse reactions, and if none are found, an increase in the dose is administered. In research cases, patients were shown to have greatly reduced symptoms of narcotic withdrawal when prescribed clonidine. Non-narcotic drug treatment also provides the added benefit of preventing patients from attending detoxification on the premise of receiving a steady supply of narcotics. The process may also be quicker than other methods of detoxification.

Narcotic withdrawal can be overwhelming and very painful to the patient, family and friends, especially in the beginning stages – but for most addicts, the outlook is positive if appropriate treatment is pursued. As research continues into the growing problem of narcotics addiction, detoxification programs involving a combination of medical drug treatment with group counseling may be the most effective path to recovery.
 

Woods is part of the 6 to 8 percent of the population (about 18 to 24 million Americans) believed to be sex addicts, according to the National Council on Sexual Addiction Compulsivity. This figure does not account for individuals who do not seek treatment. Sex addicts describe themselves as being incapable of stopping their actions, preoccupied with sex, and compulsive to various sexual acts such as masturbation, voyeurism, pornography, Internet sex, multiple partners, anonymous sex, solicitation of prostitute or escort services, sexual seduction, and varying degrees of these activities.

Many critics oppose the concept of sexual addiction. A large group of the medical professional field rejects the theory, and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV) only categorizes sex addiction as a “Sexual Disorders Not Otherwise Specified.” The DSM-IV defines sex addiction as “distress about a pattern of repeated sexual relationships involving a succession of lovers who are experienced by the individual only as things to be used” and involves “compulsive searching for multiple partners, compulsive fixation on an unattainable partner, compulsive masturbation, compulsive love relationships, and compulsive sexuality in a relationship.”

A basic human need and necessary for survival, a person’s sexual instinct is natural and innate; many psychologists and psychiatrists find the idea of sex as an addiction controversial since it potentially dismisses the fundamental impulse of human sexuality as a disease similar to alcoholism or chemical dependence. Variations of the term being introduced to the psychology field include “sex compulsivity,” “sex and love addiction,” “sexual addiction,” “sexual dependence,” or “hypersexuality.” Opponents consider the acceptance of sex addiction as a medical condition as providing an excuse for improper behavior for which society is normally held accountable. By diagnosing it, individuals can shift responsibility off themselves and plead that the diagnosis as the cause of their misconduct. Was Woods manipulating his fame, fortune, power, and accessibility to many of life’s luxuries—or is he legitimately suffering from an addictive disorder? Most medical professionals consider hypersexuality an underlying symptom for a more serious behavioral condition, such as manic depression or obsessive-compulsive disorder. Sex can be a way for these individuals to cope with fear of intimacy or solitude, reduce stress, and escape from problems.

The idea of sex addiction as an independent condition came about during the mid-1970s but became popularized in 1983 by Dr. Patrick Carnes in his book, Out of the Shadows: Understanding Sexual Addiction, in which Carnes first recognized the destructive behavior called sex addiction. Sexual addiction is classified as an obsessive-compulsive disorder, or excessive sexual behavior disorder, characterized by despair and severe distress involving the individual’s sexual acts and compulsions. “Consequences may be relational, emotional, physical, financial, legal, occupational, social, and spiritual in nature” writes Brenda Schaeffer, D.Min., M.A.L.P., C.A.S., in her book Is It Love or Is It Addiction? “In the process, a physical dependency on the bio-chemical or mood-altering experiences of arousal, satiation, and fantasy occurs. There is usually marked tolerance and continued involvement in spite of negative consequences. And, like other addictions, sexual addiction becomes an unconscious habit, a compulsive ritual that is no longer a choice, and a psychological and biological attachment to the stimulus that provides the pleasure. Withdrawal symptoms occur when the sexual stimulus is removed, and preoccupation begins to interfere with life.”

