Thesis Statement
The Marchman Act – Florida Statute 397.6811 – involuntary assessment and Florida Statue 397.693 involuntary treatment is the moral obligation of state law as funding should be increased because there is a need for state-funded beds, can increase odds of recovery, and can help meet the demand for resources, training, and evidence-based intervention implementation.
The State Of Florida Should Expand Funding For State-Funded Beds
Increasing Accessibility for Those Who Don’t Have Insurance and Rely on State Funds
The problem of the need for such intervention from the outside is aggravated by the fact that adults, like adolescents when confronted with addiction, acquire a number of other serious psychological complications. In particular, about a third of adults with substance use disorder also suffer from depression. As a result, they are not able to rationally evaluate their actions and build a more adequate emotional background. This problem, combined with access to psychoactive substances, can become extremely problematic and lead to suicide and self-harm (Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, n.d.).
Moreover, it is important to take into account that this harm to oneself can be not only intentional but also accidental and unintentional, perceived by a person as an extreme, radical attempt at self-healing. The real cure for people caught in such a trap can be interventions carried out under the auspices of the Marchman Act. Treatment of drug-related comorbidities, including other mental disorders, is also an integral part of the recovery program.
Addressing Public Health Issues, Homelessness, and Unemployment
The problem of substance abuse is a considerable public health issue and affects one in seven Americans aged 12 and over. Substance abuse disorder extends to all areas of the subject’s life, including work, education, and family life. It is the Marchman Act that seems to be a program capable of removing the declassing stigma from a person with this disease and thus drawing attention to the problem without condemning those suffering from substance use disorder.
Considering that drug use can lower the social status of a person and deprive them of the opportunity to earn money, the problem of homelessness in the context of drug addiction is quite common. People may experience problems earning and distributing money adequately, resulting in them being on the streets, unable to pay their bills. The state of homelessness also causes a deep psychological trauma that can only exacerbate the problem of drug use. Unemployment and homelessness are often problems stemming from drug addiction, but it is not uncommon for these same social turmoil to trigger drug addiction.
Increasing Accessibility to Oppressed and Racially Discriminated Populations
At the legal level, it is stated that, regardless of class or gender, a person is able to receive assistance under the auspices of the Marchman Act without any discrimination. Services are non-discriminatory and do not even refuse individuals who have committed a crime while maintaining their constitutional rights. Particular attention is paid to the category of dignity that should be preserved in the individuals undergoing treatment. It is also important to note that despite involuntary placement in treatment, the service-providing authorities guarantee the least restrictive conditions for the individual, according to their needs (Cavaiola & Dolan, 2016). Thus, maximum respect is shown to a person, which will avoid cases of remission and falling into criminal antisocial patterns of behavior.
The economic benefits of this program are quite large, as they prevent the growth of drug-related crime and decriminalize the person suffering from addiction. Broward County says it has waived the construction of a new jail on the county’s property, saving $350,000 after the act was implemented. Thus, this Act gives not only humanistic but also purely monetary advantages. In addition, this proves the underestimation of the criminal consequences of drug use.
Involuntary Assessment and Treatment Increase the Odds of Recovery
Anecdotal Evidence – Examples of Individuals Who Have Benefited From Involuntary Treatment
One of the specialist therapists present at the discussion of the Marchman Act, and its role in behavioral medicine gave an example from his practice. A man approached him with the aim of sending his own wife for compulsory treatment. After learning about the Act and its functionality, he admitted that if he had used it a few weeks earlier, his son, who died from an overdose, might still be alive (Futures Recovery Healthcare, 2022). This proves the need to expand the possibilities of this act and the need to sponsor such services at the state level. Extensive grants and the spread of knowledge about the Marchman Act can help desperate families, and additional funding for specialists can reduce the time spent waiting for help.
In order to better understand the logic of the functioning of the Marchman Act, one should compare it with another Act adopted in Florida and improved since 1971, the Baker Act. This act was aimed at helping those suffering from mental disorders receive help, given that they themselves do not agree to treatment. Involuntary placement in appropriate institutions was a hallmark of the Baker Act, which extended to the Marchman Act, which, however, is characterized by a specific focus on problems of drug addiction. The Marchman Act is broader and more extended in its application, and while the Baker Act could only hold a person for therapy for 72 hours, the Marchman Act extends the potential detention period to 90 days.
At the same time, the specificity of the Marchman Act is the ability to resume these 90-day treatment sessions. Periodically, 90 days may be just the first step in the healing process. Of particular difficulty is filling out an order for the placement of a relative or close one; however, in the event of economic and legal restrictions, this is the only condition that a person can be given help.
