In ad­dic­tion re­cov­ery, big­ger isn’t al­ways bet­ter

Modern Healthcare - - Comment | Letters -

Re­gard­ing the Nov. 26 fea­ture “In­vestors pour money into ad­dic­tion treat­ment, but qual­ity ques­tions re­main” (p. 22), this is an ex­cel­lent ar­ti­cle, but the idea that elim­i­nat­ing the “mom and pop” providers is a good thing is short-sighted. Larger med­i­cal groups may be how our econ­omy op­er­ates, but the “treat and street” men­tal­ity of in­sur­ance providers will con­tinue to leave out the nec­es­sary el­e­ment of re­cov­ery sup­port ser­vices, which are nec­es­sary long af­ter a pa­tient has been “dry” for a pe­riod of time.

The sci­ence sim­ply isn’t there yet, and may never be, to “cure” some­one from ad­dic­tion. It is as much a psy­cho-so­cial learned be­hav­ioral is­sue as it is a brain-wiring and ge­netic pre­dis­po­si­tion con­cern. Larger is not nec­es­sar­ily bet­ter, when it comes to ad­dic­tion post-treat­ment re­cov­ery sup­port so­lu­tions.

Jef­frey Lynne Beigh­ley, Myrick, Udell & Lynne

Boca Ra­ton, Fla.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from USA

© PressReader. All rights reserved.