Dr. Jain is a research fellow in forensic psychiatry with the Department of Psychiatry, Columbia University, and New York State Psychiatric Institute, New York City. Dr. Christopher is assistant professor of psychiatry and human behavior, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island. Dr. Appelbaum, who is editor of this column, is the Elizabeth K. Dollard Professor of Psychiatry, Medicine and Law in the Department of Psychiatry, Columbia University, New York City.
Psychiatr Serv. 2018 Apr 1;69(4):374-376. doi: 10.1176/appi.ps.201800066.
Many states are turning to civil commitment for substance use disorders as a potential solution to address rising rates of overdose deaths. Civil commitment allows family members or others to seek court-ordered involuntary treatment for a substance-abusing person. In contrast to mandatory treatment ordered by drug courts, civil commitment does not require involvement with the criminal justice system. Although these laws are understandably appealing, statutes and their implementation are highly variable, ethical concerns about deprivation of liberty continue to be raised, and outcome data are limited and often not generalizable. Above all, more studies are needed to determine effectiveness.
许多州正在将民事强制治疗用于物质使用障碍，作为解决过量死亡人数上升的潜在方法。民事强制治疗允许家庭成员或其他人寻求法院下令对滥用物质的人进行非自愿治疗。与毒品法院下令的强制性治疗不同，民事强制治疗不需要涉及刑事司法系统。尽管这些法律可以理解地具有吸引力，但法规及其实施情况变化很大，关于剥夺自由的道德问题仍在不断提出，结果数据有限，且通常不具有普遍性。最重要的是，需要更多的研究来确定其效果。
