Mental Health Prescribing Controlled Substances for Those w/ Addiction History

Asparagus_Prince

Bluelighter
Joined
Jan 19, 2021
Messages
315
Location
'merica
I don't know if this is the ideal forum for this post, so feel free to move if necessary. But read the following story and let me know which character you're on the side of...

John is a therapist. He has a client (Sarah) that is a wreck. Her life is a mess and she has a bad track-record with addiction. She has quite the criminal history, all of it being directly linked with addiction.

Sarah has told John on many occasions how Vyvanse used to be beneficial for her in her younger years. But doctors won't prescribe it because of her history. Sure she could find a doctor or get them off the streets, but she is involved with all kinds of entities such as Probation and Child Services... places that would see this as a red flag (even if prescribed by a doctor). Currently she is staying clean and passing drug screens, but it always seems like she's about to fall apart.

As therapist John gets to know Sarah more, he begins to suspect that ADHD meds may have indeed benefitted her in the past, and that they still might. Sarah claims that she always did well on Vyvanse, but that it was meth/street drugs that led to her problems. John doesn't remember knowing anyone that is this clear-cut ADHD. Sarah is disorganized, clumsy, always having driving mistakes, etc etc. He goes to his boss Dan to get advice on whether or not he could advocate for Sarah. He wants to write a letter to her doctor and highlight all the reasons why she might benefit from Vyvanse again. He wants to provide coinciding therapy and support for her.

Boss Dan is dead-set against this. "No way, we're not doing that. She's an addict, so that's a bad idea".

Keep in mind Sarah is not pushing John to advocate for her. He made this decision on his own and approached his boss without Sarah knowing.

A month later Sarah relapses. She has been arrested on a possession charge. She is sentenced to some prison time because she was already on Probation.

Boss Dan finds out about this. And he says to John: "See, I told you that was a bad idea. She's an addict".

But John thinks this: "Well, NOT prescribing her ADHD meds didn't help either. Yes, maybe she would have abused them. In which case she'd probably be in this same position anyway. Would it have hurt to try?".

Do you agree with Boss Dan or Therapist John?
 
I think that it's not usually so simple, tbh. Lots of factors go into this. Mostly, how long were you doing meth for?

Amphetamines aren't approved as replacement therapies, so I'd say that you need to be off of potential euphoriants for longer. This is difficult, but addiction is a cunning enemy. With meth, it takes the brain a long, long time to recuperate. But it does.

If you're not a doctor, you don't really have sway in the realm of prescribing (I guess NP's do to an extent). The boss isn't a doctor, so it's honestly not proper for him to recommend a medication, especially a controlled substance.

Maybe if you actually have ADHD, you'll have yourself tested, and then perhaps try a non-stimulant. That should fix the whole controlled substances confounding. Best to stay away from amphetamines altogether.

This may come across as hard, but it's my honest and true opinion.
 
Do you agree with Boss Dan or Therapist John?
Both. There isn't one right way to look at this. I am an addict, I have been in that chair in this situation, and I am impartial to both arguments.

There are so many conditions here... was meth her drug of choice? She lost access to her children?

John also has a point. There is no way to say for certain that a prescription to adderall would lead to a relapse or other issues. Adderall has never triggered me to relapse personally. She likely also really does have ADD, which again may have helped.

I will say this: the best psychiatry I've ever had were with doctors I could be honest about my addiction past with, and they would still give me controlled subs, because I really do have devastating anxiety as well as ADD - which is the main reason I started using drugs in the first place. It's a horrible feeling to be immediately categorized by admitting past drug use.

Addiction is such a subjective, personal thing, that I think it needs to be a case by case basis.
 
Give her the drugs. They either help or they don't. She already crashed her life into the ditch (and, in the scenario, is going back to prison) and the drugs have the potential to help, so why not?

I'm permissive about such things, though...
 
Give her the drugs. They either help or they don't. She already crashed her life into the ditch (and, in the scenario, is going back to prison) and the drugs have the potential to help, so why not?
I think you bring up a very good point, frank, but good.

They are likely going to help more than any potential damage it would acutely cause.
 
I think giving a very low dose prescription could be more beneficial than detrimental.
Something like 5mg to 7.5mg Dexedrine per day.
If after a few months there have been no relapses with street drugs and no abusing of the script, and there is an objective improvement in the quality of life of the patient, it could be reasonable to consider gradually increasing the dose, but only if ADHD symptoms still significantly affect the life of the patient.
 