Although little research has been conducted on abnormal sexual activity, some recent studies have helped chip away at the complex, unofficial diagnosis. Sex has been found to release dopamine within the brain and create a temporary sense of euphoria like intoxication. Unhealthy sexual behavior is being considered as affecting an individual similar to a chemical dependency. When stimulated, sex addicts display a loss of activity in the top frontal lobe of the brain where reasoning, emotions, judgment, and voluntary cognitive function are controlled. Signs of sex addiction include: inability to stop sexual acts or thoughts; preoccupation; using sex as a coping mechanism, escape, or fix; mood changes; increasing tolerance and need to seek more stimulation; a developing routine; negative consequences; risks involving family, occupational, and social relationships; destructive behavior; maintaining a secret life; suppressing sexual trauma; feelings of shame or guilt; and sexualizing in inappropriate settings. A sex addict normally does not recognize the negative consequences of their sexual behavior and pursuits, which can include: depression; anxiety; loss of self-respect; loss of self-esteem; stress; loss of concentration and productivity; suicidal thoughts; comorbid substance abuse addictions; illness; risk of HIV, AIDS, and unwanted pregnancies; objectifying others or feeling objectified; violence to self and others such as molestation, assault, rape, or scandal; betrayal; engaging in illegal activities; and inappropriate physical or sexual behavior that is out of context or out of character.

According to the Sexual Recovery Institute, “sex” is the most commonly searched topic on the Internet. Around 25 million Americans visit pornographic websites between 1 to 10 hours per week. Approximately 40% of those with sex compulsivity with Internet pornography are now women. Schaeffer also states that around 83% of sex addicts have a comorbid substance abuse addiction or behavioral disorder; 70% have thoughts of suicide; 60% have experienced financial troubles or failure; and 58% have engaged in illegal acts to foster their sexual compulsions. Another concern for classifying sex addiction as an official disorder is that the diagnosis might assist sexual predators and rapists in a court of law. Not all sex addicts are sex offenders, and vice versa. Approximately 55% of sex offenders are considered to be sex addicts. The problem is more serious when involving child sex offenders, whose compulsions are believed to never be prevented unless kept behind bars. Around 70% of child sex offenders have a sex addiction. The Society for the Advancement of Sexual Health (www.sash.net) assists those struggling with a sex addiction by providing multiple resources, information, and guidance on how to manage their compulsive behavior.

Dr. Markel writes that Dr. Lambert had years of experience taking care of thousands of alcoholics at Bellevue Hospital’s infamous “drunk ward,” which is where he experimented with the belladonna cure. He obtained the recipe from a layman named Charles B. Towns, who claimed to have learned about it from a country doctor.

In 1901, Towns opened a substance abuse hospital in New York City; he needed Dr. Lambert because he lacked a medical degree, and Dr. Lambert needed Mr. Towns because he had relatively little to offer his patients in terms of an effective treatment.

The Towns Hospital attracted the wealthiest alcoholics and addicts, who paid exorbitant fees for a treatment that “successfully and completely removes the poison from the system and obliterates all craving for drugs and alcohol.”

Perhaps the most famous patient of the Towns Hospital was William Griffith Wilson, better known as Bill W., or the co-founder of Alcoholics Anonymous. In the early 1930s, Wilson was consuming more than two quarts of rotgut whiskey daily, a definite health risk according to Dr. Lambert, who found that consumers of cheap or bootlegged alcohol were far more prone to seizures, delirium tremens, and brain damage than those who drank expensive liquor.

Dr. Markel writes that between 1933 and 1934, at his wife’s urging and on his wealthy brother-in-law’s dime, Wilson was admitted to Towns four times. The cost upon admission was up to $350 (about $5,610 today) for a four- to five-day stay. Although Wilson made some progress in temporarily abstaining, he relapsed after each of the first three hospitalizations. It was around this time that he reunited with a drinking buddy named Ebby Thacher, who told Wilson that he had quit drinking and was now a member of the Oxford Group, a church-based association devoted to living on a higher spiritual plane guided by Christianity.

On Dec. 7, 1934, Thacher took Wilson to the Calvary Mission on East 23rd Street and Second Avenue, where the most drunken of New York’s Depression-era down-and-outers went to be fed and, hopefully, “saved.”

A few days later, Wilson drunkenly returned to the Towns Hospital, where Dr. William D. Silkworth sedated him with chloral hydrate and paraldehyde, two agents guaranteed to help an agitated drunk to sleep. This was especially important because the medical staff members had to wake patients every hour for at least two days to take the various pills, cathartics, and tinctures of the belladonna regime.

