[Front Matter]

[Title Page]

Substance Use Disorder Treatment For People With Physical and Cognitive Disabilities
Treatment Improvement Protocol (TIP) Series 29
 
Dennis Moore, Ed.D.
Consensus Panel Chair
 
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Public Health Service
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration
Center for Substance Abuse Treatment
Rockwall II, 5600 Fishers Lane
Rockville, MD 20857
DHHS Publication No. (SMA) 98-3249
Printed 1998

[Disclaimer]

This publication is part of the Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment Block Grant technical assistance program. All material appearing in this volume except that taken directly from copyrighted sources is in the public domain and may be reproduced or copied without permission from the Center for Substance Abuse Treatment (CSAT) or the authors. Citation of the source is appreciated.

This publication was written under contract number 270-95-0013 with The CDM Group, Inc. (CDM). Sandra Clunies, M.S., I.C.A.D.C., served as the CSAT government project officer. Rose M. Urban, M.S.W., J.D., C.S.A.C. served as the CDM TIPs project director. Other CDM TIPs personnel included Jonathan Gilbert, M.A., managing editor, Y-Lang Nguyen, copy/production editor, Raquel Ingraham, M.S., project manager, Mary Smolenski, Ed.D., C.R.N.P., former project director, and MaryLou

Leonard, former project manager. Special thanks go to consulting writers Jeff Allen, Ph.D., A.B.P.P., Janet Dickinson, Ph.D., Debra Guthmann, Ed.D., and Elizabeth Villalobos, M.S.W., for their contributions to this document.

The opinions expressed herein are the views of the Consensus Panel members and do not reflect the official position of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS). No official support or endorsement of CSAT or DHHS for these opinions or for particular instruments or software that may be described in this document is intended or should be inferred. The guidelines in this document should not be considered substitutes for individualized patient care and treatment decisions.

What Is a TIP?

CSAT Treatment Improvement Protocols (TIPs) are best practice guidelines for the treatment of substance use disorders. CSAT's Office of Evaluation, Scientific Analysis and Synthesis draws on the experience and knowledge of clinical, research, and administrative experts to produce the TIPs, which are distributed to a growing number of facilities and individuals across the country. The audience for the TIPs is expanding beyond public and private treatment facilities for substance use disorders as these disorders are increasingly recognized as a major problem.

The TIPs Editorial Advisory Board, a distinguished group of substance use disorder experts and professionals in such related fields as primary care, mental health, and social services, works with the State Alcohol and Drug Abuse Directors to generate topics for the TIPs. Topics are based on the field's current needs for information and guidance.

After selecting a topic, CSAT invites staff from pertinent Federal agencies and national organizations to a Resource Panel that recommends specific areas of focus as well as resources that should be considered in developing the content for the TIP. Then recommendations are communicated to a Consensus Panel composed of non-Federal experts on the topic who have been nominated by their peers. This Panel participates in a series of discussions; the information and recommendations on which they reach consensus form the foundation of the TIP. The members of each Consensus Panel represent substance use disorder treatment programs, hospitals, community health centers, counseling programs, criminal justice and child welfare agencies, and private practitioners. A Panel Chair (or Co-Chairs) ensures that the guidelines mirror the results of the group's collaboration.

A large and diverse group of experts closely reviews the draft document. Once the changes recommended by these field reviewers have been incorporated, the TIP is prepared for publication, in print and online. The TIPs can be accessed via the Internet on the National Library of Medicine's home page at the URL: http://isis.nlm.nih.gov. The move to electronic media also means that the TIPs can be updated more easily so they continue to provide the field with state-of-the-art information.

While each TIP strives to include an evidence base for the practices it recommends, CSAT recognizes that the field of substance use disorder treatment is evolving, and research frequently lags behind the innovations pioneered in the field. A major goal of each TIP is to convey "front-line" information quickly but responsibly. For this reason, recommendations proffered in the TIP are attributed to either Panelists' clinical experience or the literature. If there is research to support a particular approach, citations are provided.

This TIP, Substance Use Disorder Treatment for People With Physical and Cognitive Disabilities, is intended to enhance treatment providers' knowledge concerning people who have a physical or cognitive disability in addition to their substance use disorder. Treatment programs for substance use disorders already see many individuals with coexisting disabilities, but many providers fail to accommodate these individuals either because they are unaware of the disability or how accommodations can improve treatment outcomes (even though such accommodations are legally mandated). The first chapter defines and explains the issues involved in treating people with coexisting disabilities. Chapter 2 discusses how to screen for coexisting disabilities and how to adapt substance use disorder screenings for clients who have a disability. Chapter 3 discusses treatment planning and counseling; it also describes how treatment can be modified to meet the particular needs of people with coexisting disabilities. Forming linkages with other service providers is the topic of Chapter 4, and Chapter 5 presents material for program administrators. In Appendix B, there is a comprehensive list of resources. Appendix C discusses the proper language to use when referring to people with disabilities. Alcohol and Drug Programs and the Americans With Disabilities Act, a pamphlet from the Pacific Research and Training Alliance, is reproduced in Appendix D.

Other TIPs may be ordered by contacting the National Clearinghouse for Alcohol and Drug Information (NCADI), (800) 729-6686 or (301) 468-2600; TDD (for hearing impaired), (800) 487-4889.

Editorial Advisory Board

Karen Allen, Ph.D., R.N., C.A.R.N.
President of the National Nurses Society on Addictions
Associate Professor
Department of Psychiatry, Community Health, and Adult Primary Care
University of Maryland
School of Nursing
Baltimore, Maryland
Richard L. Brown, M.D., M.P.H.
Associate Professor
Department of Family Medicine
University of Wisconsin School of Medicine
Madison, Wisconsin
Dorynne Czechowicz, M.D.
Associate Director
Medical/Professional Affairs
Treatment Research Branch
Division of Clinical and Services Research
National Institute on Drug Abuse
Rockville, Maryland
Linda S. Foley, M.A.
Former Director
Project for Addiction Counselor Training
National Association of State Alcohol and Drug Directors
Washington, D.C.
Wayde A. Glover, M.I.S., N.C.A.C. II
Director
Commonwealth Addictions Consultants and Trainers
Richmond, Virginia
Pedro J. Greer, M.D.
Assistant Dean for Homeless Education
University of Miami School of Medicine
Miami, Florida
Thomas W. Hester, M.D.
Former State Director
Substance Abuse Services
Division of Mental Health, Mental Retardation and Substance Abuse
Georgia Department of Human Resources
Atlanta, Georgia
Gil Hill
Director
Office of Substance Abuse
American Psychological Association
Washington, D.C.
Douglas B. Kamerow, M.D., M.P.H.
Director
Office of the Forum for Quality and Effectiveness in Health Care
Agency for Health Care Policy and Research
Rockville, Maryland
Stephen W. Long
Director
Office of Policy Analysis
National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism
Rockville, Maryland
Richard A. Rawson, Ph.D.
Executive Director
Matrix Center
Los Angeles, California
Ellen A. Renz, Ph.D.
Former Vice President of Clinical Systems
MEDCO Behavioral Care Corporation
Kamuela, Hawaii
Richard K. Ries, M.D.
Director and Associate Professor
Outpatient Mental Health Services and Dual Disorder Programs
Harborview Medical Center
Seattle, Washington
Sidney H. Schnoll, M.D., Ph.D.
Chairman
Division of Substance Abuse Medicine
Medical College of Virginia
Richmond, Virginia

Consensus Panel

Chair

Dennis Moore, Ed.D.
Director
Rehabilitation Research and Training Center on Drugs and Disability
Wright State University
Dayton, Ohio
John J. Benshoff, Ph.D., C.R.C.
Associate Professor
Rehabilitation Institute
Southern Illinois University at Carbondale
Carbondale, Illinois
John D. Corrigan, Ph.D.
Professor
Division of Rehabilitation Psychology
Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
Ohio State University
Columbus, Ohio
Jo Ann Ford
Assistant Director
School of Medicine
Substance Abuse Resources and Disabilities Issues
Wright State University
Dayton, Ohio
Harry Kressler
Executive Director
Pima Prevention Partnership
Tucson, Arizona
Kathy A. Sandberg
Program Manager
Minneapolis Chemical Dependency Program for Deaf and Hard of Hearing Individuals
Fairview University Medical Center
Minneapolis, Minnesota
Cecilia Anne Belone
Social Worker
Gallup, New Mexico
Roslyn Pollack Corasaniti, R.N., M.S., C.R.R.N.
Rehabilitation Training and Development Specialist
James Lawrence Kernan Hospital
Baltimore, Maryland
John de Miranda, Ed.M.
Executive Director
National Association on Alcohol, Drugs, and Disability, Inc.
San Mateo, California
Marvis A. Doster, R.N., C.A.R.N.
Addiction Education Coordinator
Heartview Foundation
Bismarck, North Dakota
Nancy Ferreyra
Executive Director
Pacific Research and Training Alliance
Oakland, California
Brian Garrett, M.S.S.W.
Brian Garrett Associates
Nashville, Tennessee
Jacqueline Hendrickson, M.S.W.
Director
Beltsville Counseling and Consultation
Beltsville, Maryland
Michael Nelipovich, Rh.D.
Director
Office for the Blind
Division of Supportive Living
Wisconsin Department of Health and Family Services
Madison, Wisconsin
Kenneth W. Perez, M.S.
Addictions Program Specialist
Bureau of Treatment Policy and Resource Development
New York State Office of Alcoholism and Substance Abuse Services
Albany, New York

Foreword

The Treatment Improvement Protocol (TIP) series fulfills SAMHSA/CSAT's mission to improve treatment of substance use disorders by providing best practices guidance to clinicians, program administrators, and payors. TIPs are the result of careful consideration of all relevant clinical and health services research findings, demonstration experience, and implementation requirements. A panel of non-Federal clinical researchers, clinicians, program administrators, and patient advocates debates and discusses its particular areas of expertise until it reaches a consensus on best practices. This panel's work is then reviewed and critiqued by field reviewers.