Thanks for the responses, everyone.

It probably comes across as a loaded question, because it's probably clear (I think) which way I lean.
 
Give her the drugs. They either help or they don't. She already crashed her life into the ditch (and, in the scenario, is going back to prison) and the drugs have the potential to help, so why not?

I'm permissive about such things, though...
This reminds me a little of a conversation I had with my mother. Her mother is well into her 90s and has never had anything close to an addiction problem. And my mother worries about her being prescibed painkillers because she might become addicted. Good god. At that age let her become an addict, I say!
 
Last edited:
In my local, a patient would have to pay to take a test that confirms if you have ADHD/ADD or not and the Doctors may proceed from there. Doctors are very much people too and so are not free from their biases and stigmas like in this case. It is impossible to know if they should have prescribed since they did not try. Society will punish “addicts” in many ways out of conditioning from the War on Drugs propaganda that continues to spread in our culture.
 
I have inattentive type ADD with one hyperactive symptom (which is talking a lot). I was actually put on Dexamphetamine for Narcolepsy in around August and given a 2 month trial of the medication. It was absolutely life changing for me and not moreish or abusable at all. In fact, I underdosed so consistently I managed to make 2 months last for 3.5-4 ,months, which was useful since the Drugs of Dependence Unit came back with a request for more information from my specialist when I had my next appointment with him to pick up the approved prescription. They were asking for urine testing, and a staged supply, because I'm on ORT and last used IV heroin in June. They also wanted the specialist to check for IV drug use. Well, he cracked the shits and accused the DDU of making him act like Drug and Alcohol Services, who I already see once a month for my Buvidal injection, who urine test me and check me for IV use. But I saw the legislation and itis very clear on the topic of someone prescribed a schedule 8 stimulant for medical reasons while on ORT - you need urine tests at both clinics, and to be constantly monitored for drug use at both clinics. So he just put me in the fuck it bucket because he's happy to prescribe Dex until he has to do more than lift his pen on the paper, and actual works and he fucks off. He just told me I was 'fucked', signed my fitness to drive form, and said if I couldn't find some way to access Dex in the next year I'd be losing my license.

So I emailed the DDU, explained my entire drug use history from when I started using meth and heroin to when I stopped, why I stopped, and all the treatment I've done. Also mentioned I have a job that is the only job someone as autistic as me can do (working as a mentor with 3 other autistic people who don't pick up on my levels of autism) and therefore if I lose my car, I lose the one job I can actually do. I can't take public transport, so I'd be fucked. I told them I regretted being honest about the heroin to DASSA because that's how they found out I'd used, and I went back on ORT pre-emptively - I hadn't used heroin in almost 3 years before that date. I just knew I would again once I figured out how simple the dark net was (delete if not allowed lol). So i told them I should have just handled it myself but I thought I was being smart by utilising help and evidence based science and staying on the injections more than for 6 months which is the longest I've been on suboxone in the past. 2-5 years this time, and longer if I need to. The DDU thanked me for my honesty and apologised that I felt as though I was being punished, and apologised that the specialised was being unhelpful. I asked them if my GP could authorise the authority (which is unusual, but not unheard of and possible in this case because the specialist is not interest in playing ball) and they said yes, provided he had all the necessary evidence. I also mentioned I'm being investated for ADHD at that stage (not to come across as drug seeking but we explored it 5 years ago with my first psychiatrist and I was still on and off meth all the time so I think she was wary in engaging with it. However given recent ASD diagnosis, which as am 80% comorbidity rate with ADHD and a bipolar diagnosis which as a 70% comorbidity rate with ADHD, PLUS my bixarre stimulant behaviour (I don't get horny and weird and masturbate for 48 hours. The most I go without sleep is two days and I sleep on the second night, always. No matter what. Sometimes I even get sleep on the first. My tolerance for meth has stayed higher than necessary. I tend to get a lot of important tasks done that I otherwise wouldn't (boring and tedious paperwork etc), or various chores (laundry, dishes). I happen to be the most boring meth head ever. Entirely disinterested in people, very task focussed but not ridiculously so. However she and I obviously agreed meth use was poor for my long term health (though interestingly not as bad for me as weed, which instantly makes me psychotic. Meth only makes me psychotic after too much, and too many days up. Weed its one toke and done). So she asked me to easy up over time, which I did. I had 18 months up until last month when I relapsed, interestingly after they took my Dexamphetamine trial away/I ran out of extras and I felt abolutely exhausted all the time again. I was fine until the fatigue kicked in and I realised if I could buy some extra dexies or some gear I could keep the fatigue at bay pretty well. It is far from sustainable though, as both are clearly too expensive to continue on this road. My Dex authority has just been approved, with fortnighly urine tests, and picking up the medication twice weekly from the chemist. I'm pleased with this arrangement as we both came to a sufficient end for eachother. They can rest assured knowing it can't be abused and I'm using it as directed, I don't even have to deal with any cravings the way this is set up, I have no variations on my dosing schedule except one extra one here or there, but that'll be rare. Once I have the script next week I imagine a large part of my recent relapse will disappear, or mostly vanish entirely. A couple of times a year is tolerable. Not more than twice a week though and thats the territory we are in now.

