DOING YOUR OWN RESEARCH

DOING YOUR OWN RESEARCH

If reading this book has raised your level of interest and you want more specific information, or you want the straight story about a new develop­ment, there is no substitute for doing your own research.

Reading both scholarly review articles and original research papers is much easier than most people believe. In fact, one of the first steps in writing this book was gathering such research. Much of the library work for the first edition was done by two college students, neither of whom had any previous experience using a medical library. Should you decide to investigate for yourself, here are some suggestions about where to begin.

Public libraries are not likely to have the sorts of journals and books you will need. Because there is such a vast amount of medical literature pub­lished, most universities with a medical school have a separate library just to house all this information. Find a medical library at a nearby medical school. If for some reason you cannot get to a medical school, check to sec if there is a college or university biology department nearby and use the

library they use.

Next, go to the library and make friends with the reference librarian, because you will need his or her help until you are familiar with the library and the search mechanisms. The most efficient way of searching the literature is to use MEDLINE or PubMed, databases of the National Library of Medicine, a US government institution that allows you  

search almost all the published medical literature on any subject you can think of related to health. You can search by author, title, subject, key­word, institution, and many other descriptors.

In most cases you will find far more information than you need. A good place to start is with reviews. Reviews are documents that consoli­date and summarize the research and literature available in a given area, and they are usually written in less technical language. Reading several recent reviews about the topic you are researching will help you form a base of knowledge about the subject. Practice using MEDLINE by start­ing out with simple concepts; for example, search for marijuana articles. There are hundreds of them, and many of the titles will be so technical that they might seem indecipherable. So tell the computer to select mari­juana review articles. This will reduce the number markedly.

If you have read Buzzed, then you know that one of the active ingredi­ents in marijuana is THC. Try searching for THC and you will get more articles. Refine your search by asking for reviews of THC and you will get articles different from those you did when you searched for marijuana in general. Play with the database and have fun. Search for all kinds of com­binations of keywords, like THC and learning, or THC and adolescent. You will soon have an idea of the enormous amount of information there is about just this chemical. Understand, though, that no one study tells the whole story.

As a final note, we caution you not to accept everything you read as directly applicable to the human condition. Often scientists employ very high levels of a chemical to test for toxic effects in animals, and sometimes the chemical levels they use in/on animals are hundreds or thousands of times higher than a human would ever use, taking into account the weight of the human compared to the animal. Consequently, some of the toxic effects seen in animals may not apply to humans. On the other hand, ani­mal experiments cannot reveal many subtle effects of chemicals, particu­larly psychological ones, and thus animal studies almost certainly miss some important effects that humans will experience. So, as you read a sci­entific paper, remember that it is just a small part of the literature about a drug, and while the data may be true, it is important to understand that data in the context of everything else known about the drug.

GETTING CONVICTED: THE PENALTY BOX

GETTING CONVICTED: THE PENALTY BOX

The penalty laws of most states and countries are built on a series of leg­islative acts that happened over a long period of time, and thus, they are complicated and not easily summarized. Possession of modest amounts of marijuana can result in a slap on the wrist in some places and serious jail time in others. The same is true for other drugs, although they are usually taken more seriously, even in very small amounts. Often the prosecuting attorney has some leeway about the level of crime with which to charge an individual. The problem is that it is difficult to be sure of (1) the latest changes in the law, (2) the attitude that the prosecu­tor is taking toward drug crimes, and (3) whether that individual will be charged under state or federal statutes. Thus, conviction for the posses­sion of a small, recreational amount of heroin or cocaine could result in either a modest sentence or a huge fine and a long prison term, depend‑

ing on the exact circumstances and the mood of the legal officials over­seeing the case.

It is important to recall that in some states and in the federal system there is structured, or guideline, sentencing. That means that once an individual is convicted of some drug crimes, the sentence is regulated by law and might not be alterable by the judge no matter what the circum­stances. Coupled with the fact that there is no parole in the federal system (and increasingly in the state systems), a conviction can mean long prison time, even if the prosecutor and judge wish it were otherwise.

