(CN) - An avowed atheist who was jailed for refusing to participate in
a 12-step treatment program deserves a new trial of his civil rights
claims, the 9th Circuit ruled.
Barry Hazle sued his parole officer, several California
corrections officials and Westcare Corp. after they revoked his
probation for a drug conviction because of his "congenial" refusal to
recognize a higher power, as the 12-step recovery method requires.
Hazle said he told officials several times about his atheism and
reluctance to participate in religious treatment programs after pleading
no-contest in 2006 to possession of methamphetamine. Nonetheless, in
2007 he was paroled to a 90-day residential program that offered only
the 12 Steps, many of which call for explicit acceptance of God.
When he refused to participate, staff reported Hazle to his parole
officer, saying that he was being "disruptive, though in a congenial
way, to the staff as well as other students," according to the ruling.
Hazle then found himself back in prison for another 100 days.
His federal civil rights action sought damages for false
imprisonment, among other things. U.S. District Judge Garland Burrell in
San Francisco found the defendants were indeed liable for depriving
Hazle of his First Amendment rights and turned the issue over to a jury
to determine the amount of damages.
The jury awarded zero damages.
Hazle shot back with a motion for a new trial, but was denied. A
three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit reversed Friday, finding that Hazle
was entitled to something.
"The district judge's finding of liability establishes that Hazle
suffered actual injury when he was unconstitutionally incarcerated,"
Judge Stephen Reinhardt wrote for the court. "Given this undisputed
finding that Hazle's constitutional rights were violated, and applying
the rule that the award of compensatory damages is mandatory when the
existence of actual injury is beyond dispute, we hold that the district
judge erred in refusing to hold that Hazle was, as a matter of law,
entitled to compensatory damages. We therefore reverse the district
judge's denial of Hazle's motion for a new trial."

http://tinyurl.com/p4pmh65

- - -

Ahh, the religious.

On Tuesday, August 27, 2013 9:33:33 PM UTC-4, F.O.A.D. wrote:


FOAD = Earl....I get it now.

GO **** YOURSELF.

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 27 Aug 2013 21:33:33 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

(CN) - An avowed atheist who was jailed for refusing to participate in
a 12-step treatment program deserves a new trial of his civil rights
claims, the 9th Circuit ruled.
Barry Hazle sued his parole officer, several California
corrections officials and Westcare Corp. after they revoked his
probation for a drug conviction because of his "congenial" refusal to
recognize a higher power, as the 12-step recovery method requires.
Hazle said he told officials several times about his atheism and
reluctance to participate in religious treatment programs after pleading
no-contest in 2006 to possession of methamphetamine. Nonetheless, in
2007 he was paroled to a 90-day residential program that offered only
the 12 Steps, many of which call for explicit acceptance of God.
When he refused to participate, staff reported Hazle to his parole
officer, saying that he was being "disruptive, though in a congenial
way, to the staff as well as other students," according to the ruling.
Hazle then found himself back in prison for another 100 days.
His federal civil rights action sought damages for false
imprisonment, among other things. U.S. District Judge Garland Burrell in
San Francisco found the defendants were indeed liable for depriving
Hazle of his First Amendment rights and turned the issue over to a jury
to determine the amount of damages.
The jury awarded zero damages.
Hazle shot back with a motion for a new trial, but was denied. A
three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit reversed Friday, finding that Hazle
was entitled to something.
"The district judge's finding of liability establishes that Hazle
suffered actual injury when he was unconstitutionally incarcerated,"
Judge Stephen Reinhardt wrote for the court. "Given this undisputed
finding that Hazle's constitutional rights were violated, and applying
the rule that the award of compensatory damages is mandatory when the
existence of actual injury is beyond dispute, we hold that the district
judge erred in refusing to hold that Hazle was, as a matter of law,
entitled to compensatory damages. We therefore reverse the district
judge's denial of Hazle's motion for a new trial."

http://tinyurl.com/p4pmh65

- - -

Ahh, the religious.

Has anyone had any better success with drug addiction?

Drug addicts are pretty successful at drug addiction....

On 8/28/13 11:22 AM, wrote:
On Tue, 27 Aug 2013 21:33:33 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