So can people with bad addictions safely take Schedule 8 Controlled Substances? It absolutely entirely depends on the person what they can take. I can take Dexamphetamine all day every day for Narcolepsy and ADHD because Dex doesn't make me high, it makes me neutral. I feel focussed enough to *gasp* read a book or like, wake up with a to do list in my head of 5 things and actually sytematically work my way through those things. It really let's me achieve mundane things, as does meth. I'll say it again, very boring meth addict. My drug of choice is oxycontin and heroin. If I got given constant access to OxyContin or Endone for a significant period of time outside a short injury (like when I did my back out) and surgery (like for top surgery) when both times I was given a weeks worth of Endone (20 pills) then told to switch to panadol + codeine for a week or two, then just panadol. Also appendicitis when I got given another 20 Endone. And that was absolutely fine for me even after years long spent in opiate addiction and recovery and having been on suboxone one/twice. If you're injured they just dont do that much for you, it brings you back to baseline. I wouldn't be able to have any opiates in the house for any type of chronic pain though.

Nor can I be about benzos without eating them like tic tacs or stealing them from people and hoping they won't notice. My sleep specialist gave me a large supply of klonopin even when I warned him against it and within the day I'd taken 7-8 and had to get a neighbour to give them to me slowly over a period of time, but eventually he got sick of that. I ended up filling the other two bottles and finishing them both over 2 day long periods and getting super benzo fucked up. They'll really mess with you. I don't love benzos being prescribed to me, only in really small amounts like when I did my back I got 20 for muscle spasm as well. But thats the maxiumum, not fucking 100 a bottle for $10 when I pay $33 a month for 3mg melatonin. Please.

Whereas the Dex trial? perfectly fine, no desire to abuse it all all. Just amazingly grateful to be able to do all the things I could suddenly do and it reminded me of before I got fucked up by Narcolepsy (which is easly my most disabiling condition even though its not recognised anywhere as a disability which is absurd). I gotta say though like this is the last med option I have or I lose my license, so I have ever single incentive to keep on the straight and narrow with this and keep my tolerance low, because theres no more options after this, im just unmedicated (unless I go through with my ADHD diagnosis and continue with that and use Ritalin or Adderal if I have to, which is an option).

So my honest opionion? It's possible, but you'd probably have to be similar to me. Used meth out of convenience in the town I live in because there's no heroin and I don't wanna shoot up pills. Shoot up meth for 6 months or so, be consistently bored out of my mind with it while everyone accuses me of being on heroin as I just get so chillled out and calm on it, and dont tweak out. At rehab when I slipped up one day the psychiatrist pulled me into his office seperately because my pupils were massive and he wanted to ask if I was still high and I said I was so he said he'd do a private session with me, then halfway through the session and interacting with me he was like 'I'm sorry Eli but aren't you on Suboxone? How did you use heroin today if that's the case?' and I was like 'I didn't I told you ice affected me weirdly, like it makes me seem slow' and hes like 'so you've taken ice and? weed?' and I say 'no, just ice. This is why my parents can't tell once my eyes are more normal, it relaxes me, it doesn't amp me up.' and hes like 'okay, loook, I actually believe you now, this is super odd. I really thought you'd taken some heroin with the ice and I was genuinely confused because of being on Suboxone.'