As part of this act, a person can be subjected to a detoxification procedure that helps to get rid of the withdrawal syndrome or the negative psychophysical effects of addiction. The patient is integrated into the healthcare system, where they can be given intensive attention by an interdisciplinary team of professionals. Special attention is paid to cases of opioid addicts, with programs of increased intensity and increased duration. In the case of sufficient financial support, the patient is constantly informed individually and provided with necessary information about treatment, sobriety, and mental health.
Providing Awareness, Education, and Continued Services for Individuals With SUD
As part of this act, a professional assessment of behavior and health status is carried out by a certified specialist, and observation and education of the patient are continued after the intensive care is over. The treatment provided under the auspices of the Marchman Act takes place under the supervision of the patient’s desperate loved ones and is guaranteed to be humane and not excessive, befitting the severity of the situation. The Marchman Act differs from the older Baker Act in that it aims to provide a real cure as opposed to stabilizing the situation. The advantage of the Marchman Act is that the family is able to control what happens to the patient and independently choose treatment strategies. The Baker Act may, after 72 hours, work in such a way that the state will not forcibly return the patient after the stabilization process and send him to the clinic without the consent of the relatives (Futures Recovery Healthcare, 2022). Thus, the Marchman Act is a humane and measured response to the excesses of previous legal means to help the sick.
It is necessary to take into account, when discussing the ethical characteristics of this act that its adoption in Florida is connected with the principles of protecting a person from causing harm. A person who uses alcohol or drugs uncontrollably can be dangerous not only for himself but also for the closest people around him. Therefore, a mandatory objective assessment and appropriate treatment for people who cause such fears for relatives may be the only way not only to save a person but also to protect loved ones from danger.
Assisting Those Who Refuse Treatment the Help They Need
The key indicators of the possibility of using the Marchman Act are quite broad and include many examples of resistance to treatment for addiction. Mention may be made of refusing to support relatives, running away from home, and avoiding services offered by the interventionist (Duchen & Lan, 2009). The suffering of addicted individuals and, the inability to convince them to use professional help, the lack of self-control, and the denial of the need for treatment are all sufficient factors for the application of the Act. Examples from legal practice show that a drug addict subject to compulsory treatment cannot refuse to take substances on his own since addiction is like a disease that is difficult to cure (Johnson & Hoopes, 2019). That is why such programs are especially valuable since they perceive the addicted patient realistically and humanely.
The advantage of the Marchman Act is the aftercare program, which allows one to consolidate the recovery experience gained during therapy in order to avoid remission and even greater personal trauma. The problem is compounded by the fact that many adults are immersed in traumatic experiences of facing real-life problems. The use of substances can happen to people as a result of psychological trauma, as a result of which a person turns to substances as a way to distract himself from deep psychological complexes. In order to reduce possible unpleasant side effects, the treatment process works with the patient’s motivation and self-esteem in such a way as to relieve them of the feeling of pressure from authority. Post-treatment follow-up is especially important for opioid addicts, who are at increased risk of overdose if they go into remission after a long period of withdrawal.
There Is a Demand for Resources, Training, and Evidence-Based Intervention Implementation
Implementing Evidence-Based Interventions as a Game Changer
Despite the pursuit of the most patient-centered and progressive drug policy, Florida is just recovering from the pandemic crisis that has put a significant strain on the healthcare system. It is important to note that, at a legal level, an individual’s inability to pay is not a legal reason for refusing treatment. The resources provided by the state and the space suitable for treatment are always taken into account. That is why it is necessary to expand the treatment facilities at the legislative level so that class and financial differences do not determine the order in which people receive assistance.
Florida is just getting over the pandemic crisis that has severely strained the state’s healthcare system, despite the state’s efforts to implement the most progressive and patient-centered drug policy. Unless adequate support is provided to drug-dependent populations long enough to complete the recovery period, the fabric of society will deteriorate despite the efforts of the health system and jurisdiction (Johnson & Hoopes, 2019). Therefore, the collection of data and the accumulation of reports on the recovery of drug addicts is especially valuable, forming the foundation for evidence-based recovery. It is not only patient-centric but also contextually perceptive.
Implementing Facilities to Enhance the Utilization of Community Resources
In case the project gets the popularity it deserves, the state should consider the problem of funding in such a way as to provide the necessary human and technical resources for assessing and stabilizing the condition of the patients. The pressure on the healthcare system can be high enough that funding is required to place all the patients admitted under the Marmman Act. The need to increase public funding for the Marchman Act is reinforced by the fact that not all people suffering from drug addiction are able to pay for the treatment offered to them. An example of the economic near-crisis state of the country during the pandemic demonstrates that recipients were ready to cover only part of the treatment.