(CN) - An avowed atheist who was jailed for refusing to participate in
a 12-step treatment program deserves a new trial of his civil rights
claims, the 9th Circuit ruled.
Barry Hazle sued his parole officer, several California
corrections officials and Westcare Corp. after they revoked his
probation for a drug conviction because of his "congenial" refusal to
recognize a higher power, as the 12-step recovery method requires.
Hazle said he told officials several times about his atheism and
reluctance to participate in religious treatment programs after pleading
no-contest in 2006 to possession of methamphetamine. Nonetheless, in
2007 he was paroled to a 90-day residential program that offered only
the 12 Steps, many of which call for explicit acceptance of God.
When he refused to participate, staff reported Hazle to his parole
officer, saying that he was being "disruptive, though in a congenial
way, to the staff as well as other students," according to the ruling.
Hazle then found himself back in prison for another 100 days.
His federal civil rights action sought damages for false
imprisonment, among other things. U.S. District Judge Garland Burrell in
San Francisco found the defendants were indeed liable for depriving
Hazle of his First Amendment rights and turned the issue over to a jury
to determine the amount of damages.
The jury awarded zero damages.
Hazle shot back with a motion for a new trial, but was denied. A
three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit reversed Friday, finding that Hazle
was entitled to something.
"The district judge's finding of liability establishes that Hazle
suffered actual injury when he was unconstitutionally incarcerated,"
Judge Stephen Reinhardt wrote for the court. "Given this undisputed
finding that Hazle's constitutional rights were violated, and applying
the rule that the award of compensatory damages is mandatory when the
existence of actual injury is beyond dispute, we hold that the district
judge erred in refusing to hold that Hazle was, as a matter of law,
entitled to compensatory damages. We therefore reverse the district
judge's denial of Hazle's motion for a new trial."

http://tinyurl.com/p4pmh65

- - -

Ahh, the religious.

Has anyone had any better success with drug addiction?


The 12-Step programs are self-help and reassurance programs, they are
not the sort of "therapy" many addicts need. That therapy incorporates
traditional therapy, whether individual or group, and in many cases,
prescription therapy. If a drug addict goes cold turkey by
himself/herself and right into some 12-step program, the addict has a
good chance of falling over and dying.

The religious underpinnings and overlay of 12-step programs are
off-putting for many addicts. A lot of people simply don't want religion
shoved down their throats.

On 8/28/13 1:08 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 28 Aug 2013 12:12:24 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:


Has anyone had any better success with drug addiction?


The 12-Step programs are self-help and reassurance programs, they are
not the sort of "therapy" many addicts need. That therapy incorporates
traditional therapy, whether individual or group, and in many cases,
prescription therapy. If a drug addict goes cold turkey by
himself/herself and right into some 12-step program, the addict has a
good chance of falling over and dying.

The religious underpinnings and overlay of 12-step programs are
off-putting for many addicts. A lot of people simply don't want religion
shoved down their throats.


Conventional therapy is substituting one drug for another.
Is Methadone really that much better than Heroin?
I understand drug companies make the money not drug smugglers but the
drug is about the same.

Religion based programs do have the advantage that they are
substituting a belief for a drug but I guess you think that is as bad.

I do agree it is not the kind of thing that will be successful if it
is just a sentence from a court. They have to believe it will work or
it won't work. The reality is these things don't really work anyway
until the addict decides they don't want to be addicted anymore.
For some, there is no "bottom" that is low enough to do that.

Maybe we should just have drug zones and let them kill themselves.
Free drugs, all you want anytime you want them and come in every
morning with a Bobcat to pick up the bodies.


There are many types of what you call "conventional" therapy. The
12-step programs are not really therapy; they are support mechanisms.

And, once again, if you are an addict on serious **** like heroin, and
you stop cold turkey without using a prescribed substitute under careful
watch, you might die while trying to get clean.

And, no, I don't believe "faith healing" is the antidote for physical or
mental/emotional illnesses. God didn't make you sick and god isn't going
to cure you.

In article ,
says...

On Wed, 28 Aug 2013 11:34:38 -0400, iBoaterer
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 27 Aug 2013 21:33:33 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

(CN) - An avowed atheist who was jailed for refusing to participate in

- - -

Ahh, the religious.

Has anyone had any better success with drug addiction?

Drug addicts are pretty successful at drug addiction....

You can say what you want to about religion but substituting faith for
drugs seems to be more effective than any other treatment.
It is still a very low number tho.
Most addicts die addicts. The only question is whether you can get any
productivity out of them at all.

Once and addict, always an addict. A recovering addict never uses the
past tense.

In article ,
says...

On Wed, 28 Aug 2013 12:12:24 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:


Has anyone had any better success with drug addiction?


The 12-Step programs are self-help and reassurance programs, they are
not the sort of "therapy" many addicts need. That therapy incorporates
traditional therapy, whether individual or group, and in many cases,
prescription therapy. If a drug addict goes cold turkey by
himself/herself and right into some 12-step program, the addict has a
good chance of falling over and dying.

The religious underpinnings and overlay of 12-step programs are
off-putting for many addicts. A lot of people simply don't want religion
shoved down their throats.


Conventional therapy is substituting one drug for another.

That's only one form.

Is Methadone really that much better than Heroin?
I understand drug companies make the money not drug smugglers but the
drug is about the same.

Tax revenue!

Religion based programs do have the advantage that they are
substituting a belief for a drug but I guess you think that is as bad.

I do agree it is not the kind of thing that will be successful if it
is just a sentence from a court. They have to believe it will work or
it won't work. The reality is these things don't really work anyway
until the addict decides they don't want to be addicted anymore.
For some, there is no "bottom" that is low enough to do that.