The talent, dedication, and hard work that TIPs panelists and reviewers bring to this highly participatory process have bridged the gap between the promise of research and the needs of practicing clinicians and administrators. We are grateful to all who have joined with us to contribute to advances in the substance use disorder treatment field.

Nelba Chavez, Ph.D.
Administrator
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration
H. Westley Clark, M.D., J.D., M.P.H., C.A.S., F.A.S.A.M.
Director
Center for Substance Abuse Treatment
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration

Executive Summary and Recommendations

Nearly one-sixth of all Americans have a disability that limits their activity; countless others have disabilities (mostly cognitive in nature) that go unrecognized and undiagnosed. The Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) was signed into law in 1990 to ensure equal access to all community services and facilities, including substance use disorder treatment facilities both public and private, for all people regardless of any disability they might have. People who are blind, deaf, paraplegic, and who have arthritis, heart disease, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)/acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS), mental illness, and substance use disorders are among those covered under this legislation.

People with physical and cognitive disabilities are more likely to have a substance use disorder and less likely to get effective treatment for it than those without such a coexisting disability. There are already many people in treatment who have a coexisting cognitive or physical disability. But, as many still go untreated, the number of people with coexisting disabilities entering treatment can only be expected to rise. Treatment programs have a legal and ethical responsibility to make treatment for these clients as effective as possible.

The ADA states that both public and private facilities be equally accessible for all. The law requires the installation of ramps, elevators, proper lighting, and usable doorknobs, and the removal of other physical obstacles, but accessibility means more. Barriers to communications must be removed; discriminatory policies, practices, and procedures eliminated; and attitudes changed in order to not hold a person's disability against him. Accommodating people with coexisting disabilities in treatment for substance use disorders entails such things as adjusting counseling schedules, providing sign language interpreters, suspending "no-medication" rules, and often, overcoming people's fears and ignorance. This TIP presents simple and straightforward guidelines on how to overcome barriers and provide effective treatment to people with coexisting disabilities.

The topic of substance use disorder treatment for people with coexisting disabilities is a broad one. In creating this Treatment Improvement Protocol (TIP), the Consensus Panel focused its attention on the needs of adults in treatment who had a coexisting physical or cognitive disability (including those disabilities also classified as "sensory" in nature). While people who have an affective disability (i.e., mental illness) are mentioned in the TIP, the reader is referred to TIP 9, Assessment and Treatment of Patients With Coexisting Mental Illness and Alcohol and Other Drug Abuse (CSAT, 1994), for more detailed information concerning the assessment and treatment of these clients.

In order to avoid awkward construction and sexism, this TIP alternates between "he" and "she" for generic examples. Since substance use disorders are considered a disability under the ADA, when people in substance use disorder treatment are referred to in the TIP as having disabilities it is understood that they have "coexisting" disabilities.

The Consensus Panel for this TIP drew upon its considerable experience in both the disability services and substance use disorder treatment fields. Panel members included providers as well as consumers of these services. Because of a lack of substantial research on the particular needs of people with coexisting disabilities in treatment for substance use disorders, the Panel often relied on clinical experience to develop the recommendations provided here. In the summary of recommendations listed below, recommendations that are supported by research literature or legislation (i.e., the ADA) are followed by a (1); clinically based recommendations are marked (2). Citations supporting the former are given in Chapters 1 through 5.

Summary of Recommendations

This TIP is organized into five chapters, the first of which presents an overview of the issues involved in providing substance use disorder treatment for people with coexisting disabilities. It provides important definitions, relevant research findings, and a discussion of barriers to treatment for people with coexisting disabilities. The second chapter presents methods of screening for disabilities and ways in which substance use disorder treatment may need to be modified for people with coexisting disabilities. Chapter 3 discusses treatment planning and counseling, and gives specific recommendations concerning how treatment can be modified to be most effective for people with specific disabilities. Information on forming and maintaining linkages with other service providers is provided in Chapter 4. The final chapter is aimed at program administrators and discusses issues such as staff training, funding mechanisms, marketing, and demonstrating an organizational commitment to working with people who have coexisting disabilities. The recommendations that follow are, however, grouped thematically and not according to the chapters in which they are found.

Making Accommodations To a Program

  • Providers should examine their programs and modify them to eliminate four fundamental groups of barriers to treatment for persons with disabilities: attitudinal barriers; discriminatory policies, practices, and procedures; communications barriers; and architectural barriers. (1)
  • Accommodation does not mean giving special preferences--it does mean reducing barriers to equal participation in the program. (1)
  • When barriers cannot readily be removed, a program must find alternative methods to make its services available. (1)
  • Staff training is key to overcoming most barriers to treatment, especially attitudinal barriers. Such training should be ongoing and comprehensive. All program staff should be trained in understanding functional limitations, the wide variety of conditions that lead to them, and the barriers that treatment-as-usual may present for persons with specific disabilities. Training should strongly encourage and reward staff members who find creative ways to adapt treatment procedures for people with coexisting disabilities. Because they are the initial points of contact, receptionists and other support staff should receive special training to prepare them to respond knowledgeably and sensitively to people with coexisting disabilities. (2)
  • If there is any doubt on the part of the provider regarding the legitimacy of a person's request for accommodation, a disability expert should be consulted to evaluate the request. (2)
  • In general, it is beneficial and feasible to integrate people with coexisting disabilities into already existing community-based services used by nondisabled individuals recovering from substance use disorders. However, there are a number of exceptions to this rule. In instances where a legitimate, documented reason exists, specialized services may be necessary. (2)
  • For clients who are blind or visually impaired, keep pathways clear and raise low-hanging signs or lights. Use large letter signs and add Braille labels to all signs and elevator buttons. Make oral announcements; do not rely on a bulletin board. (2)
  • People who are blind or visually impaired will require assistance to orient themselves to a new environment. The treatment provider should give clients who are blind a complete orientation to the facility the first time they visit; the client can be guided by holding her arm just above the elbow and walking with her through the rooms, explaining where the doors, furniture, and other features are. (2)

Screening for Disabilities

  • Because many disabilities are not obvious, it is important to screen for them in every person, not just those with obvious functional limitations. Ask all clients entering treatment whether they require any accommodations in order to participate. (2)
  • It is the level of abilities and of the functioning of the individual--not the simple determination of whether an impairment exists--that must be assessed if screening is to lead to an effective treatment plan. In situations where a diagnosis of disability is needed (e.g., to qualify for special services) treatment providers should refer the client to a disabilities services professional. (2)
  • Although it is a good idea to get background information from as many sources as possible, interview the person alone, if possible. Having others present often distorts the quality of the interview. (2)
  • Intake interviews should begin with an open and friendly question, not one that is focused on the person's disability. (2)
  • An intake interview should address the eye condition and blindness adjustment skills of people who are blind or visually impaired. The counselor should ascertain the pathology of the loss of vision (if it was congenital, adventitious, or traumatic), and precisely how much vision remains. (2)
  • If there are forms to be completed as part of intake processing, people who are blind must have the option to complete them in the medium of their choice (Braille, large print, audiocassette, or sighted assistance). Individuals who are both deaf and blind will need a tactile interpreter to translate for them during the admissions process and afterward. (2)
  • Due to the wide range of reading abilities among people who are deaf, paper and pencil should never be utilized to gather detailed assessment information. Written English forms and questionnaires should be interpreted into sign language for these clients. (2)
  • When screening people with cognitive disabilities, be as specific as possible--rather than asking if they "use alcohol," ask if they like to drink beer, wine, wine coolers, etc. It may help to use props such as different glass or bottle sizes rather than asking how many ounces were consumed. (2)

Treatment Planning

  • For treatment to succeed, all clients must understand the particular strengths that they can bring to the recovery process. A strengths-based approach to treatment is especially important for people with disabilities, who, because they have so frequently been viewed in terms of what they cannot or should not attempt, may have learned to define themselves in terms of their limitations and inabilities. (2)
  • It is key to the treatment planning process for the treatment provider to learn where a person with a disability is on the spectrum of understanding and accepting his disability. (2)
  • No treatment plan should be static, and treatment providers must continually evaluate and revise the treatment plan with assistance from clients with disabilities. Treatment plans should be flexible enough to take into account changes in a person's condition or new knowledge gained during treatment. Clients with traumatic brain injury, for example, often show a dramatic recovery curve over the year to two years following their accidents. (2)
  • An individual with a disability may also need to explore several methods for learning something or fulfilling a goal before an accomplishable approach to the situation can be identified and implemented. (2)
  • The treatment plan should document all alterations to the usual treatment procedures that are being made. If an approach does not work, the outcome should still be carefully documented to prevent duplication of effort by other programs in the future. Similarly, details of what is successful for a person should be documented, particularly for persons with cognitive disabilities who may not be able to tell future caregivers which treatments have been effective and why. (2) Documentation of all efforts at accommodation is needed to verify ADA compliance. (1)
  • It is helpful to identify early on any needed exceptions to the routines of the treatment program for a person with a disability and to explain to other clients that the accommodations for a person with a disability simply give her the help she needs to meet shared goals. If the client does not object, the exceptions and the rationale for these exceptions should be discussed openly in group meetings. (2)
  • Behavioral contracts with people with coexisting disabilities may need to be more explicit than those with other people, and the consequences for relapses in particular may need to be specifically tailored to what the individual is realistically capable of achieving. (2)
  • People who are deaf or hard of hearing (and probably those with other disabilities as well) generally know less about addiction and recovery when they enter treatment than nondeaf (or nondisabled) people, and therefore they will often require lengthier treatment. Treatment providers should be prepared to allow for longer treatment times for clients with disabilities. (1)
  • It is essential that all clients participate in planning leisure activities, and programs with rigid approaches that exclude clients from such participation should consider changing their policies. (2)
  • If a person with a disability has limited transportation options, conduct individual counseling by telephone, go to the person's house, or meet at a rehabilitation center or other alternative site. The Consensus Panel recommends that providers make home visits if necessary, which may be reimbursable under case management services. (2)
  • For people with coexisting disabilities, failure to achieve treatment goals may indicate that the treatment plan lacks the discrete steps necessary to meet those goals. In setting a goal, the client and the counselor must work closely to understand all the physical and cognitive requirements of meeting a goal. (2)
  • Early in treatment, a medical professional should conduct an assessment of all the client's medications--both prescribed and over-the-counter, including herbs and vitamins. In addition, the Panel recommends that a single medical professional try to monitor the client's medication regimen. Under no circumstances, however, should other treatment staff advise clients to take or not to take particular medications, vitamins, or herbs. (2)
  • Lack of employment may be a factor in substance abuse; conversely, addressing and overcoming barriers to employment, with the aid of collaborative partners, may greatly enhance the prospect for recovery and should be addressed as a component of treatment planning. (2)

