dopetalk
Core Topics => In the Media => Topic started by: clinton on November 07, 2015, 09:05:37 PM
-

As a father, my heart belongs to my children. As the owner of an addiction treatment center, my thoughts are with my clients and how to help them return to their families. I recognize in these two roles, that my feelings toward children, mine and those of others, and my obligations toward my clients, often parents who are working to rebuild positive relationships with their children, are sometimes in conflict.
Recently, I was asked to address the realities of parents who are on opioid replacement therapies (ORT), particularly methadone and Suboxone, and the needs of their children. It is my considered opinion that the law may side too heavily with the rights of parents, while not adequately protecting the needs of children.
Let's understand ORT. ORT, whether methadone or Suboxone, is a replacement medication for those who are addicted to opioid pain medications or heroin. It serves as a way to ease withdrawal symptoms and in long-term use, is a replacement or substitute for prescription painkillers or heroin.


Suboxone is often preferred over methadone because it is taken in a form that does not require daily doses in a clinical setting. Methadone also is more easily abused than Suboxone, as Suboxone has an additive that makes at least some users sick when it is crushed and used intravenously. ORT is given in a dose that does not allow a person to feel high, but does give enough of the drug to keep the addict from feeling sick. These drugs are "safest" when tolerance is developed and though a person might technically have enough drugs in their system to be high, the addict feels normal. Most doctors are moving away from methadone toward prescribed Suboxone because it is believed that Suboxone has less potential for abuse. Suboxone has a mixed bag in terms of results and its use is highly controversial in the addiction treatment community.
The medical literature on Suboxone says that it is safe to leave children in the care of someone who is on Suboxone, if the medication is being used exactly as prescribed and a preliminary dosing period has provided the patient with a steady dose.
This is all well and good if you are among the ORT users who do not relapse or die while on an ORT treatment plan. Relapse rates are high and mortality rates are far above average. Do we allow addicts on ORT to supervise children and wait and hope that no relapse occurs? My suggestion is no, because even if a relapse while on Suboxone is minor or short-lived, there is a great deal of evidence that shows that children who have access to Suboxone are at high risk of accidental ingestion and overdose leading to death. Even having Suboxone in the home is playing with fire.
A related problem with Suboxone use is driving under the influence. In some states, it is illegal to drive with Suboxone in one's system. In other states, the police must show that the medication impairs the ability to drive.
Even in that case, it is very possible that those who use Suboxone even as prescribed can be too impaired to drive as the medication has many contraindications for drug mixing. For example, mixing a standard dose of Suboxone with a single beer or prescribed medication for depression can have disastrous results. Is this a situation into which children should be thrown into the mix? Even if it is strictly legal, would you leave your child with an adult you know to be on Suboxone, methadone or other medications that can impair decision-making? I'm a professional in the field and I certainly will not.
Parents, including addicts and especially those in recovery, have rights. Children have rights too. Where do we place our values? As someone who provides care to addicts and knows the real probability of relapse for those who are on ORT, I have to support looking first and foremost at what is in the best interest of children.
While it may be legal in the strictest standard of the law for someone who is on ORT to mind children, cook their dinner, drive them to soccer, or supervise their baths, is that what is in the children's best interest? Do we wait until relapse and disaster strikes to take action? You wouldn't place your children in the care of someone on methadone or Suboxone, so why allow others to do that very thing? Yes, parents have protected rights, and at the same time, we have to consider the welfare and safety of our children.
I am abstinent from drugs and alcohol for more than a decade. I leave my children in the care of individuals in recovery all the time. I don't think twice about it because those who are established in an abstinence based recovery have the ability to put the needs of the children in their care first.
Those who are on ORT do not have the clarity of mind, in my opinion, to be unsupervised primary caregivers for children. ORT has a role to play in addiction treatment, but it should be a stepping stone to abstinence based care, not the end of the road and a "maintenance" treatment. Our children deserve better than that
-
Hes the CEO of Cliffside Malibu
-
What a whesal.
Reminds me of a brain privacy lecture we had school. Lets arrest
The dirty thought criminals before they commit a crime in the future. Now its: lets take the kids away before these dirty junkies relapse. I feel sorry for anyone who goes to his (soley to enrich hom most likely) treatment center. Yuck.
-
I really don't think I was EVER impaired during the years I was on suboxone... I don't have little kids any more but - SHIT - do we really need more obstacles to people trying to get clean? yup let's take away their kids. What a tool
-
What a dick.
