| ||||||||||
| ||||||||||
| Faces & Voices Website Take Action Our Store Donate Contact | ||||||||||
    | ||||||||||
| Copyright 2013 - Faces & Voices of Recovery |
Sunday, November 2, 2014
No Flood of Patients Seeking Care for Substance Use Disorders Under Affordable Care Act
October 30th, 2014/
While many newly insured patients are seeking care now that the Affordable Care Act has expanded coverage, there has not been a rush of new patients receiving treatment for substance use disorders or mental health issues, according to U.S. News & World Report.
Several factors are keeping people from receiving care for substance use disorders and mental health care, known collectively as behavioral health, the article notes. Experts believe the majority of the 5 million people who are without health care, because they live in states that have not expanded Medicaid, need mental health treatment. Some patients who do have insurance are not aware their benefits include coverage for behavioral health.
While mental health and substance use disorders are considered essential health benefits and must be covered, the Affordable Care Act does not specify which particular services must be covered. States vary in their requirements.
“There’s a perception that enforcement is not what it should be, and that people aren’t getting the benefits they are entitled to,” said Bob Carolla, a spokesman at the National Alliance on Mental Illness.
If more patients do start seeking care for behavioral health, experts are concerned there will not be adequate resources to serve them. A report by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration found a shortage of 1,846 psychiatrists and 5,931 other mental health professionals. In 55 percent of U.S. counties, there are no practicing psychiatrists, psychologists or social workers. All of these counties are rural.
“There has been a long-standing shortage,” Carolla says. “Expansion of health care is a good thing, but it also means you are widening demand for it.”
Denver Police to Parents: Make Sure Halloween Candy Doesn’t Contain Marijuana
October 30th, 2014/
The Denver Police Department has posted a public service video, made in conjunction with a marijuana store owner, that advises parents to check their children’s Halloween candy to make sure it isn’t infused with marijuana.
Marijuana edible products can mimic candy such as Sour Patch Kids, Jolly Ranchers and gummy bears, the video cautions parents. Patrick Johnson, the owner of Urban Dispensary, says, “There’s really no way to tell the difference. It’s best just to toss that stuff into the trash.”
There have been no reported cases of marijuana-infused treats being given to children on Halloween in Denver, The New York Times reports. Marijuana advocates say the warnings perpetuate urban legends, such as candy bars spiked with razor blades. But the warning underscores the concern of parents’ groups and regulators that marijuana edible products look too much like regular food, the article notes.
Edible marijuana products have become a popular alternative to smoking marijuana in Colorado this year, since retail sales of the products became legal on January 1. Adults 21 and over can legally purchase marijuana edibles at state-licensed stores. Marijuana is now available in products ranging from candy to soda and granola.
Recently, marijuana retailers in Colorado have begun responding to reports of tourists who have had bad experiences after consuming large amounts of THC by offering products with lower amounts. THC is the psychoactive ingredient in marijuana. A “serving” of marijuana is 10 milligrams of THC under Colorado rules. It can be difficult to tell exactly how much THC is in an individual cookie or brownie. Many marijuana edibles contain 100 milligrams of THC, and are meant to be broken into multiple pieces to avoid overdosing.
Earlier this year, health officials reported legal marijuana edible products were linked to two deaths and an increase in emergency room visits in Colorado.
NFL Expected to Ask for Dismissal of Players’ Lawsuit Over Painkillers
October 30th, 2014/
The National Football League (NFL) is expected to request that a lawsuit filed by former players who allege the league illegally supplied them with prescription painkillers be dismissed, ABC News reports.
The case is scheduled to be heard in San Francisco’s federal court on Thursday morning.
The players say the drugs numbed their injuries and led to medical complications. Lawyers for the league deny the allegations. They argue the former players waited too long to file suit, citing a two-year statute of limitations for claiming personal injury. Former players who joined the lawsuit said they did not realize the health hazards they faced until recently.
The lawyers also argued the lawsuit does not specify the damages the players have suffered and does not name who dispensed the painkillers.
The players say the NFL obtained and administered the painkillers without prescriptions. The league did not warn the players about the drugs’ potential side effects, the lawsuit alleges. The players say the league wanted them to return to the field quickly, in order to maximize profits.
Some players say they were not told they had broken legs or ankles, and were instead given painkillers. One player said he was given anti-inflammatory medication instead of surgery. The years of free painkillers led to addiction, some players contend.
The lawsuit states the drugs given to players included painkillers such as Percodan, Percocet and Vicodin, anti-inflammatories such as Toradol, and sleep aids such as Ambien.
Lawyers for the players are seeking class-action status for former players who received narcotic painkillers, anti-inflammatory drugs, local anesthetics, sleeping aids or other drugs without a prescription. More than 500 other former players have signed on to the lawsuit. The suit seeks to force the NFL to fund a testing and monitoring program to help prevent addiction, injuries and disabilities resulting from painkiller use. The suit also seeks unspecified financial damages.
House Member Grades from Pro-Legalization Group Don’t Fall Neatly Along Party Lines
October 30th, 2014/
Report card grades for members of the U.S. House of Representatives, issued by the pro-marijuana legalization group Drug Policy Alliance, do not fall neatly along party lines. Some conservative members of Congress are among the 49 House members who earned an A+, while some prominent Democrats are among the 141 members who received an F.