Counseling

  • Counseling session times should be flexible, so that sessions can be shortened, lengthened, or more frequent, depending upon the individual treatment plan. (2)
  • For people with cognitive impairments, it is important to remember to ask simple questions; to repeat questions; and to ask the client to repeat, in her own words, what has been said. Discussions should be kept concrete. People with mental retardation or traumatic brain injury may not understand abstract concepts; they should be asked to provide specific examples of a general principle. (2)
  • The use of verbal and nonverbal cues will help increase participation and learning for people with cognitive disabilities and make the group sessions run more smoothly for all. The counselor and the person with a disability together can design the cues but should keep them simple, such as touching the person's leg and saying a code word (e.g., "interrupting"). (2)
  • Clients with cognitive disabilities will often benefit from techniques such as expressive therapy or role-playing. (2)
  • Assignments that require the use of alternative media in place of writing may work best with clients who have cognitive disabilities as well as those who are deaf. (2) Clients who are blind will need assignments translated into their preferred method of communication (e.g., Braille, audiotape), but no matter what method is used they will require more time to complete reading assignments. (1)
  • Regardless of the model of communication used by the person who is deaf or hard of hearing, the visual aspect of communication will be important. Therefore, it is important to look directly at the person when communicating. This will allow him to try to read the lips of the counselor and to see her facial expression. (2)
  • Interpreters should usually be provided for people who are deaf or hard of hearing. (1) The interpreter should be a neutral third party hired specifically to interpret for the counselor and the person who is deaf; a family member or friend of the client should not be used as an interpreter. Use only qualified interpreters as determined by either a chapter of the Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf or a State interpreter screening organization. (2)
  • If a person who is deaf is using an interpreter, group members will need to take turns during discussions. When addressing a person who is deaf the counselor or group members should speak directly to the person as if the interpreter is not present. (2)
  • When working with an individual with a physical disability, make certain that table surfaces are the correct height, and in particular that wheelchairs can fit beneath them. Counselors should try to place themselves so that they are no higher than the client. They should be aware of the pace of the interview, and attempt to gauge when clients are becoming fatigued. Counselors should periodically inquire how the client is doing and offer frequent breaks. (2)
  • People who use wheelchairs often come to regard the chair as an extension of themselves, and touching the chair may be offensive to them. Never take control of the wheelchair and push the person without permission. (2)
  • For individuals with cognitive disabilities, providers must systematically address what has been learned in the program and how it will be applicable in the next stage of treatment or aftercare. Some people are very context-bound in their learning, and providers cannot assume that the lessons learned in treatment will be applied in aftercare. (2)
  • In planning and providing treatment to people with disabilities, the importance of asking questions cannot be overemphasized. Asking before rendering any service is a basic principle. (2)

Linkages

  • Coordination with an agency providing case management services for people with disabilities should be a priority if those services are not already being provided by the substance use disorder treatment program. Treatment plans for people with coexisting disabilities should address problems such as unemployment, a lack of recreational options, social isolation, and physical abuse because they are more likely than the general population to experience these situations. (2)
  • Service linkages are essential to provide effective substance use disorder treatment for people with coexisting disabilities. (2)
  • Treatment providers need to be able to identify what ancillary services are available for their clients, and be able to access those services and funding sources. (2)
  • Since a client having a substance use disorder and a disability may also be in a physical rehabilitation or other disability program, treatment professionals should be aware of the various approaches used by these other programs, and know how to collaborate with them. The Panel recommends cross-training between vocational rehabilitation or other disability service providers and substance use disorder treatment providers to help treatment professionals understand the impacts of both disability and substance use disorders. (2)
  • In developing partnerships with referring agencies, the treatment program should ensure, through interagency agreements, that mechanisms are in place for exchanging client information. (2)
  • It is not unusual for services to be duplicated or ineffective when a case manager is not utilized, and so a substance use disorder treatment provider may need to either case manage these services or find another organization or person to do so. A case manager can be a strong advocate for a person with a disability and help her locate appropriate and accessible services. (2)
  • A substance abuse counselor may not have the time or the expertise to work on all the issues that arise because of a client's disability. If that is the case, a referral to a peer counselor at a Center for Independent Living, whose job it is to help disabled individuals come to terms with the limits of their disabilities, may be in order. The two counselors can work together as a team. (2)
  • The treatment provider should investigate whether accommodations will be made for a client with a coexisting disability before sending him to an aftercare facility. (2)

Organizational Commitment

  • Providers must be prepared to act as advocates for their clients when services and supports that are normally readily available and effective prove inaccessible for the client. (2)
  • When treatment teams make the effort to accommodate individuals with coexisting disabilities, the quality of care improves for all clients. All clients can get more out of treatment that is individualized and that takes their specific functional capacities and limitations into account. (2)
  • To ensure full organizational support for treating people with coexisting disabilities, the Consensus Panel recommends that a treatment program develop a policy statement that articulates the program's willingness to accommodate any individual with a disability who chooses to attend the program. (2)
  • When a program makes a commitment to serving people with coexisting disabilities, board membership of people with disabilities may be implemented immediately or considered as a goal to be reached as the program begins to serve a greater number of people from these groups. A program should try to obtain regular input from the community it seeks to serve; creating a permanent task force or an advisory committee is an ideal way to address this need. (2)
  • The organization must make a commitment to continually reexamine the program's effectiveness for people with coexisting disabilities. Such inquiry can take place both formally, using quality assurance methods and consumer satisfaction surveys, and informally, through opportunities for individual and group feedback with program staff. (2)
  • It is not enough for a program simply to be ready to serve people with coexisting disabilities. Rather, the program should be proactive in making the disability community aware of its services to ensure that disability organizations will support referrals to the program. (2)
  • Another sign of organizational commitment is to hire people with disabilities to work in the treatment program. Hiring people with disabilities also benefits other staff members, who can learn from these coworkers. (2)
  • The Consensus Panel recommends an "open door" policy that states that all clients are entitled to an assessment if they are presenting with a chemical dependency problem, regardless of whatever other problems they may appear to have. If the proper course of treatment is not available at the facility, it is still possible to perform a substance use disorder assessment and refer the client for treatment elsewhere. (2)

Improving Treatment for All Clients

Treatment that is planned and provided on a case-by-case basis will benefit everyone, not just those clients with coexisting disabilities. All people have different functional capacities and limitations, and an evaluation of these, as described and encouraged in this TIP, will help providers focus on individual needs. This TIP explores the treatment needs of people with particular types of disabilities, but the processes of assessment and evaluation it suggests can help all clients gain greater benefit from treatment.

There is a growing belief in the substance use disorder treatment field that treatment is more successful if it can respond to all the needs of an individual, not just the need to stay away from alcohol and drugs. If treatment is to succeed for a client with a coexisting disability, a wide range of services may be required. For this reason, this TIP strongly encourages the use of case management services and service linkages. The TIP also aims to educate people in both the disability services and substance use disorder treatment fields concerning the problems faced by people who have both a substance use disorder and a coexisting disability. A better understanding of the needs of these clients and the services available to them can be gained through reading this TIP.

Chapter1 -- Overview of Treatment Issues

In 1990, it was estimated that 36.1 million people in America (14.5 percent of the population) had a disability that limited their functioning in some manner (LaPlante, 1992). A great number of people with disabilities have struggled for years with barriers to employment, inaccurate and hurtful stereotypes, and inaccessible community services. In order to redress these barriers that affect millions of Americans, President Bush in 1990 signed into law the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA), the most significant civil rights legislation in two decades. The legislation prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability, including substance use disorders (See Figure 1-1), and guarantees full participation in American society, including access to community services and facilities, for all people with disabilities. It makes provision for many accommodations that may be necessary in substance use disorder treatment, such as the use of large print materials, reading services, attended care, adaptive equipment such as listening devices, and flexible schedules to accommodate different physical needs. Because of this legislation, many people today are more aware of the problems faced by people with physical and cognitive disabilities.

Though the ADA is correcting the situation, many people with disabilities remain stigmatized and shut out. They are also at much higher risk than the rest of the population for substance abuse or dependence. A study of adult males receiving treatment for alcoholism, for instance, revealed that 40 percent had a history indicative of learning disabilities (Rhodes and Jasinski, 1990). Another study indicated that at least one half of persons with a substance use disorder and a coexisting disability are not being identified as such by the systems providing them services (Rehabilitation Research and Training Center on Drugs and Disability [RRTC], 1996).

New York State maintains within their Office of Alcoholism and Substance Abuse Services (OASAS) some of the most comprehensive records in the country on substance use disorder services for persons with disabilities. The OASAS client services statistics for 1997 showed that of 248,679 clients served by licensed facilities in New York, a total of 55,719 (or 22.4 percent of the total clientele) were recorded as having a coexisting physical or mental disability. Of these clients, 58.9 percent had a disability not related to mental illness (e.g., mobility impaired, visually impaired, deaf) (OASAS, 1998). These records were generated by treatment staff personnel who were not necessarily trained in disability assessment or by client self-reports, which suggests that some disabilities (e.g., traumatic brain injury [TBI], learning disability, attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder [AD/HD]) may be greatly under-reported. Given that these "hidden" conditions affect more than half of all special education students, coexisting disabilities may actually affect up to 40 percent of all clients served by substance use disorder treatment programs.