The other day someone on another forum (non drug ) posted up the rat park video and said how great it was that addiction was "only in the addicts head". Oh and that there is no such thing as physical addiction.
*Face Palm *
-
As a victim of this kinda bullishit, I found most the info posted (if not ALL) pretty offensive.
Without going into too much detail (those of you that know, know) my step children were removed from the home nearly 2 years ago.
The complaint started off as an allegation that I was "abusing" Methadone and Xanax.
Which is bullishit, I'm "prescribed" Methadone and Xanax. I'm also on Welbutrin and Seroquel.... But I never abused them.
Just the scheduled meds.... Anyway, once everything was looked into. Worker dropped the case.
But, flash forward one month later, and now there are allegations that I'm choking, throwing, punching, gouging and any other form of brutal physical abuse you can imagine, to my two step children.
At the time, my eldest step son was visiting his bio dad in Texas, we're in California.
Once the drug allegations didn't stick, they threw that fucking bullishit at me. And bio dad had been MIA for nearly 12 years.
My point is.... This kinda ignorant bullishit is what spawns new and consequence free ways for outside parties, with their own agenda (in this case, getting out of paying child support) an avenue to use DCFS as a medium to fuck with other people's lives.
As it stands, my youngest step son will be returning home in December. My eldest is completely head fucked by his own dad, doesn't call his mother or brother and the bio "dad" plays keep away with the phone.
It's heart wrenching, and its a complete misuse and abuse of a system to protect children that are in honest to God BAD situations.
Do we really need to start taking children away from people that are doing the best they can with the disease which they are afflicted with?
And what about other opioid narcotic medication? Why is it so much more safe to keep in a home with kids?
Should we pull children away from parents that are healing up, post operation, on narcotic pain medication?
This is the hugest load of shit that I've read in awhile.
Due respect, but your hypothesis and "solution" is fucked up.
You ever heard the stories that come out of some of these group homes and Foster families?
Do me a favor, look it up.... Then tell me that your extremely biased opinion is justifiable.
-
I appreciate that many in recovery feel the need to demonise drugs and drug users to maintain their own recovery,but really!!
Ugly article.
-
I appreciate that many in recovery feel the need to demonise drugs and drug users to maintain their own recovery,but really!!
Ugly article.
From a loving parent who just happens to be an addict.
-
Omg. I just can't...this is too much bs to address but I will say you cannot use blanket statements like the OP...maybe some ort patients aren't quite responsible enough YET, but the vast majority are on ort in order to stabilize their lives BC of their children. To the op, you really picked the wrong forum for this kind of crap... Very disappointed that you feel this way, Kat
-
You really think this is my opinion ? This is an article by the CEO of a drug treatment facility .I even posted his name and what facility he runs. I've been an opiophile member since 2006,and I plan on being here even longer ..I'm fully aware of the sensitivity of the subject. I was posting the article so we could all see the types of mentalities we deal with day to day even from former junkies like the man who wrote the article...
I post many articles, they usually don't represent what I believe.I post them to keep everyone informed on the state of things in regards to our thing....
-
What a colossal ASSWHIPE!
Holier-than-thou bullshit. Can't stand it.
And all that "children are my biggest concern in the whole world, all children - do it for the children" stupidity makes me sick.
What if one of his recovering friends with whom he leaves his kids all the time just decides to relapse, which happens an awful lot, and accidentally puts his kids in the oven?
How the fuck would this work anyway? Let's see: if you're using heroin, and don't go for help with suboxone or methadone, then you can keep your kids, but if you seek out the help, they take your kids from you? WTFF!?#*&(*_(*&^*(^*(&^&*()?
-
Lol at the peeps who think Clinton wrote this himself.
-
Thanks for posting this article, Clinton. While I BELIEEVE EVERYTHING THAT WAS SAID IN THIS ARTICLE IS PURE BULLSHIT, I DO REALIZE THAT IT IS IN THIS DOUCHE BAGS BEST INTEREST TO PREACH ABSTINENCE BEING HIS FACILITY IS AN ABSTINENCE BASED MODEL.
OOPS..SORRY FOR THE CAPS!
I agree that SOME people on maintenence medication are impaired due to poly substance abuse (mainly benzos, but other shit too) , but on the whole I think most people on medication assisted treatment, who are not abusing or combining other meds are perfectly fine and able to take care of children and do all the regular things, like driving, safely.