Dr. Markel writes that on the second or third day of his treatment, Wilson had a spiritual awakening. Earlier that evening, Thacher had visited and tried to persuade Wilson to turn himself over to the care of a Christian deity who would liberate him from the ravages of alcohol. Hours later, Wilson cried out: “I’ll do anything! Anything at all! If there be a God, let him show himself!” He then reportedly witnessed a blinding light and felt an ecstatic sense of freedom and peace. When Wilson told Dr. Silkworth about the event, the physician responded: “Something has happened to you I don’t understand. But you had better hang on to it.”

This experience ultimately led Wilson to abstain from alcohol for the remaining 36 years of his life and to co-create the novel program whereby one alcoholic helps another through a commitment to absolute honesty and a belief that a higher power can help one achieve sobriety, what we now know as Alcoholics Anonymous.

Long before Towns touted his cure for alcoholism, belladonna (as well as henbane) was known to cause hallucinations. The hallucinations brought on by alcoholic delirium tremens tend to be a transmogrification of things the alcoholic is actually seeing or experiencing into a realm of sheer terror. Other hallucinations associated with alcohol withdrawal, or alcoholic hallucinosis, tend to be brief and involve hearing accusatory or threatening voices. Belladonna hallucinations, however, are typically based on recent discussions the person had but become far more fantastic. Many times, these visions appear to fulfill the wishes one might have had during the inspiring experience.

Several decades after his 1909 announcement, Dr. Lambert took great pains to distance himself from belladonna. Although he found the detoxification process to be useful in the short run, Dr. Lambert became discouraged by its toxicity, its propensity to induce hallucinations, and the fact that many of those he treated at Bellevue relapsed and returned for subsequent treatment. Something more was needed, he declared, and that task fell to Bill Wilson and an alcoholic physician from Ohio named Bob Smith, who created Alcoholics Anonymous in 1935.

Dr. Markel asks: Were Bill Wilson’s spiritual awakening and influential sobriety the products of a belladonna hallucination shortly after his discussions with his friend Ebby Thacher? Could they have been incited by his alcohol withdrawal symptoms? Or did something else happen to him that science cannot explain? In the end, millions of people who have benefited from Alcoholics Anonymous and similar 12-step programs around the world would say that such pharmacological, physical, or spiritual parsing hardly matters.

One of the major substance-related difficulties in partner violence is that batterers have impaired decision-making when intoxicated. Control of violent behavior for batterers is largely a matter of making conscious choices for safety based upon empathy for others. Intoxication can sabotage the batterers’ ability to make such recovery-based decisions and to use cognitive coping skills designed for safety.

Intoxication also leads to poor impulse control that can override recovery efforts and safety plans meant to control coercion and abuse of partners. Poor impulse control allows emotions to surface with fewer mental checks and balances than are present when not intoxicated. High emotionality is a classical trigger to violence relapse for many batterers who use substances. High emotionality is also a common trigger for relapse to substance use.

Batterers who use substances also tend to have a more distorted perception of others when intoxicated. This can lead them to believe that their victims have hidden agendas, are provocative, disrespectful or any number of other things that trigger the impulse to control and abuse partners. Misinterpreting cues and situations because they are intoxicated can sabotage the batterers’ usual efforts to control violence. Substance use in these cases greatly increases the risk of partners becoming targeted and consequently harmed through the misperception of the batterer. Batterers who make conscious recovery efforts to stop violence are sabotaged by their continued use of substances.

Similarly, it is well known that batterers with substance use disorders do not always become nonviolent with sobriety. It is, however, something of a stretch of the imagination to say that batterers who continue violence while abstaining from substances are “sober”. Sobriety, especially in the self-help recovery community, is based upon the use of spiritual principles in one’s behavior and relationships. For this reason, a violent lifestyle is philosophically at odds with the concept of having sobriety from substances.

There are significant ways that domestic violence and substance use are distinct from each other, but they do share many characteristics. For example, denial is a core problem in each. For both the batterer and a substance user denial impedes recovery. Responsibility for behaviors is blamed on situations and others and, at times, there is not even an awareness of being responsible for problems. The tendency to avoid responsibility and blame others increases the dangerousness of batterers and the chances of relapse to substance use.