Yet despite the prevalence of substance use disorders among people with disabilities, these individuals are less likely to enter or complete treatment (de Miranda and Cherry, 1989; Kirubakaran et al., 1986; Helwig and Holicky, 1994; Schaschl and Straw, 1989). This is because physical, attitudinal, or communication barriers often limit their treatment options or else render their treatment experiences unsatisfactory.

Fortunately today, substance use disorder treatment providers are better able to face the challenges of accommodating people with coexisting disabilities because they have already had the experience of making treatment modifications for other constituencies. Over the past decades, the substance use disorder treatment field has matured through the challenges of treating populations with specific needs, such as women, adolescents, people from various racial and ethnic minority groups, and gay men and lesbians. The effectiveness of treatment has improved as a result--it has become more developmentally and culturally specific, flexible, and holistic. Rather than placing a person in an established treatment "slot," treatment providers are learning the importance of modifying and adapting services to meet an individual client's needs. Thus, the knowledge and skills necessary to adapt a treatment program to meet the needs of people with coexisting disabilities are a logical extension of existing principles.

Disabilities can be classified as physical, sensory, cognitive, or affective (see Definitions section below). This TIP addresses the problems that may arise when treating people with the first three types; providers treating people with affective impairments (often called dually diagnosed persons) are referred to TIP 9, Assessment and Treatment of Patients With Coexisting Mental Illness and Alcohol and Other Drug Abuse. This TIP targets substance use disorder treatment providers with little or no experience treating people with physical, cognitive, or sensory disabilities. These providers may be prompted to address disability issues because of the ADA, or perhaps they are treating their first-ever client with deafness, TBI, spinal cord injury, or another disability. This TIP will help them screen, assess, refer, and treat this large and underserved population.

Definitions and Terminology

Physical and cognitive disabilities are very sensitive topics for discussion and providers need to pay attention to the language they use to discuss this issue. Appendix C presents specific guidelines on how to refer to persons with disabilities in a respectful, sensitive manner. As a general rule, one should always put people first, before their disabilities, referring to "persons with disabilities" rather than "disabled people." One should never refer to the disability in place of the person (not "the retarded" but rather "people who are retarded"). Nor should one call a person with a disability a "patient" or "case," unless it is to refer to his relationship with his doctor.

Disabilities

Diseases, disorders, and injuries, whether congenital or acquired, can have various effects on organs and body systems. Conditions (and diseases) such as multiple sclerosis, TBI, spinal cord injury, diabetes, and cerebral palsy can lead to impairments, such as impaired cognitive ability, paralysis, blindness, or muscular dysfunction. These impairments in turn cause disabilities, which limit an individual's ability to function in various areas of life, such as learning, reading, and mobility. While diseases, impairments, and disabilities are distinct categories, they are often used interchangeably; to ensure clarity, they are defined in Figure 1-2.

The field of disability services has developed its own terminology to discuss physical and cognitive disabilities, and many substance use disorder treatment providers will not be familiar with these terms. The terms used throughout the TIP (and in the field of disability services) are defined below.

The World Health Organization (WHO) has devised a method for the classification of impairments and disabilities (World Health Organization, 1980). This complex system has been simplified here into four main categories:

  1. Physical impairments are caused by congenital or acquired diseases and disorders or by injury or trauma. For example, spinal cord injury is a disorder that can cause paralysis, an impairment.
  2. Sensory impairments include blindness and deafness, which may be caused by congenital disorders, diseases such as encephalopathy or meningitis, or trauma to the sensory organs or the brain.
  3. Cognitive impairments are disruptions of thinking skills, such as inattention, memory problems, perceptual problems, disruptions in communication, spatial disorientation, problems with sequencing (the ability to follow a set of steps in order to accomplish a task), misperception of time, and persevera-tion (constant repetition of meaningless or inappropriate words or phrases).
  4. Affective impairments are disruptions in the way emotions are processed and expressed. For the purposes of this discussion, affective impairments are considered to include problems caused by both affective and mood disorders, such as major depression and mania. These impairments include the symptoms of mental disorders, such as disorganized speech and behavior, markedly depressed mood, and anhedonia (joylessness).

Figure 1-3 categorizes various disabilities according to these four classifications; however, some conditions may be more difficult to categorize and some individuals may experience multiple conditions.

Functional Capacities and Limitations

People may have the same disability without having the same functional capacities and limitations. It is, however, their capacities and limitations that will determine what accommodations should be made to the treatment plan. Treatment providers should look at each individual when determining the level and type of service needed rather than prescribing an approach or course of treatment based on the disability diagnosis. For example, one person with TBI may require a period of specialized services because of problems with attention span, unconstructive behaviors, or medical needs. Someone else with TBI may be stable enough to be integrated with nondisabled persons with minimal accommodation.

Though this TIP addresses accommodations and adjustments by disability, functional limitations are actually what will drive program modifications. There are seven categories of functional capacity and limitation that can impinge on a person's treatment. They are listed below with some of the specific functions that fall under each category.

  1. Self-care
    • Eating
    • Grooming
    • Bathing
    • Dressing
    • Bowel and bladder management
    • Medication usage
  2. Mobility
    • Positioning
    • Walking, with or without assistive devices
    • Use of wheelchair or other mobility aid
    • Use of stairs
    • Ability to operate motor vehicle
    • Use of public transportation (or other access to transportation)
  3. Communication
    • Reading
    • Writing
    • Speaking
    • Listening
  4. Learning
    • Attention
    • Comprehension
    • Retention
    • Application
  5. Problem-solving
    • Awareness and recognition of problems
    • Identification of alternatives
    • Anticipation of possible consequences of various alternatives
    • Deciding on optimal alternative
  6. Social skills
    • Understanding of social mores and values
    • Impulse control
    • Intimacy
    • Conversational skills
    • Empathy
  7. Executive functions
    • Planning and organization
    • Motivation and initiation
    • Monitoring and reviewing
    • Decisionmaking

Disabilities and Chemical Dependency

Data from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation indicate that about 10 percent of the population have a substance use disorder (Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, 1994). Yet studies have consistently found that 20 percent or more of all persons qualifying for State vocational rehabilitation services exhibit symptoms qualifying them for a diagnosis of substance abuse or substance dependence (Moore and Li, 1994; Schwab and DiNitto, 1993; RRTC, 1996). In the 1996 RRTC study, the disabilities represented included those most prevalent within State vocational rehabilitation (VR) systems: mental illness, various orthopedic impairments, deafness/hearing impairments, blindness/visual impairments, learning disability, mental retardation, TBI, and chemical dependency. In a subsequent analysis, persons with the primary disability of chemical dependency were omitted from the sample. Yet the remaining VR consumers with other disabilities reported patterns of illicit drug use that were more frequent and heavier for every drug compared with a general population sample matched for age and geographic distribution (RRTC, 1996).

In 1988, the Wisconsin Department of Health and Social Services conducted a statewide study of alcohol use by people with disabilities (Buss and Cramer, 1989). It asked 3,216 consumers of VR or independent living services (people who had disabilities such as orthopedic impairments [including spinal cord injury and amputation], vision impairments, loss of hearing, arthritis, cerebral palsy, polio, brain trauma, heart disease, and multiple sclerosis) to report their use of alcohol. Alcohol use patterns were based on typologies established by Cahalan (Cahalan et al., 1969). The study found that respondents with a disability were more likely to be "heavy" or "moderate" drinkers (35 percent and 25 percent, respectively) than the general population. While heavy or moderate drinkers are not considered dependent, this heavy alcohol use puts them at higher risk for injury and other health consequences, as well as future risk of dependence. The results of this study suggest that people with disabilities may use alcohol at least as much if not more than the general population.

Not all people with disabilities are equally likely to have substance use disorders. Certain types of disabilities seem to have more impact than others on substance use behavior. For instance, research suggests that the rate of substance abuse among people with mental illness may be twice as high as that of the general population, and over 50 percent of young people with mental illness report some kind of substance use (Kelley and Benshoff, 1997; Kessler and Klein, 1995; Regier et al., 1990; Brown et al., 1989). Substance use is often the major contributing factor to both spinal cord and traumatic brain injuries, and people living with the aftereffects of such trauma often continue to have substance use disorders (Heinemann et al., 1988; Sparadeo and Gill, 1989; Corrigan et al., 1995).

Both disability and chemical dependency service providers report increases in substance use disorders among people with disabilities. For example, State directors of alcohol and drug departments and directors of State VR agencies reported increases in coexisting disability and substance use disorders among recent referrals to their programs. Directors of both agencies predicted that these numbers would continue rising in the future (RRTC, 1996). Since many people with disabilities are not currently receiving the treatment for substance use disorders they require, the number of people with disabilities seeking treatment can only be expected to grow.

Life Problems Contribute to Substance Use Disorders

People with disabilities are more likely to use substances in part because they experience unemployment, lack of recreational options, social isolation, homelessness, and victimization or physical abuse more frequently than the general population (Susser et al., 1991; Vash, 1981; DeLoach and Greer, 1981; Marshak and Seligman, 1993). If they also have substance use disorders, such problems are further exacerbated.

Many adults with disabilities are underemployed or unemployed. Some 30 percent live below the poverty line, a rate approximately 20 percent higher than that for people without disabilities (LaPlante et al., 1997). People with disabilities at all income levels generally spend a large proportion of their income to meet their disability-related needs. Like others who have been isolated or unemployed over a long period of time, some people with disabilities lack the social skills and familiarity with workplaces needed to succeed in a job.