Tl;dr: if meth was NOT your favourite drug, and just something you used out of convenience (like myself since there was nothing else to shoot) for relatively unextended periods of time, and also for a purpose (to pull an all nighter before an essay was due, got loads of them finished that way, or writing my NDIS price guide listed planning amounts so that I can have written down every support I require the NDIS to fund and at what cost as well. So if I want a specific task done, I will use stimulants to do it. But meth is frankly unnecessary in this day and age when I can have dexamphetamine now. If meth, in general, doesn't really appeal to you (like I remember in NA people telling me it was like touching god when you shot up and a decade later I'm still like 'I got higher of $15 DXM cough syrup and heroin is better' so clearly, my position hasn't changed much. My medication may also play a part - I take anti psychotics which may dampen euphoric effects. I can't say I've felt anything approaching euphoria with meth having Narcolepsy and ADHD, just a miracle being able to stay awake with such little substance.

I would not risk it if you really, really enjoyed meth, it was the first drug you got addicted to, or you are unable to take a break when you need to (if meth stops doing it for me, I just stop for 2 weeks to a month instead of spending twice my money. I'll get you in the end. Now, no more tolerance breaks from meth, just the next big one and we will push it longer than 18 months this time I reckon. I have my magic tablets now, they work better, plus I don't have to take an uber to work to avoid getting caught with meth in my system because while I'm wide awake for work, I'm not arriving because I'm being arrest for being stupid. It will not work if you have zero self control with meth, or you've abused other prescription stimulants in the past. Ritalin did nothing for me, that's another reason we figured ADHD.

At this stage my psychiatrist is just waiting on the second opinion to go ahead and diagnose. With being put on the restricted access supply it actually helps me as I don't have to fight the cravings that having that break felt. My only issue I have with Dexamphetamine is I sometimes want to redose early, just because I start getting a bit of a crash and I need to be fastidious in waiting the full 4 hours even if it means a little bit of tiredness as we CANNOT creep forwards on our dosing at any stage, no way. There's just too much to risk. So I know when I'm having a bad day with that (every dose feels like 3 hours instead of 4) but you can't get around that, and if you can't stick to a dosing schedule with this, then this medication isn't for you either.
 
I don't know if this is the ideal forum for this post, so feel free to move if necessary. But read the following story and let me know which character you're on the side of...

John is a therapist. He has a client (Sarah) that is a wreck. Her life is a mess and she has a bad track-record with addiction. She has quite the criminal history, all of it being directly linked with addiction.

Sarah has told John on many occasions how Vyvanse used to be beneficial for her in her younger years. But doctors won't prescribe it because of her history. Sure she could find a doctor or get them off the streets, but she is involved with all kinds of entities such as Probation and Child Services... places that would see this as a red flag (even if prescribed by a doctor). Currently she is staying clean and passing drug screens, but it always seems like she's about to fall apart.

As therapist John gets to know Sarah more, he begins to suspect that ADHD meds may have indeed benefitted her in the past, and that they still might. Sarah claims that she always did well on Vyvanse, but that it was meth/street drugs that led to her problems. John doesn't remember knowing anyone that is this clear-cut ADHD. Sarah is disorganized, clumsy, always having driving mistakes, etc etc. He goes to his boss Dan to get advice on whether or not he could advocate for Sarah. He wants to write a letter to her doctor and highlight all the reasons why she might benefit from Vyvanse again. He wants to provide coinciding therapy and support for her.

Boss Dan is dead-set against this. "No way, we're not doing that. She's an addict, so that's a bad idea".

Keep in mind Sarah is not pushing John to advocate for her. He made this decision on his own and approached his boss without Sarah knowing.

A month later Sarah relapses. She has been arrested on a possession charge. She is sentenced to some prison time because she was already on Probation.

Boss Dan finds out about this. And he says to John: "See, I told you that was a bad idea. She's an addict".

But John thinks this: "Well, NOT prescribing her ADHD meds didn't help either. Yes, maybe she would have abused them. In which case she'd probably be in this same position anyway. Would it have hurt to try?".

Do you agree with Boss Dan or Therapist John?
Sarah's chances of ending up in jail would have been less likely. Having been on medication for ADHD, I know how stimulants would calm my impulsiveness to be on meth. Consequently, I was able to go about my daily routine without much effort. In reading about these professionals who understand life better than the average patient, I am more disgusted by their opposition to those who have suffered undiagnosed conditions which have caused them to self-medicate.
 
Top