Here's an example of how things can go terribly wrong as a conse­quence of alcohol, a prescription drug, and harsh laws. One of us (WW) testifies as an expert in legal cases, and a recent one illustrates how the law, the prosecutor, and the courts can interact to ruin the life of an indi­vidual. A man was at a party with his neighbors outside of his home. He consumed a modest amount of alcohol throughout the evening, but at some point he decided to go to bed and took his nightly medicine, which included the sleeping pill zolpidem (generic for Ambien). Before going to bed, he came back to the party but soon appeared intoxicated. He then prepared for bed and went to sleep. Shortly thereafter, he awoke and came out of the house without his shoes, false teeth, or hearing aid, clearly hav­ing just awakened. But he had a gun, which he had retrieved from his bedside where he kept it. He fired twice as he yelled an obscenity to the individuals at the party. No one was hurt. The police were called, and he was arrested.

The man was charged with aggravated assault, and everyone thought he was intoxicated with alcohol. In the law of most states, that is consid­ered "voluntary intoxication" and thus is not a defense against any charges. His defense team argued that he was not intoxicated with alco­hol, but with his prescribed zolpidem, which is known to produce odd behaviors such as sleep driving, sleep sex, sleep shopping, sleep eating, and so forth. If it were the zolpidem, that would be "involuntary intoxica­tion," and that is a defense against such charges.

The jury heard the case and decided that he was intoxicated by alcohol and was therefore guilty. Now, here is where the disaster occurred. In that state, commission of many crimes (such as aggravated assault) with a gun is a mandatory ten-year sentence. If the gun is fired, the mandatory sen­tence is twenty years. In this case the prosecutor chose to charge the man for each of the six people present at the party, and the law requires that the mandatory sentences apply to each charge and be served consecu­tively. This means the man (who has not been sentenced at this writing)

must, by law, be sentenced to 120 years in prison. The judge has no discre­tion in this case.

This is a terrible example of the interaction of intoxication, harsh laws, vigorous prosecution, and finally, the presence of a gun where a sleepy, intoxicated person could access it and fire it. This man had no history of behavior like this and was a decorated soldier. It is very likely that the zolpidem produced the bizarre behavior, but the prosecutor and jury did not see it that way.

The lesson from this is that if a person chooses to intoxicate himself and then commits a crime, that intoxication is usually not a defense against any crime he committed, no matter how impaired he was at the time of the crime.

FOCUSING ON CONCRETE BEHAVIOR

FOCUSING ON CONCRETE BEHAVIOR

Both Minuchin w° and Haley6' 'emphasize the importance of keeping the therapy focused upon concrete, observable behavior. This em-phasis is particularly crucial in working with addicts and their fami-lies, since addicts can be especially slippery and difficult to pin down. Similarly, family members often appear to be in agreement until an attempt is made to get consensus on specific details, at which point hidden disagreements usually surface.

It is most important to have the parents and the rest of the family focus on "house rules,- particularly rules dealing with drug-related behavior. The therapist should also help them to focus on positive, achievable goals, such as specific steps the IP might take in looking for a job.

These rules and positive goals should be negotiated in the session, so that the therapist can observe the behavior during the negotiation process and intervene to increase the likelihood of a successful outcome. Often the agreement will include specific "home-work" tasks that stem from session interaction but are performed during the interval between sessions. If resistance in the family is high, the therapist may want to assign tasks that are small and almost unchallengeable (see Chaper 12), such as having the IP look up two jobs or two apartments in the classified section of the newspaper. It is ideal for the parents to participate in these tasks, so that they feel some sense of participation in the IP's eventual success.

One type of specific behavior that has been especially important in our work has been the results of weekly urine tests. They give a tangible indication of progress and do not allow family members (or the therapist) to sidestep this issue. They can also serve as aids in getting the family to take responsibility and put pressure on the IP to remain clean. It usually helps to negotiate the criteria for failure with the family at the outset of treatment. The idea is to get advance agreement that they will believe the urine tests. If the addict protests that someone has switched or will switch urine samples with him, the therapist should get the rest of the family to agree on the number of times they will accept this story before they can finally trust the urinalysis results.