Skip to content Skip to navigation

Our readers closely analyzed treatment's support team in 2015

December 31, 2015
by Gary A. Enos, Editor
| Reprints

Addiction Professional's readers in 2015 showed keen interest in the role of non-clinical support players in the continuum of care, and how clinicians and administrators might interact more productively with them. Three of the Addiction Professional website's five most read feature articles this year explored the perspective of recovery coaches, interventionists, and recovery residence/sober home operators.

The most read article of 2015, based on overall website traffic, was contributing writer Alison Knopf's analysis of where recovery coaches' non-clinical work fits into the service system. In the second position was interventionist Rickard Elmore's account of what he looks for when referring a family to a treatment center. Placing fifth on the list of most read articles was our examination of the strides recovery homes have made in establishing their legitimacy as an essential component of the continuum of support.

Also in the top five articles were an update on federal guidance regarding proper billing for confirmatory urine drug testing, and a report on John Dyben's (Hanley Center) National Conference on Addiction Disorders (NCAD) workshop presentation on addiction in the senior population.

Here are the articles that placed in positions 6 to 10 on 2015's most read list:

  • Marc Pimsler's description of addicts' relentless pursuit of validation.

  • Our exclusive interview with the creator of “The Business of Recovery,” a documentary assailing questionable ethics in the treatment industry.

  • A discussion of whether first responders who need treatment should be isolated from the rest of the treatment population.

  • An article on how coping mechanisms are an active dynamic of all addictions.

  • A description of Joseph Nowinski's book on the research basis for the 12 Steps.

Topics

Comments

I am a big supporter of "non-clinical support services in the continuum of care." Sometimes I wonder if recovery coaches, sober support, etc. should be considered "clinical care?" Would considering these services to be clinical open up sources of funding? Allison Knopf's 2015 article is excellent. However, there seems to be a fine line between people who are "not therapists" yet "provide help," and "get paid (as they should)." Services such as assistance with finding housing and employment are often considered part of treatment. They are also covered under ASAM's Dimension 6.
The intent of this comment is to see if more people could access support services if they were part of the continuum of care?

I think that clinical care is a much more narrow meaning than support. This is what I can say from the essay I have got at Thesis Paper Sale.