For many reasons, people with disabilities may rely on a smaller social network. They may be isolated because of their families' efforts to protect them, the physical difficulty of getting out to social settings, lack of opportunities to practice social skills, lack of physical stamina, trouble finding activities and negotiating transportation, poverty, and nondisabled people's discomfort with people with disabilities. An altered body image can make those with a recent disability onset (e.g., people using a wheelchair for the first time) reluctant to socialize. Additionally, physical limitations make some people fear violence or exploitation. People with disabilities are at greater risk of being victims of sexual abuse and domestic or other violence (Glover et al., 1995; Varley, 1984). They are more likely to be victimized because they are perceived as unable to protect themselves. Depression and low self-esteem associated with their disabilities can also play a role in some individuals' victimization, and in turn their substance use.

Isolation and functional limitations leave many people with disabilities with few recreational options, yet they often have much unstructured time on their hands. For example, people who are blind or have a visual impairment may face increased isolation, excess free time, and underemployment (Motet-Grigoras and Schuckit, 1989; Nelipovich and Buss, 1989). Some people may perceive bars or other places where alcohol is consumed as the only social gathering places open to them and drinking or drug use the only possible means of recreating or gaining social support (Greer, 1986).

Panel members report that employed assistants and caregivers for people with disabilities may often abuse their clients, steal from them, or otherwise exploit them. The caregiver for a substance-using client with a disability may purchase alcohol or drugs for the client or tolerate the client's self-destructive behavior.

Treatment implications

Each of these life problems increases the individual's risk of substance use disorder, makes treatment more complex, and heightens the possibility of relapse. Coordination with an agency providing case management services for people with disabilities should be a priority if those services are not provided by the substance use disorder treatment program. People with both a substance use disorder and a coexisting disability may need assistance and individualized accommodations to

  • Escape from abusive situations
  • Learn to protect themselves from victimization
  • Find volunteer work or other means of gaining a sense of productivity in lieu of paid employment (although paid employment would always be preferred)
  • Develop prevocational skills such as basic grooming, dressing appropriately, using public transportation, and cooking
  • Learn social skills that may be missing because of both substance use disorders and disability-related problems
  • Learn to engage in healthy recreation
  • Become educated about their legal rights to accessible environments and services as well as employment
  • Obtain financial benefits to which they are entitled
  • Build new peer networks

Programs face procedural and other obstacles when they attempt to rectify such problems. For example, clients may be declared ineligible for some VR programs until they have remained sober for 6 months or more (even though such a requirement is counter-productive and can act to maintain a vicious cycle between a lack of vocational skills and substance use disorders). Some VR counselors resist working with people with substance use disorders, believing them too "difficult" and destined to fail. Furthermore, by the time a person with a disability attempts to access treatment, the level of her substance use disorder may be rather severe because of societal enabling, systems that do not identify early substance use and abuse, and the tendency among human service agencies to focus on disability rather than chemical dependency issues.

Obvious Versus Hidden Disabilities

Identifying hidden disabilities is the key to successful substance use disorder treatment. A patient who repeatedly fails at treatment may not understand what he is told, or may not be able to read or remember materials. Many people who have disabilities (e.g., people with multiple sclerosis, seizure disorders, cardiac problems) look healthy much of the time, but these conditions often cause significant fatigue or limitations on walking, driving, or other physical activities. Treatment staff members may not accept or believe a client has a disability based on what they see, regardless of what the client says. In some cases, people may have had a lifelong investment in hiding their cognitive disabilities and will not volunteer or admit to their conditions.

Disabilities can also be hidden from clients themselves. A substance use disorder treatment program may be where a person first discovers she has diabetes, a learning disability, or a hearing loss. Even if a client knows he has a disability, he may not be aware of accommodations that could help him function better.

Whether they recognize it or not, treatment providers are already delivering services to a variety of people with disabilities. Some of these may be the same people who drop out of treatment, who do not seem to make progress, or who seem unmotivated. Such clients can be particularly frustrating for treatment providers; however, if functional limitations are recognized and treatment is modified accordingly, the program is likely to see better results.

The counselor must be especially sensitive when working with people who are not aware of or wish others to remain unaware of their disability. Chapter 2 elaborates some of the ways in which treatment staff can screen for cognitive disabilities that may not be readily apparent.

Hidden cognitive disabilities

Physical and sensory disabilities are generally more apparent than cognitive disabilities. Several studies have indicated that many people requiring chemical dependency treatment have cognitive, personality, or other conditions that affect their ability to learn or benefit from treatment (Corrigan, 1995; Brown et al., 1989; Rourke and Loberg, 1996). Provider experience bears out the fact that a number of persons present to the treatment setting with undiagnosed or misdiagnosed cognitive impairments. Treatment providers should look out for these potential hidden disabilities, because they may not have been documented by previous health care professionals, may not be fully appreciated by the client, or may have been misinterpreted in the past as "poor motivation" on the part of the client.

The majority of individuals with mental retardation is in the mild to borderline range (IQ up to 83) and can function well in many treatment situations with minimal adaptations. However, people with mental retardation and other cognitive disabilities may have very good social and communication skills and yet still have serious problems with memory, decisionmaking, planning, or learning comprehension. Some highly functioning individuals go to great lengths to keep their disabilities a secret, even presenting with noncompliant or negative behavior to deflect attention from their areas of functional limitation.

Hidden physical disabilities

One cannot ascertain the nature of someone's limitations based on obvious physical impairments. A person who speaks slowly due to cerebral palsy may be able to read and process information quite well. On the other hand, someone who uses a wheelchair may in fact face a more serious impairment in an unrelated learning disability that dramatically limits his ability to read. Some persons with physical disabilities may have had to deal with so many disappointments that they have seriously lowered their own expectations of what they can do; in these situations, these individuals' physical disabilities may be less of an impediment to recovery than their lowered expectations.

Recognizing Barriers to Treatment

In spite of two recent Federal laws (the 1992 Amendments to the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990), substance use disorder treatment programs continue to provide inadequate services for people with disabilities. Although this difficulty is most visible in inpatient or residential programs, statewide legal proceedings on behalf of people with disabilities have been initiated regarding access to outpatient settings as well. According to the ADA, programs must remove or compensate for physical or architectural barriers to existing facilities when accommodation is readily achievable, meaning "easily accomplishable and able to be carried out without much difficulty or expense" (P.L. 101-336 -301). Providers should examine their programs and modify them to eliminate four fundamental groups of barriers to treatment for people with disabilities: (1) attitudinal barriers; (2) discriminatory policies, practices, and procedures; (3) communications barriers; and (4) architectural barriers. (For a more detailed explanation of what accommodations must be made, and answers to other, more specific, questions concerning ADA compliance and the best ways to overcome these barriers, see Appendix D).

Attitudinal Barriers

Attitudes about "disability" influence the ways nondisabled people react to people with disabilities, which can affect the latter's treatment outcomes. The stereotypes and expectations of others also influence the ways people think about their own disabilities.

Perceptions, stereotypes, or beliefs held by providers can hinder their ability to treat a person with a disability. Following are some examples of commonly held beliefs that can pose barriers to treatment:

  • People with disabilities do not abuse substances.
  • People with disabilities should receive exactly the same treatment protocol as everyone else, so that they aren't singled out as different. Being mainstreamed into society means that you should do exactly the same things as everyone else.
  • A person is noncompliant when her disability prevents her from responding to treatment.
  • A person with a disability will make other clients uncomfortable.
  • People with disabilities will sue the program regardless of the services offered.
  • Serving people with disabilities requires going to extremes.
  • Every person with a disability requires hospitalization rather than a residential or outpatient program.
  • People with cognitive disabilities are not capable of learning how to stay sober.
  • People with disabilities make too many demands and use their disability as an excuse for not fully participating in treatment.
  • People with disabilities deserve pity, so they should be allowed more latitude to indulge in substance use.

Staff members who hold such beliefs about people with disabilities may screen out those who would be well served by their programs or deny a client an appropriate accommodation for her disability. On the other hand, these staff members may unwittingly enable clients to use their disabilities to avoid treatment. (For examples of inappropriate responses, see Figure 3-1 on Denial, Enabling, and Accommodation.)

Staff training is key to overcoming attitudinal barriers. For more information on staff training, see Chapter 5 for the discussion of Provider Knowledge of People with Disabilities. To learn the appropriate terms to use in referring to people with disabilities see Appendix C: How to Refer to People With Disabilities.

Discriminatory Policies, Practices, and Procedures

Programs can inadvertently discriminate when their policies, practices, or procedures present barriers to the treatment of people with coexisting disabilities. For example, a program may establish a discriminatory policy such as the following:

  • We do not serve clients who are taking medication (even if the medication is for a medical condition, such as epilepsy). (Such discrimination is also often seen against clients in opioid maintenance therapy or those who require psychoactive medications for a psychiatric condition.)
  • People who miss appointments must pay fines (even though disability-related problems may make it impossible for a person to make a scheduled appointment)
  • Fire and safety regulations require that all clients be able to walk out of the building independently (which precludes the participation of a person who uses a wheelchair).
  • All clients must participate in house chores such as washing dishes and mowing the lawn (which precludes the participation of people with particular physical disabilities).
  • Every person must read two chapters of a book per day (even if some people do not have the necessary reading skills).

Examples of discriminatory practices include the following:

  • A client is excluded from the residential setting because he needs assistance in transferring from the wheelchair to the bed (even though this task is readily learned by program staff and is required only twice per day for 2 minutes at a time).
  • A client is discharged from outpatient treatment for missing three sessions, when the client was actually delayed by waiting for a "handicapped-accessible" bus that does not run on a set schedule.

The ADA sets forth many requirements to protect people with disabilities from administrative barriers. Programs should periodically review their existing policies, practices, and procedures and adopt new ones as needed in order to avoid discrimination. Rules and treatment plans can be specifically tailored to meet the needs of each person, and consequently the specific treatment requirements will vary for some people. An individualized treatment approach permits more latitude in assigning different types of chores or homework to individuals and in using different techniques or learning modalities (e.g., allowing a client who has great difficulty speaking in a group setting to turn in an oral report on audiocassette). Also, when all clients receive individualized treatment there will be less friction when one client is permitted to do an assignment differently.