The group’s advocacy arm, Drug Policy Action, issued the report card Wednesday, according to U.S. News & World Report. Representative Steve Stockman, a conservative Republican from Texas, earned an A+, while Democratic National Committee Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz, from Florida, earned an F.
The group based the grades on seven House votes. Three involved hemp and two involved banking rights for marijuana businesses. One would have cut funding from the Drug Enforcement Administration, and one was designed to protect medical marijuana in states where it is legal.
Members who voted in a way the group considered pro-drug reform in six of the votes received an A. Those who voted for reforms in one or none of the votes received an F. The group gave 56 percent of House members (179 Democrats and 64 Republicans) a grade of C or better, which indicated they favored reform in at least three of the seven votes.
The group did not grade senators, saying there were not enough drug policy votes in the chamber to consider.
Injustice at The St Lucie FL Medical Center, Treasure Coast Behavioral Health Center
My Daughters plea to the Prosecutor for her mentally ill brother. Please help Daniel by signing the petition, he is not a felon. Prison cannot be a warehouse for the mentally ill. Daniel is just a symptom of the problem. Together we must fight for all our children, addicted, mentally ill or not. Today it is my child, tomorrow it can be yours. Much love to all addict's moms and their families....Barbara
Injustice at The St Lucie FL Medical Center, Treasure Coast Behavioral Health Center
Ms.
I have been told a great amount of your endless work and commitment to St. Lucie County and its occupants, and because of this knowledge of your rational, erudite attributes, I thought I would give you my insight of my brother, Daniel Montalbano, case number ____.
Being only a year and nine months younger than my brother Daniel, we were extremely close growing up. Even at a young age, I noticed that although my brother was older than me, he didn’t seem to have some of the common social and societal features that I began to develop as we both got older. I always assumed he was just a bit off, which I expected some people to not quite understand, but never expected the outcomes that actually occurred. Although I loved everything about my brother, from his out of place remarks to his experimental phases with different hairstyles and clothing, I seemed to be one of the many few. He was tremendously impulsive, had absolutely no filter between things he thought he should do in his head and things that are actually acceptable in society, and others began to acknowledge his divergent personality as a bad thing. He was constantly made fun of, isolated, beaten up, and because he was only one grade above me, I had to witness it all in agony.
Eventually the bullying got so bad that Daniel had to withdraw from high school and obtain his GED instead, which he made look easy. Daniel was always extraordinarily naturally intelligent, but lacked all of the social skills to go along with the intellect. It became apparent to me that he wanted nothing more than to be accepted, if not by just a handful of people, and he couldn’t seem to fit in anywhere. Even after attempting to become friends with other kids his age at a local church, even they turned their back on him after experiencing his unique qualities. This is when I started to first see Daniel beginning to mold into two separate people in his own mind. He liked to call one of his personalities simply “Daniel”, which was usually when he was calm and easy to be around, and “The Dan”, who he believed was almost prophet-like, and was invincible to the world around him. I hoped that it was a joke, or in the worst situation a phase that would eventually go away. It didn’t. Things only got worse as time progressed.
Daniel began to mess around with drugs a little before he withdrew from High School, but the issues were there before the drugs ever came into play. The drugs for him were a method to get rid of the cruel world around him that made him feel constant isolation, and he became addicted to the numbness of it all. He is the most beautiful person I know inside and out, but his mind never worked the way most people’s do. I watched my mother make every attempt to help him get rid of his addiction. I saw him go to dozens of rehabs, hospitals, therapists, and halfway houses. I also was there for the multiple phone calls about him getting Baker Acted or arrested. But the issue was never the drugs, the issue was and still is Daniel.
Our family’s situation with Daniel has always been a serious one, but what made it even more difficult was the absence of our father through it. Growing up, our father was extremely violent, and was actually one of the main contributors of the corruption of Daniel’s self worth. Although my mother and I, despite the sadness of it all, continued to visit the countless rehabs, counselors, and jails, watching Daniel’s confidence and mind deteriorate altogether, we did so alone. Being Daniel’s younger sister, there hasn’t been much I can do for him other than try to be the best emotional support I can be and remind him that I love him no matter what, so my mother has been his only parental advocate in his extremely challenging life. My mother created her organization, The Addict’s Mom, because she felt the pain that she knew every mother with an addicted child felt, and she knew how much worse the pain was to deal with alone. Her organization was not created to keep him out of trouble no matter what he does, but rather to share her experiences with having a mentally ill, addicted child, and provide support to others in the same situation. Her goal was to share her struggles with constantly trying to find the right place for a child with mental illness that became dependent on emotion-numbing substances to deal with their painful lives, like so many others.
There is no one more appropriate for Mental Health Court than my brother Daniel. Unfortunately for the mentally ill who have nowhere to turn when the world shuts them out, many see drugs as the only option to get rid of the pain. But with the right mental help, he has every capability of getting through the addiction and being a beneficial citizen to society, he just needs the right resources that are appropriate for someone with his many medical diagnoses. I truly hope you can see how much my mother and I love him, and that’s because we know him more than anyone else and know how much help he really needs, and it goes so much further than the drugs. The mental disability is real, and that is what must be focused on, and I pray that you understand that Daniel is not meant to end up in a place like prison.
With the greatest respect and appreciation,
Nicole
Much love to all addict's moms and their families...Barbara
Visit The Addict's Mom at: http://addictsmom.com/?xg_source=msg_mes_network
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)