Jazz and substance abuse: road to creative genius or pathway to premature death

Jazz music and jazz musicians have often been linked for better or worse to the world of addictive substances. Many talented jazz musicians either had their careers sidetracked or prematurely ended due to their addiction to drugs and/or alcohol. The rigors of nightly performances, travel, and for many musicians a disapproving society exacted a toll that impacted the creativity of many artists of the genre. The fact that drug and alcohol use had a significant impact on the performance levels of numerous jazz musicians in the 1940's and 1950's has been much discussed, but more study of that impact is warranted. While recent research has provided new information regarding this challenging topic, there is still much to learn. Indeed, a number of questions for inquiry may be posed. Among those questions are the following: Was the work of these jazz artists truly inspired? Would their creative output have been enhanced had they not been addicted to substances? What was the impact of the addictive substances on their ability to function as creative artists and is there evidence to refute or verify that impact? Are there identifiable traits in certain artists that allowed them to be creative in spite of their addictions? This examination presents an evaluation of the evidence of the link between creativity and substance abuse especially as it relates to selected jazz artists during this time period and how they remained creative and actually prospered in their careers in spite of addictions to controlled substances.     

LESSENING THE STING OF ASFA: THE REHABILITATION‐RELAPSE DILEMMA BROUGHT ABOUT BY DRUG ADDICTION AND TERMINATION OF PARENTAL RIGHTS

Congress passed the Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997 (ASFA) as a response to children waiting in foster homes for years without permanent placement. In addressing the problem of permanency, however, Congress set a strict limit on how long a child could be in foster care (15 out of the most recent 22 months) before a state must either commence a proceeding to terminate parental rights or else lose valuable federal funding. Due to health care funding schemes and quality of treatment, this requirement, in particular, negatively impacts parents currently in drug rehabilitation whose parental rights may be permanently terminated before a realistic chance to recover is permitted. Although ASFA requires that states make “reasonable efforts” to keep families united, it does not define “reasonable efforts,” leaving parental rights and family unity subject to a chaotic interpretation of this requirement from state to state. “Reasonable efforts” should be interpreted to take into account current drug addiction and recovery research and drug court programs should be used to facilitate this goal. Research has shown that focusing on adequate treatment saves states money and improves the lives of children and their families, reducing the need for reliance on termination of parental rights.