There are other effects of battering and substance use that are similar in both problems such as difficulty functioning in daily life, at work and in responsible and protective parenting. Legal problems are also typical. Depression, poor self-esteem and poor self-image are common characteristics of the two as well.

Treatment issues for batterers who use substances include the need to examine the relationship between battering and substance use. Some of these are:

• How much violence occurs when intoxicated and how does intoxication change the frequency of violence or the severity of violence?

• At what point during substance use does violence occur?

• Which is triggered first, substance use or violence?

• What substances are used in episodes of violence?

• Are substances used after episodes of violence?

• What does the batterer expect from substance use?

• Are substances used along with the victim?

• Is the victim’s use of substances used as excuse violence?

• What are the batterer’s expectations when the victim is using substances?

• Is the victim ever coerced to use substances with manipulation, intimidation or other tactics?

• Are substances used as “an excuse” for violence?

• Are substances used in premeditation preparing for violence?

Questions such as these help clarify the cycle of substance use and battering that are specific to the individual. Such an inventory allows recovery efforts to focus upon the specific coping skills and strategies needed at each step in the dual abuse cycle. In this way, relapse prevention for both issues can be thoroughly addressed. These intertwined and closely related issues create many challenges in achieving recovery and maintaining a good relapse prevention program.

Additionally, the close and complex relationship between substance use and domestic violence requires that good treatment for either screen for both problems or be prepared to handle many of the issues that surface for both. For example, both groups in treatment frequently reveal that they have experienced childhood abuse and/or neglect, have witnessed parental violence and were children of parents with substance problems. These types of trauma can present long-range and significant problems that impede recovery efforts in both substance use and battering. While some of this work is long-term and will require specific counseling apart from the primary issues of substance use and violence, it is important that they are identified, a plan is formulated and initial coping skills are learned in order to be successful in the first phases of substance recovery and nonviolence.

Treatment for substance use disorders occurs in phases and is typically time-limited. Treatment is necessarily specific in each stage as it identifies the goals for successful recovery such as detoxification, education and engagement with recovery supports. Longer term substance treatment focuses upon maintenance of sobriety and relapse prevention. Similarly, treatment for intimate partner violence is also typically time-limited and very goal specific. It is common for batterers to participate in educational groups that focus upon information about the cycle of violence, the impact of violence, coping strategies to stop battering and to prevent relapse. While substance use and domestic violence are commonly concurrent issues, treatment programs do not typically treat them simultaneously as, for example, some programs treat concurrent disorders of mental illness and substance problems. For these reasons addicted batterers may need to be referred to multiple services or multiple programs in order to successfully resolve a variety of issues that prevent us sustained recovery from substance use and battering.

Treatment providers for each problem should be able to screen and make appropriate referrals for additional services that are needed to thoroughly treat substance problems, domestic violence, parenting, trauma, mental health symptoms, self-esteem and anger and impulse control problems. Often, the legal system is involved in getting individuals to substance treatment and also to treatment for domestic violence. Court involvement helps to ensure that treatment needs are identified and appropriate services secured and coordinated. Treatment compliance is usually also monitored by the courts for such clients. Clients with substance use and domestic violence who wish to be compliant with court orders and/or to enter recovery successfully may need help in navigating multiple services and access to multiple programs. Court monitoring programs can provide the structure needed to assist them.

This study tests the effectiveness of Mindfulness Meditation – which is the calm awareness of one’s body and its functions – in the treatment of alcoholism and other addictions.

According to Aleksandra Zgierska, professor of family medicine and lead researcher, she was drawn to this study due to her roots in family medicine. She has witnessed the impact addiction can have on lives of the addict and those around them, especially those living in Wisconsin.

“Clearly, there is a need for development of new therapies to help improve outcomes in alcohol dependence and other addictive disorders,” Zgierska said, citing scientific evidence that shows 60 percent of people who quit their addictions relapse within a year.

Zgierska believes meditation is a perfect therapy to fill this need, especially since mindfulness treatments are proven to be an effective treatment for many triggers of addiction relapse. She believes that conceptually, it is a perfect fit as a therapy for addictions.

A pilot study was conducted by Zgierska in 2008 in which 15 alcohol-dependent adults were given meditation therapy in addition to their other treatments. Subjects participating in the study reported having new tools for dealing with their alcohol cravings. In addition, participants also liked the mediation.

