WHEN IT HAPPENS IN A FAMILY: AIDING PARENTS OF SUBSTANCE‐ABUSING ADOLESCENTS*

This article first summarizes key data on the scope of teen substance abuse and the lack of teen access to needed treatment services. It then describes how and why attorneys may be helpful to parents who discover their teen's drug or alcohol problem and seek advice and counsel about the legal implications of various actions that can or may be taken. The article explores such issues as parents finding illegal drugs in the house or on their teen's person, various modalities of treatment and how family members are involved, how parents might secure residential evaluations for their youth without the necessity of juvenile court involvement (and why this is important), concerns about placing youth in unlicensed residential treatment facilities, health insurance coverage issues, home drug testing, and how past American Bar Association (ABA) policy on youth drug and alcohol abuse is being followed up with a new ABA project to aid parents of substance‐abusing teenagers and their families.     

Economics and politics of deregulation

The Access Charge Plan, a marginal-cost pricing system for long-distance telephone sewice, was devised by the Federal Communications Commission in 1982 to facilitate the transition from regulated monopoly to competition. In little more than a year after the plan was proposed, as the plan's distributive and competitive impacts were recognized by a host of stakeholders and political interests, a flood of opposition different from the system that had previously existed, nevertheless continued to reflect some of the objectives of the past regime, including subsidies to residential users and some shelter for AT&T's principal competitors. The strength of the political process that produced these modifications was due part to elements in the original FCC proposal that were not essential to its central purpose. swamped the initiative. What emerged, although distinctly different from the system that had previously existed, nevertheless continued to reflect some of the objectives of the past regime, including subsidies to residential users and some shelter for AT&T's principal competitors. The strength of the political process that produced these modifications was due part to elements in the original FCC proposal that were not essential to its central purpose.