Pubdate: Tue, 09 May 2006
Source: Regina Leader-Post (CN SN)
Copyright: 2006 The Leader-Post Ltd.
Contact:  http://www.canada.com/regina/leaderpost/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/361
Referenced: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v06/n521/a01.html
Author: Hirsch Greenberg
Note: Greenberg is with the department of justice studies at the 
University of Regina.
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/youth.htm (Youth)

PLUSES AND MINUSES IN YOUTH DETOX LAW

Regarding the article, "Youth detox law trashed" in the April 26 
Leader- Post, let's not throw out the baby with the bathwater.

The Children's Advocate has got it only partly right. The legislation 
providing for an involuntary intervention when youth abuse substances 
to the extent that they might be a harm to themselves or others might 
not be "enlightened" (quoting the Children's Advocate), but neither 
is it draconian.

As a society, we restrict peoples' rights all the time, especially 
those of children and youth, respecting that their maturity level 
(the capacity to make informed decisions) is different from that of 
adults. The "new" law is an extension of legislation that has been 
around for decades, the Mental Health Act -- had that act been used 
to intervene in severe addiction problems affecting young people, 
there would have been no need to construct new legislation.

Where the new legislation falls short, and where the Children's 
Advocate has got it right, is that the application of the new 
legislation is a patchwork attempt and takes a health problem and 
criminalizes it (the intervention is at the Paul Dojack Youth Centre 
in the south; I know new facilities are being built, but again, it's 
a patchwork attempt). Involuntary care should not be in a locked 
facility, should only be for the protection of life (either the 
youth's or that of others) and should be part of an array of services 
based in the community; and, involuntary care should only be 
sanctioned by a trained physician(s).

There needs to be legislation providing for life-threatening 
situations, when youth high on drugs and alcohol threaten themselves 
or the community. The government fell short when its first priority 
was involuntary care rather than an array of community services, of 
which involuntary care should be a small part. Let's not throw the 
baby out with the bathwater, we need community based interventions, 
specifically geared to young people and a way of keeping them safe IF 
they pose a threat to themselves or others.

Hirsch Greenberg

Greenberg is with the department of justice studies at the University of Regina.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Beth Wehrman