While this is the first published study measuring meditation as a treatment for addiction disorders, many other small and large scale studies have been conducted since.
 

Adrienne Lu of the Philadelphia Inquirer writes that the law requires judges to incarcerate for up to three years all offenders convicted of selling drugs (or possessing drugs with the intent to sell them) within 1,000 feet of school property. The law was later changed to strengthen sentences for certain drug offenses within 500 feet of public parks, public housing, and other public buildings.

More than 20 years later, some argue it has done little to protect schoolchildren while disproportionately affecting cities and minorities. Others cite statistics indicating that treatment for drug addiction is more effective (and less costly) than prison.

The latest bill, which the Senate Judiciary Committee cleared last week (8-5), would allow judges to favor treatment over jail time and place offenders on probation in certain cases. The Assembly approved a previous version of the bill.

An amendment that would allow those now in prison for drug-free school-zone violations to apply for resentencing means that if the Senate approves the bill, the bill must return to the Assembly for a second vote.

The legislation calls for judges to consider factors such as a defendant’s criminal record, the proximity of the school property, the likelihood of exposing children to drug-related activity, whether school was in session, and whether children were nearby.

Under the bill, imprisonment would still be mandated for certain drug offenses, including those on school property or a school bus and those in which the defendant used or threatened violence or that involved a firearm.

"The bill gives a judge an opportunity to sentence them to start treatment rather than prison, which is a much more effective," said Sen. Raymond Lesniak (D., Union), a sponsor of the bill.

Critics said changes would send the wrong message. "We must remember why we established mandatory minimums in the first place," said Sen. Gerald Cardinale (R., Bergen), a Judiciary Committee member. "Leaving sentencing solely to the discretion of judges often meant that serial offenders were back on the street terrorizing our neighborhoods."

Among complaints about the existing law is that it unfairly targets minorities.

"We’ve heard so often that justice is blind, but in New Jersey, when it comes to drug crimes, too many offenders are unfairly penalized based on where they live and not on what crime they committed," said Sen. Sandra Cunningham (D., Hudson), also a sponsor of the bill. "This bill upholds the original intention of New Jersey’s drug-free school zone and continues to impose hard penalties on violent offenses but gives judges greater authority to dictate sentences for nonviolent offenders."

Large swaths of New Jersey’s most urban communities (where minorities are concentrated) fall within school zones. For example, 52 percent of Camden, 54 percent of Jersey City, and 76 percent of Newark (excluding the airport) are in drug-free school zones.

According to the New Jersey Commission to Review Criminal Sentencing, which studied the law and its effect, 96 percent of offenders convicted and incarcerated for such offenses in New Jersey are black or Hispanic.

"When this was constructed, all you had to do was look at a map in an urban area and you could therefore extrapolate that it would have a disproportionate impact on the people in those communities that are most densely populated," Sen. Nia Gill (D., Essex) said during the Judiciary Committee debate on the bill Monday.

People representing many sides of the criminal-justice system (including prosecutors, corrections officials, probation officers, the American Civil Liberties Union, and the Drug Policy Alliance) have registered support of the bill.

Barnett E. Hoffman, chairman of the criminal sentencing review commission, which is no longer active, said that while the legislation did not follow all of the recommendations of the commission, it was a very good bill.

"The present law doesn’t work," he said at the committee hearing. "It doesn’t deter anything."

In 1987, Hoffman said, 11 percent of the inmates in state prisons were there for drug offenses. By 1996, more than a third were incarcerated for drug offenses.

Drug courts have been proved to reduce recidivism by 24 percent, Hoffman said, and are generally far less expensive than imprisonment.

Among those who argue that the law affects minorities disproportionately is New Jersey Public Defender Yvonne Smith Segars.

The law, she said at the hearing, "effectively created a double standard: one for urban communities, one for suburban communities."

As recently as 2007, Segars said, New Jersey was one of the top three states in the disparity between incarcerating African Americans and whites. African Americans are incarcerated at 12 times the rate of whites, she said. And while African Americans make up only 13 percent of the state’s population, they constitute 70 percent of its jail population, she said.