Barriers to Communication

These barriers exist when a program's communications with people with coexisting disabilities are less accessible than its communications with others. To eliminate communications barriers, programs should have available a wide range of auxiliary aids and services.

Communications with people with physical disabilities

Persons with slow speech, significant respiratory problems, or other limitations in expression have a great deal of difficulty expressing their thoughts fully. Consequently, treatment staff has less information to guide its therapeutic actions. Ironically, this occurs most often with clients who need to be better understood by their counselors in order to progress in treatment. A counselor or clinician is confounding the potential success of treatment by not allowing clients who have delays in speech or cognition sufficient time to fully express their thoughts.

Speech impairments can result from a stroke or from a condition such as cerebral palsy. Auxiliary aids for individuals with speech impairments include telecommunication devices for the deaf (TDDs), computer terminals, speech synthesizers, and communication boards.

Communications with people with sensory disabilities

A person who is deaf and blind may require the use of a sign language interpreter trained in the use of tactile communication. People who are blind or visually impaired use a wide range of communication techniques, and one should not assume that all people who are blind are Braille-literate. Providers should find out from the blind person her primary communication method and provide materials in that medium. The provider should be able to supply materials in Braille, large print, and audiocassette. Local, State, or private agencies for the blind can either transcribe or help arrange transcription of printed material into these media.

Inadequate communications are the major barrier to treatment for people who are deaf and hard of hearing. Without accommodation, people who are deaf, whether they use sign language or not, will experience barriers to communication that significantly reduce their ability to benefit from a treatment program and to receive services equivalent to those hearing clients receive. Various auxiliary services and devices can help a person who is deaf communicate with program personnel.

An individual who is deaf can experience his first barrier when he calls a program to apply for admission. A treatment program should have a TDD (also referred to as a TTY), which enables people to type and send messages over the telephone network. If a treatment program has a TDD, people who are deaf can call the program directly.

Once the individual who is deaf has been admitted to the program, someone will have to translate the spoken communication that comprises most of the program. Clients who are deaf and use sign language will need sign language interpreters in order to have access to communication. Individuals whose first language is American Sign Language (ASL) know written English as a second language, and may have the same difficulties with it that other nonnative speakers have. Interpreters should be available at all times so that clients who are deaf can fully participate in the program; if there are no staff who use sign language then one or more outside interpreters will need to be hired.

Treatment programs can contact their State commission for the deaf and hard of hearing or the agency in their State that focuses on deaf and hard of hearing service provision. Most States also have a chapter of the Registry on Interpreters for the Deaf (RID), the professional association for sign language interpreters, to help people obtain the services of a qualified interpreter. As a general rule, an interpreter who is certified by the RID is considered qualified. However, in some States there is a screening system to determine if interpreters who have not yet received certification from the RID are able to provide quality interpreting services. In these States, a person who passes the evaluation, or receives a certain rating, may be qualified. The provider should speak with the organization overseeing the evaluation system to ensure that this is the case.

It is important for treatment providers to understand the parameters within which interpreters work. If an assignment (e.g., interpreting for a detoxification program) is 2 hours or less, an interpreter will usually take the assignment alone. He will probably need a break at some point during the 2 hours, however. Interpreting is taxing, and an interpreter's effectiveness diminishes over time. Well-placed breaks or hiring two interpreters will greatly reduce such fatigue and reduced performance.

Treatment programs may have deaf clients who do not use sign language. In this case, a program may need to get an oral interpreter (who mouths the words that people are saying) or Computer Assisted Realtime Transcription (CART) services. A CART reporter types everything that is said into a computer system, which a deaf person then reads on a monitor or laptop screen. Some individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing may request an assistive listening device to amplify sound. The client who is deaf can provide advice to the program and should be provided the type of device he asks for. The State agency for people who are deaf or the State VR agency should know where to obtain these devices.

Communications with people with cognitive disabilities

Programs must be prepared to adapt basic treatment modalities for individuals with impaired communication (receptive and expressive), reading, or writing skills. The use of picture books, comic books, illustrated "flash cards," art therapy techniques, and audio and videotapes may help resolve some of these communication barriers.

Individuals with TBI may have decreased comprehension of both written and oral information, or may have difficulties speaking. In other cases, these abilities may be intact but social cognition is impaired, leaving those people functionally communicative and literate, but without the requisite judgment and social interaction skills to communicate meaningfully or appropriately with clinicians and peers.

People with aphasia lose the ability to convey and comprehend oral or written information. These individuals may be able to think clearly but may not be able to form their thoughts into coherent sentences without a struggle. In some cases, this condition can vary from day to day, causing counselors to suspect willful noncompliance or a mental/emotional problem unrelated to language comprehension.

Cognitive disabilities may limit people's understanding of basic concepts of treatment. Individuals with developmental disabilities may not have acquired abstract thought skills, and dealing with abstract concepts such as admitting their powerlessness over alcohol can be daunting. Those with learning disabilities may have trouble processing and using abstract information. Many will have limited vocabularies. And many individuals with a variety of disabilities--not necessarily cognitive ones--have poor educational achievement due to negative school experiences. Bad experiences in school are also predictors of later substance use disorders (Jessor and Jessor, 1977).

Architectural Barriers

Physical barriers include the absence of elevators or ramps, narrow hallways, poor lighting, wall telephones too high for people in wheelchairs, deep pile carpets that interfere with wheelchairs or crutches, conventional doorknobs that impede access to people with limited manual dexterity, or even a lack of transportation from the property's boundaries (where public transportation may drop off a person) to the facility's entrance. Programs should consider other types of modifications as well in order to make their buildings safer for all participants.

A person who is blind or visually impaired can typically move safely within an environment once it becomes familiar. The treatment provider should early on give clients who are blind a complete orientation to the facility. Signage to accommodate people who are blind and visually impaired is widely available and includes signs and elevator settings that are properly color contrasted or have raised Braille words and numbers. In addition, loose rugs, wall-mounted fire extinguishers, and lighting that is too bright or too dim can create mobility problems for individuals who are visually impaired.

When barriers cannot readily be removed, a program must find alternate methods to make its services available. A program that offers counseling in an upstairs room must offer counseling downstairs when needed, if it is not able to add a ramp or elevator. If an onsite adjustment cannot be made, an outpatient program must find an alternate site where it can deliver the same level of care it provides at its nonaccessible site. A residential program may find it necessary to make an appropriate referral as a temporary solution, while it takes the steps necessary to change its facilities for future clients.

Mainstreaming Versus Specialized Services

In general, it is beneficial and feasible to integrate people with disabilities into already existing community-based services used by other individuals recovering from substance use disorders (a process known as mainstreaming). However, there are a number of exceptions to this rule. In instances where a legitimate, documented reason exists, specialized services may be necessary.

People who are deaf and identify with Deaf Culture will usually prefer specialized treatment programs (see below). In addition, clients who have severe psychiatric disorders will benefit from specialized services that understand their medication and behavioral issues. People with mental retardation may find it easier to understand and participate in discussions that involve others with similar disabilities. They do not have to channel all their energy into "passing as normal" and are less ashamed to ask questions. Some clinicians find that even people with mild and borderline mental retardation, and with limited or no reading abilities, prefer to be placed with other nonreaders. Other disability conditions that may warrant some stand-alone services include TBI, spinal cord injury, or severe or multiple disabilities.

In some situations, however, grouping people with similar disabilities may be counterproductive. For example, persons who are grouped by disability may try to ignore the larger treatment population, or they may be at widely dissimilar stages of acceptance or adaptation to their disabilities. Depending on the personalities of the individuals involved, one person may keep another from going forward in treatment. While grouping generally can produce positive outcomes, it is an adaptation that should be monitored once established.

Ideally, stand-alone services should be offered to an individual with a coexisting disability in concert with other community supports, thereby increasing the depth of the recovery plan and making the transition to sober community living more logistically possible. Such community supports could be attending an outpatient chemical dependency program in an area of the town where the client lives, becoming enrolled in vocational rehabilitation, attending support group meetings for head injury, or enrolling in a community college developmental English program.

Deaf and Hard of Hearing

Many members of the Deaf Community benefit from specialized services, which generally are better equipped to handle specific cultural, language, and communications issues that may arise. People who are deaf or hard of hearing and use sign language tend to identify themselves as part of a deaf community. Many will prefer to be served by programs that specifically address their needs and whose staff is fluent in sign language. Unlike many other people with disabilities, people who are deaf often do not identify with a medical model of disability and instead embrace a cultural model that emphasizes their abilities within the Deaf Community and their own language and values.

Most people who are deaf seeking substance use disorder treatment prefer segregated programs to mainstreamed programs. This allows clients who are deaf to participate in a group with deaf peers and a counselor who is fluent in sign language. Direct communication will facilitate greater participation by clients who are deaf than communication through an interpreter. Such a group provides an environment of peers who share similar life experiences and a common language, generally considered important for the recovery process.

Yet having a group that is all deaf is not realistic for most programs. It is more likely that, on occasion, there will be only one client who is deaf in a program, and the rest of the clients will be able to hear. In this case, the program will need to hire one or more sign language interpreters to facilitate comprehensive communication among the client who is deaf, hearing clients, and hearing staff. In some instances, the program may want to refer the person to a specialized program serving people who are deaf and hard of hearing. If a sign language interpreter is not available, the leader of the group may try to communicate with the person through pencil and paper, trying to explain some of the issues. Without the presence of the interpreter, however, the individual who is deaf will miss much of the information shared during a therapeutic group.