Insurance almost never allows one to get treatment completely free of charge. Government funds such as the Drug Abuse Fund have been weighed down by the pandemic and forced to lower donation rates. Thus, those receiving treatment and insurance assistance find themselves on long-term waiting lists, which can have a fatal effect on the condition of those suffering from addiction.
Given the time constraints associated with the degradation of a dependent person, many families are forced, not being able to quickly get help, to turn to less humane and more radical measures. If the state pays attention to the problem of the influx of patients under the Act, it can use public premises that were previously subject to disposal. It should be noted that as a result, the organization of coordinated assistance to drug addicts can ease the financial and labor burden on the healthcare system since an automated process will save money and time.
Establishing a Proactive, Preventative, and Interactive Way to Address a Growing National Problem
These initiatives need to be supported at the state level, and more public coverage of this problem in the media and the blogosphere is required. The problem of drug abuse continues to be of great concern, affecting an increasingly young population in the country. It is important to note that addicts often do not perceive themselves as people with a psychological illness due to their limited ability to judge and evaluate their own actions (Sederstrom, 2017). Because of this, it may seem that intervention is capable of destroying their fragile internal balance. However, one needs to remember that within the framework of this Act, one can really save these people from the suffering of those who are addicted.
This initiative has a potential preventive side because, through awareness of the Marchman Act, people become more concerned about addiction as a public issue. The stories told about the people who resorted to the help of the Marchman Act are extremely dramatic and demonstrate that this initiative may be the last resort. There is a story of a 75-year-old man who lost touch with his wife because he resorted to the Baker Act instead of the Marchman Act, which resulted in her being locked up by the state in a mental hospital (Futures Recovery Healthcare, 2022).
The ability to resume treatment after the end of the initial 90-day period highlights the altruism of this initiative. Sometimes, this extra time is vital in order to solidify a drug-free mental state that needs extra time to gain stability. Sober World hosted the success story of a 30-year-old woman who was on the verge of remission, but an additional month and a half of treatment did their job, and she has not taken drugs for a year (Considine, 2018). Often, traumatic experiences and fear of humiliation are obstacles for people to accept help, so the implementation of treatment under the Marchman Act requires more time and patience.
Patients admitted to treatment under the Marchman Act show higher recovery rates than those who voluntarily go to commercial rehabilitation centers. It is in Florida that the advanced standards of treatment effectiveness are observed due to its patient-centeredness and high awareness in comparison with similar initiatives in other states, for example, in the often criticized Massachusetts (Report on Involuntary Examinations of Minors, 2019). The advantage of the Marchman Act over other rehabilitation state initiatives can be seen from the statistics of drug usage by the state for recent years (Kiernan, 2022).
Table 1 – The Statistics of Drug Usage in Top 3 States and Florida.
In order to show the effectiveness of the Marchman Act, it is enough to resort to addiction statistics in each state. Florida is only in 33rd place, which is quite low considering that the number of legal rehabilitation cases in the country is quite high – in this ranking, the state is in 13th place. This proves that the active use of rehabilitation practices can be successfully extended at the state level throughout the country.
References
Cavaiola A. A., & Dolan, D. (2016) Considerations in civil commitment of individuals with substance use disorders, Substance Abuse 37(1), 181-187. Web.
Civil commitment and the mental health care continuum: Historical trends and principles for law and practice. (n.d.). Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. Web.
Considine, J. (2018). Marchman Act Success Stories. The Sober World. Web.
Duchene, D., & Lane. L. (2009). Fundamentals of the Marchman Act. Risk Rx 6(2). Web.
Futures Recovery Healthcare. (2022). The Marchman Act: Why Florida is still the leader in behavioral healthcare – Virtual Event [Video]. YouTube. Web.
Johnson, C. & Hoopes, J. (2019). The war on drugs and the case for rehabilitation. Brigham Young University Prelaw Preview 33(17), 1-10.
Kiernan, J. (2022). Drug use by state: Problem areas. WalletHub. Web.
Sederstrom, J. (2017). Would involuntary commitment save lives? Interest in civil commitment for addiction grows, but hurdles could impede implementation. Behavioral Executive 37(4), 28+.
Report on Involuntary Examinations of Minors. (2019). Florida Department of Children and Families. Web.
Substance abuse services. (n.d.) Official Internet Site of the Florida Legislature. Web.