Maybe we should just have drug zones and let them kill themselves.
Free drugs, all you want anytime you want them and come in every
morning with a Bobcat to pick up the bodies.

Bobcats don't eat that much.... (Humor, come on!!!)

On 8/28/13 3:50 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 28 Aug 2013 13:17:52 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 8/28/13 1:08 PM, wrote:


Conventional therapy is substituting one drug for another.
Is Methadone really that much better than Heroin?
I understand drug companies make the money not drug smugglers but the
drug is about the same.

Religion based programs do have the advantage that they are
substituting a belief for a drug but I guess you think that is as bad.

I do agree it is not the kind of thing that will be successful if it
is just a sentence from a court. They have to believe it will work or
it won't work. The reality is these things don't really work anyway
until the addict decides they don't want to be addicted anymore.
For some, there is no "bottom" that is low enough to do that.

Maybe we should just have drug zones and let them kill themselves.
Free drugs, all you want anytime you want them and come in every
morning with a Bobcat to pick up the bodies.


There are many types of what you call "conventional" therapy. The
12-step programs are not really therapy; they are support mechanisms.

And, once again, if you are an addict on serious **** like heroin, and
you stop cold turkey without using a prescribed substitute under careful
watch, you might die while trying to get clean.

Most of these people continue to use when they are in the 12 step
program

Really? What stat base are you using for that claim?


And, no, I don't believe "faith healing" is the antidote for physical or
mental/emotional illnesses. God didn't make you sick and god isn't going
to cure you.


This isn't "healing" it is simply substituting faith for drugs.
It works for some people and I would not deny them the opportunity.
I agree with you, this should not be court ordered, per se but it
should be an option in court ordered rehab.

Rehab, any kind, is generally ineffective over the long haul.
People either decide to stop or they don't but you can't make them if
they don't want to.


Right, so let's not even try, right?

In article ,
says...

On Wed, 28 Aug 2013 13:24:37 -0400, iBoaterer
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Wed, 28 Aug 2013 12:12:24 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:


Has anyone had any better success with drug addiction?


The 12-Step programs are self-help and reassurance programs, they are
not the sort of "therapy" many addicts need. That therapy incorporates
traditional therapy, whether individual or group, and in many cases,
prescription therapy. If a drug addict goes cold turkey by
himself/herself and right into some 12-step program, the addict has a
good chance of falling over and dying.

The religious underpinnings and overlay of 12-step programs are
off-putting for many addicts. A lot of people simply don't want religion
shoved down their throats.


Conventional therapy is substituting one drug for another.

That's only one form.

Is Methadone really that much better than Heroin?
I understand drug companies make the money not drug smugglers but the
drug is about the same.

Tax revenue!

Religion based programs do have the advantage that they are
substituting a belief for a drug but I guess you think that is as bad.

I do agree it is not the kind of thing that will be successful if it
is just a sentence from a court. They have to believe it will work or
it won't work. The reality is these things don't really work anyway
until the addict decides they don't want to be addicted anymore.
For some, there is no "bottom" that is low enough to do that.

Maybe we should just have drug zones and let them kill themselves.
Free drugs, all you want anytime you want them and come in every
morning with a Bobcat to pick up the bodies.

Bobcats don't eat that much.... (Humor, come on!!!)


We may not have much to argue about here.

I am guessing you have had some addicts in your close circle and you
have hit the wall more times than you want to admit, trying to help
them.

Me too.

Yes, I have.

On 8/28/13 4:16 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 28 Aug 2013 15:58:34 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:



Rehab, any kind, is generally ineffective over the long haul.
People either decide to stop or they don't but you can't make them if
they don't want to.


Right, so let's not even try, right?



The question is "how many times"?

The guy next door to me has been to rehab about 10 times, at tax payer
expense and it has not made a lick of difference. He calls it "going
to the spa"
This is the same guy who has been "Baker acted" about a dozen times
(involuntary assessment for "up to 72 hours")
He has that down to about 4 hours because he knows what to say.

They tried jail the last time and he was supposed to be locked up for
a while but I still see him walking around. (if you can call that
shuffling stumble "walking")

I tried to help for years but I gave up on him 3 arrests ago.
This guy can really tell a story and make you believe he wants to get
better but once a junkie, always a junkie.



Well, we all know that your years of experience with the addict next
door plus, of course, your years of experience treating addicts of all
varieties plus your educational background plus your years of
supervision give you the wherewithal to make black or white
pronouncements about the efficacy of all manner of treatment for all
manner of addicts.

There's no question that successfully treating substance abuse is not an
easy task, and that a high percentage of addicts fall back into their
bad habits. But that doesn't mean we should give up on addicts and
addiction treatment.

Oh, and "once a junkie, always a junkie" is hyperbolic bull****.