Some individuals who are late-deafened or hard of hearing do not use sign language, did not grow up with other people who are deaf, and do not identify with Deaf Culture. This population is actually larger than the population who uses sign language (Minnesota Chemical Dependency Treatment Program for Deaf and Hard of Hearing Individuals, 1996). These individuals will generally prefer to be served by programs for the general population alongside clients who can hear. The types of accommodations they need will differ from what is needed to effectively treat clients who identify with Deaf Culture. These accommodations will usually consist of the use of devices either to amplify sound or to print what individuals in the program are saying. These people have grown up using English as a primary language and do not have the second language issues that are common to individuals who are deaf whose primary language is ASL.

Working With People With Disabilities

A significant number of the people currently seeking treatment for substance use disorders also have a physical, cognitive, sensory, or affective disability. Many others are or believe they are unable to access the treatment they desperately need, often because of the double stigma of having a substance use disorder and a coexisting disability. This TIP provides simple, practical guidelines to help treatment professionals provide services for people with coexisting disabilities, thereby improving the quality of treatment for a large number of persons whose needs are not being met. The TIP is organized to allow treatment providers to find information pertinent to clients who may have a particular disability. Even though these categories of disabilities are often artificial distinctions, this system of organization gives treatment professionals a baseline from which to modify treatment on a case-by-case basis for their clients with coexisting disabilities.

The TIP also aims to educate providers about the needs common to most (if not all) people with disabilities and the legal, ethical, and practical reasons to accommodate this significant client population. Information is provided concerning screening for the physical and cognitive disabilities of those seeking treatment (in Chapter 2), how treatment can be modified to work better for people with disabilities (in Chapter 3), establishing linkages with other types of agencies and programs (in Chapter 4), modifications to the program that might need to take place at the administrative level (in Chapter 5), and ADA compliance (see Appendix D).

Many treatment providers have been reluctant to take on clients with disabilities because they assume difficulties that may not exist. The less one understands disabilities and their corresponding functional limitations, the more daunting accommodation appears. A useful parallel is the beginning of the acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) epidemic in the 1980s, when many health care workers were afraid to treat patients with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and AIDS (a population also covered by the ADA). In that case, education and hands-on experience with AIDS patients countered the widespread apprehension better than anything else. Similarly, more information such as that provided in this TIP and the inclusion of clients with disabilities in treatment programs will help reduce barriers to treatment discussed above.

The process of education will help treatment providers discover that people with disabilities are more like than unlike other clients, and that they have already been treating people with disabilities without knowing it. The presence of people with disabilities in a treatment group can benefit all clients. Appropriate accommodation of a person with a disability fosters cooperation at the same time it enriches group diversity. By better serving people with identified disabilities, the treatment provider will improve care for a great many other clients as well, as providers learn to tailor treatment to each client's individual needs.

Chapter 2 -- Screening Issues

Physical, sensory, and cognitive disabilities affect far more clients than many treatment providers realize. Because so many people in treatment programs for substance use disorders have coexisting disabilities, the Consensus Panel recommends that every new client be screened for disabilities. In the screening process, each client's level of ability in various areas of functioning should be evaluated. The screening described here is not and should not be seen as an additional task to be performed only with people who have an obvious physical or cognitive disability.

Persons with disabilities also may require modifications in the way treatment personnel perform screening and assessment for substance use disorders. As with any stage of treatment, providers will need to make accommodations for people with disabilities in their screening procedures. Because both these forms of screening will occur at roughly the same time, both will be discussed below.

"Disability Etiquette"

It is important that providers be sensitive to the feelings as well as the needs of people with disabilities from their first contact onward. Providers who have never worked with someone with an obvious disability may feel awkward, unsure of what to say, or what help to offer. Sensitivity and openness will help ease this discomfort, as will the following guidelines.

In planning and providing treatment to people with disabilities, the importance of asking questions cannot be overemphasized. "Disability etiquette" involves maintaining an awareness of intrusion into an individual's personal space. Asking before rendering any service is a basic principle. "May I help?" should be followed by "How may I help?" For example, if a person is struggling to put a wheelchair into a car, it is important to first ask if help is needed and then to ask how the wheelchair should be placed in the car so that the person can later remove the wheelchair unassisted.

Some providers may feel embarrassed to ask certain questions or may worry about giving offense, even when the answers are critical to the treatment planning process. It may be helpful to preface such questions by requesting permission to ask them. "May I ask you about..." or "It would help me to know more about..." are ways of beginning to ask more direct questions. It is, however, important for staff members to be able to be honest and acknowledge that they may not know the appropriate way to ask a question.

Although resources regarding disability etiquette are available from organizations such as Easter Seals and the American Foundation for the Blind, it is always best to ask each person what he wants, thus ensuring that cultural, gender, and personal preferences are met. (See Appendix C for information on how to refer to people with disabilities.)

People With Sensory Disabilities

The majority of people who are blind use a cane; fewer use guide dogs. Either way, people who are blind or visually impaired will require assistance in orienting themselves to a new environment. Treatment providers should try to describe or guide a person through a new environment. Instead of stepping back and allowing the person to fumble, the counselor should offer "sighted guide" assistance, during which the person who is blind holds the sighted person's arm just above the elbow and they walk in tandem. Pulling a person by his arm is not appropriate.

People who are blind live in a more touch-oriented world than the sighted population. It is acceptable for the counselor to put the blind person's hand on the back of the chair she is to use. A service animal, however, should not be distracted from its job; the animal should not be touched or petted, nor should one even ask permission to do so.

Word use is important. The counselor must use more descriptive and detailed language and strive to avoid phases like "over there" or "like this." There is no need to avoid words like "see" and "look"--they are part of everyone's daily language.

Finally, more than 80 percent of people considered "blind" have some residual vision. This remaining vision is typically light- or glare-sensitive. It is helpful to ask if the lighting in the current environment is uncomfortable. Figure 3-6 in the next chapter presents these and other suggestions for working with people who are blind in the form of an easy-to-follow list of suggestions.

Communication is the key issue when dealing with individuals who are deaf and hard of hearing. Regardless of the model of communication used by the person who is deaf or hard of hearing, the visual aspect of communication will be important. Therefore, it is important to look directly at the person when communicating so he can see facial expressions and has the option of lip-reading. When interviewing a person who is deaf with an interpreter, it is still important to look directly at the client. Speak directly to him just as if there was no interpreter present.

People With Physical Disabilities

Persons with disabilities that limit their mobility can encounter situations like sidewalks without curb cuts or front doors that cannot be opened from a wheelchair. They are understandably annoyed if they are stymied by these barriers and then hear those responsible for the facility explain, "We hardly ever get someone with a wheelchair here." Providers should not assume that someone in a wheelchair is unusually resistant to treatment just because she expresses anger at not being able to enter the facility through the same entrance or use the same restroom as other clients.

People who use wheelchairs often come to regard the chair as an extension of themselves, and touching the chair may be offensive to them. Never take control of the wheelchair or touch any other adaptive equipment without permission.

Screening for Disabilities

Treatment providers are not expected to become experts in disabilities or to diagnose disabilities themselves. However, functional limitations and symptoms of disability are likely to become apparent as clients with disabilities participate in treatment, and a provider should recognize certain signs and symptoms.

It is the level of abilities and of the functioning of the individual--not the simple determination of whether a disability exists--that must be assessed if screening is to lead to an effective treatment plan. In situations where a diagnosis of disability is needed (e.g., to qualify for special services), treatment providers should refer the client to a disabilities services professional. State vocational rehabilitation (VR) programs may be a good source for referral.

Functional limitations associated with a disability, whether apparent or not, can undermine treatment if they are not recognized and addressed. For example, a person's lack of progress in treatment may be mistakenly attributed to a lack of motivation, when in reality a functional limitation, such as an inability to read, is impeding her ability to understand or participate in treatment. Such an individual may seem indifferent to achieving her treatment goals, when she is actually having difficulty processing or retaining information.

Treatment providers should be careful not to make determinations about a person's disability when they are not qualified to do so. Initial screening is encouraged, but an expert on the particular disability should conduct any further assessment. Of course if a client is being referred from a disabilities expert, staff should ask for a full evaluation that includes specific client strengths and weaknesses.

Initial Screening

Through the screening process, the provider can begin to understand the circumstances in a client's life that are likely to have a bearing on treatment. All such circumstances, whether or not they are disabilities, should be incorporated into the treatment plan.

Questions relating to disabilities can and should be incorporated as seamlessly as possible into a comprehensive screen, rather than treated as an altogether separate subject. After discussion of the substance use disorder, the interviewer can bring up visibly obvious impairments, such as those requiring the use of a wheelchair or cane. The questions can be framed by the program's desire to respond to individual needs: "Do you need any accommodations to participate in this program?" This question should be posed to everyone, not only to those the interviewer thinks have a disability.

The possibility of hidden impairments can be explored subtly during the conversation. For example, during a routine medical history, a question about past hospitalizations can elicit information about a previous brain or head injury, thus alerting the interviewer to the possibility of traumatic brain injury (TBI). Similarly, a client's answers to routine questions about past and current medications may point to the possibility of cognitive or affective impairments (see Case Study below). A client's referrals from other service providers such as VR services can also offer insights into less obvious impairments.

Setting always influences the screening process; this is especially true when testing or interviewing for disabilities. An individual's problems with mobility, for example, may make it necessary for the interviewer to travel to his home, where there may be distractions of children or other family members. However, a person might not be willing to speak openly in front of other family members, even if they already know about her disabilities. Wherever the interview takes place, it is important to create a sense of privacy in talking with the client.

Figure 2-1 presents a basic screening instrument for identifying impairments and functional limitations that can be handed to a client preceding an interview. The text can be used verbatim (with the instructions given at the top of the figure) as a form all clients would receive before a screening and assessment session. In the answers to questions such as these, the interviewer should be looking for things such as the history and symptoms of diseases or disorders that can provide clues to impairments and disabilities. If the questions and discussions based on the screen indicate an impairment, the client should be referred to a disabilities expert for a more in-depth screening.