Senate President Richard J. Codey (D., Essex), who has the power to decide whether bills are posted for a full Senate vote, opposed a previous version of the bill but, after changes, supports it. "Now it’s a bill that’s fair and gives equal justice for everyone," Codey said.

Gov. Corzine also supports the bill, according to spokesman Robert Corrales.

"Mandatory minimum criminal sentences may give the state Legislature the peace of mind of looking tough on crime, but they do little in terms of creating justice," said Lesniak, who said he had spent more time thinking about the criminal-justice system since two crack-cocaine addicts robbed him at his Elizabeth home in April. The two men have, with Lesniak’s support, agreed to drug treatment instead of imprisonment.

"New Jersey’s drug-free school-zone law simply doesn’t work, and it’s time we establish a fairer legal system for drug crimes in the Garden State," he said.

Sarah Olkon of the Chicago Tribune writes that Heather Reynolds, now 28, gave birth to her daughter Alyssa two years ago inside a maximum-security prison where Heather was serving time for selling drugs. Reynolds, who was addicted to crystal meth, was given just one day to bond with her baby before Alyssa was sent to live with a relative.

Today, Reynolds and her daughter are together again, building a new life at the Women’s Treatment Center, one of many organizations in the region supported by Chicago Tribune Holiday Giving, a campaign of Chicago Tribune Charities, a McCormick Foundation Fund.

The facility is run in part with public funds, but relies on private donations to support many of its services, including parenting classes, day care, early-intervention programs for young kids, detoxification, rehabilitation, therapy, and a 24-hour crisis nursery.

"They show you how to live sober," said Reynolds, who credits the center for teaching her to better cope with everyday stress.

Cynthia Wessel, 28, had no intention of giving up crack cocaine until social workers from the Department of Children and Family Services gave her an ultimatum shortly after she gave birth to 6-month-old Kevina. At the hospital, Wessel said her infant tested positive for crack cocaine and marijuana exposure, which meant she risked losing both Kevina and another daughter, Keviona, 3, if she didn’t get off drugs.

Today, Wessel said, her life looks completely new. "I feel wonderful on the inside,” she said.

If the cost of her addiction to crack were measured, it would be her children who suffered the most, Wessel said. "I was focusing on the high instead of my kids," she said.

Wessel is now taking classes to learn parenting skills, something she said she didn’t learn growing up. "I don’t have to ‘whup’ them," she said. "Instead, I count to five, or have them stand in a corner."

Jewell Oates, executive director of the center, said staff members understand that many of the mothers were raised in environments marked by violence, abuse, and neglect.

"Just because the women get sober, doesn’t mean the women know how to parent," Oates said.

For Tasha Green, 38, it wasn’t until she examined her own troubled childhood that she began to understand the reasons she turned to crack cocaine and heroin. She has been enrolled at the center since August, and her goal is to regain custody of her 7-year-old son. With that in mind, she is learning to better understand the needs of the boy, who she said suffers from attention-deficient hyperactivity disorder.

"Being a parent wasn’t part of the addiction process," Green said. This "really gave me a second chance."

A recent Science Daily post examined the summary of two Internet studies conducted by Cheryl Carling and colleagues from the Norwegian Knowledge Center for the Health Services (Oslo, Norway). These studies were done to help researchers understand how information should best be presented to individuals when making choices about any type of health care or treatment.

In previous research, it was determined that when presenting treatment options to patients, the type of statistic used to illustrate risks and benefits of treatment can affect the patient’s choice. For instance, a patient is more likely to choose invasive therapy if the outcomes are presented in terms of chance of survival instead of chance of death.

Carling and colleagues conducted two different Internet studies to gather their data. Both trials found that as participants’ values change, their decision as to whether or not to seek specific treatment also changed. It was also determined that some ways of presenting information about risk were found to be more persuasive in motivating participants to opt for treatment, regardless of their values.

While these studies were limited in the fact that participants were more likely to be young and well-educated in comparison with the rest of the general population, they demonstrated that certain elements sway a patient toward one treatment decision over another.

In scenarios where patients are selecting addiction treatment for themselves or a loved one, it really is a life and death decision. Values must be considered before a decision can be made if the patient is to be successful in the treatment and in functional life following treatment.