There are many other conditions other than drug abuse that can put kids in danger. When I was little(four) I was alone with my diabetic mother who experinced ketoacidosis and she was in a coma for about a week. A neighbor found me wandering around trying to get help. Obviously that wasn't a safe situation, but do people say, hey, lets take away the kids of diabetics..ya' know..just to be safe?
I have epilepsy, and while I am well controlled on medication, I can see how some dangerous situations could present themselves. So, do we take away children of epileptics too?
I could go on and on and on..but you get the drift!
The article also says that relapse rates are high...only he doesn't mention they are WAY higher in an abstinence only model. If that model was more effective, we wouldn't need ORT. I have one more thing to say....What an asshat!
that is all!
-
I agree whole-heartedly that the author of the article has written a ridiculous mound of excrement. Know what it's like to lose a child based on someone else's skewed idea of how unsafe my pain meds can be/are to my children. It's infuriating for a complete stranger (or loved one for that matter) to presume to know how I react to medicine I've been on for a decade or more.
However, I also know parents on meds and/or ORT that present a danger to their kids on a regular basis but due to case load or other factors those children have fallen through the cracks. Where is the line? Who draws it? How many kids are a tolerable sacrifice in the name of parental rights? I don't want to be policed but I know so many that are damaging innocents because they have no incentive not to. There are two sides here, but the lines are so blurry that it is inevitable that if a viable answer isn't found we are gonna have massive casualties on both sides.
I don't pretend to know the answers. I fight regularly proving my fitness as a parent to one person or another. And I worry lots about the kids around here stuck in scary situations they don't understand. There has to be a way to protect them all. ~ Lissa
-
I agree whole-heartedly that the author of the article has written a ridiculous mound of excrement. Know what it's like to lose a child based on someone else's skewed idea of how unsafe my pain meds can be/are to my children. It's infuriating for a complete stranger (or loved one for that matter) to presume to know how I react to medicine I've been on for a decade or more.
However, I also know parents on meds and/or ORT that present a danger to their kids on a regular basis but due to case load or other factors those children have fallen through the cracks. Where is the line? Who draws it? How many kids are a tolerable sacrifice in the name of parental rights? I don't want to be policed but I know so many that are damaging innocents because they have no incentive not to. There are two sides here, but the lines are so blurry that it is inevitable that if a viable answer isn't found we are gonna have massive casualties on both sides.
I don't pretend to know the answers. I fight regularly proving my fitness as a parent to one person or another. And I worry lots about the kids around here stuck in scary situations they don't understand. There has to be a way to protect them all. ~ Lissa
The answer is: when a parent actually fucks up, when there is an actual cause to remove children from the home, that is when you remove children from the home. I don't think drug use in and of itself is a substantial reason to remove kids (especially when the foster care system is so fucked). Yes, there are a lot of kids who slip through the cracks, but you can't take action based on the potential or likelihood of neglect or abuse (just like you can't arrest people who are statistically more likely to commit murder). Unfortunately it's one of those things where you have to wait for it to happen.
-
The answer is: when a parent actually fucks up, when there is an actual cause to remove children from the home, that is when you remove children from the home. I don't think drug use in and of itself is a substantial reason to remove kids (especially when the foster care system is so fucked).
Yes, and even CA mandated CPS reporting laws (which are by nature hypervigilant) state that drug use/addiction is not in itself cause for reporting neglect or abuse. If it was it would destroy the entire substance use therapy community, because it would mean every single addiction counselor would have to violate confidentiality for their clients who are parents.
-
Apologies for thinking you wrote this...was in my car and kinda distracted. The rest of what I said is still valid. Again, most people on ORT are trying to stabilize their lives in order to be better parents to their children. This kind of thinking is a huge problem...
-
I wonder where that BS article came from? For someone who owns/runs a treatment center they don't seem to know much about burenorphine which is MUCH less likely to interfere with day to day functioning.
Also, kids who find bupe aren't going to put them under their tongue They will either swallow them whole ir chew them, meaning very, very poor bioavailability.
ANd in the US, EVERY SINGLE WEEK a toddler finds their parents' gun and kills someone, usually thinking they are playing with a toy. That ain't happening with Subs or 'done I promise you.
-
Huffington post ..whenever I try to link it up now I get the 404 error message now...strange
The guys a real shit for brains .