Figure 2-2 presents the questions from Figure 2-1 in the manner they might be asked during a spoken (or signed) interview, with the numbers of the relevant questions provided in parentheses. This figure also provides further questions that might be asked and ideas for how the information gained in the interview could be used in followup treatment planning. Throughout the screening interview, it is important for the screener to pay attention to the individual's affect and behavior in order to pick up on possible cognitive or affective impairments. Screening for psychiatric disorders is discussed in TIP 9, Assessment and Treatment of Patients With Coexisting Mental Illness and Alcohol and Other Drug Abuse (CSAT, 1994).

Screening for sensory disabilities

A treatment provider need not conduct an assessment of hearing loss when working with people who are deaf or hard of hearing. The provider should, however, note the individual's apparent adjustment to the hearing loss and psychosocial factors related to it. This information could be used in determining the type of program to which to refer the client (a mainstreamed program or an all-deaf program) and could be useful to the treatment provider in developing a treatment plan. Clinicians who conduct screenings should consult with a professional who is experienced in working with people who are deaf and can assist the clinician in developing an appropriate referral to treatment.

Background information to consider when screening an individual who is deaf or hard of hearing includes the following:

  • Is the family of the client deaf or hearing?
  • What is the nature of the client's relationship with family members?
  • What is the extent of communication between the client and significant family members?
  • What is the communication mode used by the client? If signing, what is the style used?
  • What type of school program(s) did the client attend? How did he feel about the program and his experiences there?
  • Is the client's primary peer group deaf or hearing? If hearing, what is the extent of communication with these peers (how fluent)?
  • How does the individual feel about and cope with her hearing loss?

If a client uses sign language as her primary mode of communication, attended a residential school for the deaf, or socializes primarily with people who are deaf, it is likely that an all-deaf program is most appropriate for him. On the other hand, if she does not use sign language, grew up attending public schools without support services, and has no deaf peers, a mainstreamed program may better meet her needs.

Screening for cognitive and affective disabilities

Some cognitive impairments, while not readily apparent, may be revealed by subtle behavioral cues. For instance, difficulty in attending to the questions being asked or fidgeting and restlessness during the interview may indicate an attention disorder.

Memory problems, such as those resulting from TBI, may also be hard to detect initially. A person might be quite conversationally skilled and appear to be comprehending a vast amount of new information but might not retain the information even until the following day. Given the significance of retaining treatment information, memory difficulties need to be detected early so that a more in-depth assessment can be conducted and treatment recommendations can be made.

A person's problem-solving and reasoning abilities may be impaired by head trauma and substance use. While this functional limitation can greatly affect decision making in high-risk situations, it might not emerge as problematic while the client is responding to questions about his personal background in a well-rehearsed fashion. For this reason, it may be important for the clinician to informally assess reasoning and problem solving with more novel questioning or a brief screening tool that does not solely target the individual's personal social history. One way to screen self-care and problem-solving capacities informally is by asking a person to complete some simple activities such as writing a check or performing a practical math problem.

Substance use disorders may elicit behaviors that could be mistaken for mental health concerns. For example, many substance-using clients display paranoid behaviors that may take time to dissipate even after detoxification. Looking at these cues as potential signals, rather than drawing conclusions from them, will help the interviewer avoid making false presumptions.

Interviewers also need to be aware that substance use disorders can obscure a disability. The use of cocaine and crack can mask clinical depression, and some individuals with severe, chronic depression may self-medicate with crack or cocaine. Upon admission to a substance use disorder treatment facility, these individuals appear appropriate in affect. However, after detoxification, they plunge into a deep, intractable depression, requiring psychiatric intervention and medication. Individuals with mental retardation or developmental disabilities often use marijuana or alcohol to mask their disability--it is difficult to discern a drunk or high person with developmental disabilities from a drunk or high person without such disabilities.

Conversing with an individual with a cognitive disability about her disability can provide other information relevant to treatment. For example, asking someone how he became cognitively disabled may reveal a history of physical abuse, accidents, or illnesses resulting in head injuries in childhood. Asking how old someone was when she first realized she had a disability and what that felt like can reveal suicidal ideation in childhood and untreated pain over the disability, problems that may contribute to a substance use disorder in later life.

From Screening to Treatment

One of the challenges substance use disorder treatment programs face in providing services to people with disabilities is determining what the program can offer these clients to best meet their needs. The screening process can help to identify those areas where linkages with other services and agencies are needed. Changes to the program and its facilities may also be needed.

The aim of the initial screening for disability-related considerations is not a diagnosis, but rather a pragmatic exploration of the potential barriers to treatment that may arise from a disability and its associated functional limitations. Individuals entering chemical dependency treatment do not always benefit from learning new, potentially stigmatizing terms that apply to them, but they may benefit from modifications to the treatment process. Which is not to say that staff and clients should avoid talking about disabilities, but that it is more important to focus on necessary modifications to treatment than on a specific label. Additionally, treatment personnel are unlikely to be qualified to make disability diagnoses; however, in a practical sense, they are likely to be more skilled than they realize in adjusting treatment approaches based on the needs of their clients.

Questions used to screen for the presence of disabilities can be asked verbally, or the client can fill out the written survey provided in Figure 2-1 before an interview begins. After the screening it may be useful to draw up a profile of the client that presents the person's strengths and needs, along with recommendations to address those needs. This profile can be drawn up as a chart listing the seven areas of functional limitations described in Chapter 1. Each of the seven areas of functional limitation used in this screening (self-care, mobility, communications, learning, problem solving, social skills, and executive functions) presents specific considerations that may be identified in the screening interview. In the example below, questions from Figure 2-1 are applied in an actual interview; an accompanying profile, for a person with TBI, is depicted in Figure 2-3. A discussion of how the information gathered can be applied in treatment planning follows.

Case Study

"John," a 26-year-old white male, was referred from a local criminal justice agency after an arrest for driving under the influence (DUI). A high-school graduate, he lived with his mother and had held a series of entry-level jobs, none for more than 8 months. He had no obvious disabilities and stated that he is at the program because he "got into trouble." The screening questions presented below reflect a portion of a lengthier interview; John's answers to the questions will assist providers in planning his treatment program.

Q: Do you feel you have a disability, or has anyone ever told you that you have one?

A: No, nothing like that.

Q: Have you ever had to stay in a hospital overnight, or gone to an emergency room for any reason?

A: I've had some falls, and once I broke my arm. I went to the emergency room. But I never had to stay overnight.

Q: Have you ever seen a doctor for a long period of time, more frequently than just one visit or for routine check-ups?

A: Yes when I was in grade school.

Q: What was going on for you that you needed to see the doctor so often?

A: I'm not sure. I think I was overactive. I was on some kind of medicine.

Q: Do you know what kind of medication it was?

A: It was "rid-lin" [Ritalin] or something like that.

Q: Were you ever diagnosed with a learning disorder?

A: I don't think so.

Q: Were you ever in special education classes in school or did you receive any kind of tutoring?

A: I had some tutoring for math.

Q: Have you ever been given a hearing test?

A: Yeah. When I was in school they did hearing tests. I always passed them with flying colors. I don't have any hearing problems.

Q: Do you ever have to ask people to repeat what they're saying? Or has anyone ever complained to you that you don't listen?

A: Yeah, well my boss at work always says that I don't listen. And my teachers at school used to tell my mother that I don't hear what people are saying to me.

Q: Did you ever need to wear glasses?

A: No.

Q: When was the last time that your eyes were checked?

A: Oh, about 2 years ago. I was having some problems at work because they have really bright lights in the building. That would give me a headache sometimes. The eye doctor said that my eyes looked good. I guess I just don't like bright lights.

Q: Have you ever been hit on the head or had any blows to the head?

A: Now that you mention it, there was this one time in high school after football practice. Some of us were fooling around and I got into a fight. I don't know what happened. But I had to get some stitches and I had a headache for a few days.

Q: Did you lose consciousness?

A: I don't know. I guess there were some things I don't remember that people told me about later.

Q: What's the first thing you remember after the fight?

A: Riding in the ambulance.

Q: What did they do at the hospital?

A: I got some stitches in my forehead and they kept me around for a while to keep an eye on me.

Q: Did you notice any changes in your abilities since then?

A: No, not really.

Q: Have you had problems with bad or frequent headaches since the fight?

A: I guess sometimes I have headaches.

Q: Have you ever talked to a doctor about them?

A: No, not really.

[This is a problem that may need to be followed up with a physician visit. If neuropsychological testing was never done after the accident, it should be performed now if funds are available.]

Q: Have you ever received benefits of any kind? Like from a government agency?

A: No.

Q: Let's talk about your work history for a while. How many jobs have you had in the past three years?

A: Oh, about four or five.

Q: What was the longest job that you held?

A: Last year I worked for 8 months as a grocer's assistant. I quit because the boss was getting on my case. I don't think he liked me very much.

Q: Why do you think that?

A: Well, he would yell at me or tell me that I didn't do my job right. I should have been given a better job there, but he would say that I couldn't figure out how to do the job I had. He said I was forgetful.

Q: Do you think that you are forgetful?

A: Yeah, I guess so. I just sometimes forget things at work. There's too much to remember all at once.

Q: How were you taught your job?

A: Well, I followed this guy around and did what he told me to.

Q: Did that work? Do you feel that you learned the job?

A: It was OK when we worked together. Then they gave me a big list of stuff and I was supposed to just follow the list, but it didn't make sense.

Q: Were you able to read the list OK?

A: I guess some of it I didn't understand.

Q: Were you able to ask someone to explain the tasks required?

A: No, I just kind of figured it out. I don't like to ask a lot of questions. People don't always understand what I'm asking about anyway.

Q: Do you ever have trouble controlling your anger?

A: Maybe when I'm drinking.

Q: Do you ever feel anxious or on edge?

A: Sometimes. When I'm bored.

Q: How about feeling depressed? Or really happy for no reason?

A: No.

Q: Is English your first language? Did you speak any other language when you were growing up?

A: No, I only speak English.

Q: Tell me about your reading habits. What kind of stuff do you like to read? How often do you read?