Week 4: For This Discussion, Choose One Of The Scenarios ✓ Solved

Week 4: For this Discussion, choose one of the scen pro

Week 4: For this Discussion, choose one of the scenarios provided and examine the levels of addiction treatment. Scenario 1 Anthony is a sixteen year-old African American male who smokes marijuana no more than three times weekly and mostly on the weekends. His parents were unaware of his drug use until a recent weekend when he was pulled over for a broken taillight and was cited for possession of a controlled substance with a few grams of marijuana. Anthony has never had any encounters with the law, and his mother and father are very upset and have grounded him from spending time with his friends. They bring him to you for treatment and are concerned about his potential for addiction as they learn more about his history of marijuana use. Anthony reports he started smoking once in a while at 14 years old. Anthony denies using any other drugs, but acknowledges that occasionally he has a few beers with his friends, also on the weekends. Post a brief description of the Anthony scenario and explain which level of treatment is most appropriate for the client and why. Include the criteria for that level of treatment. Finally, based on your review of the levels of treatment, explain which level you are most interested in working in (Outpatient Services) and why. Support your response using the resources and the current literature.

Paper For Above Instructions

Introduction and case framing. Adolescent substance use presents a spectrum of risk and impairment, and the most effective treatment level is determined by the pattern of use, risk factors, family context, and readiness to change. In Anthony’s scenario, a 16-year-old with cannabis use occurring primarily on weekends and a recent legal contact, the goal is to engage him and his family in evidence-based outpatient care that emphasizes motivation, skills training, and relapse-prevention planning. This approach aligns with the addiction-treatment continuum described in foundational texts and current guidelines, which emphasize matching level of care to severity, safety, and family involvement (Capuzzi & Stauffer, 2016; Edwards, 2018). (Capuzzi & Stauffer, 2016; Edwards, 2018).

Brief description of the Anthony scenario

Anthony is a 16-year-old African American male who reports marijuana use no more than three times per week, predominantly on weekends. A recent incident—he was cited for possession after a stop related to a broken taillight—creates parental concern and a motivation for treatment. He denies other drug use but acknowledges occasional alcohol use with peers. He began marijuana use around age 14. There are no stated comorbid psychiatric conditions or acute withdrawal concerns in the vignette. The family is engaged in seeking help, emphasizing the potential for relapse and the need for structured intervention with family involvement. This scenario represents a mild-to-moderate severity through the lens of adolescent cannabis use and legal involvement, suggesting the feasibility of outpatient treatment with targeted family-based components (Capuzzi & Stauffer, 2016). (Capuzzi & Stauffer, 2016; Edwards, 2018).

Most appropriate level of treatment and why

The continuum of addiction-treatment levels typically includes outpatient services, intensive outpatient programs (IOP), partial hospitalization, inpatient stabilization/detoxification, residential care, and aftercare supports. For a moderately engaged adolescent with relatively limited use, no polysubstance dependence, and a single legal-mandated event, outpatient services—augmented with family-based interventions and evidence-based counseling—are commonly recommended as the initial level of care. This aligns with standard practice that emphasizes least-restrictive, developmentally appropriate interventions for adolescents while ensuring safety and family involvement (Capuzzi & Stauffer, 2016; SAMHSA guidance). In Anthony’s case, outpatient services would target motivational enhancement, cognitive-behavioral strategies to reduce cannabis use, and family-based supports to create a home environment conducive to recovery. If risk factors escalate (e.g., escalation in frequency, emergence of withdrawal, or safety concerns), escalation to IOP or higher levels could be considered (Capuzzi & Stauffer, 2016; Edwards, 2018). (Capuzzi & Stauffer, 2016; Edwards, 2018).

Criteria for the outpatient level of treatment

  • Adolescent is medically stable with no immediate risk requiring detoxification or 24-hour medical supervision.
  • Substance use is at a level where regular, scheduled outpatient sessions (typically 1–3 times weekly) can support change.
  • The patient demonstrates the capacity to participate in structured therapy while maintaining responsibilities at home, school, and with peers.
  • Family involvement is feasible and actively integrated into treatment, including parent or guardian participation in sessions.
  • Therapy includes evidence-based modalities appropriate for adolescents (e.g., contingency management, motivational interviewing, cognitive-behavioral therapy, and family-based approaches).
  • There is a clear plan for relapse-prevention and aftercare (e.g., continued outpatient sessions, school coordination, and community supports).

These criteria reflect the broader framework of levels of care and emphasize adolescent-specific adaptation, including family engagement and developmentally appropriate interventions (Capuzzi & Stauffer, 2016; Edwards, 2018; SAMHSA guidance). (Capuzzi & Stauffer, 2016; Edwards, 2018; SAMHSA).

Which level you are most interested in working in (Outpatient Services) and why

I am most interested in working in outpatient services for several reasons. First, outpatient care aligns with a developmentally appropriate approach for adolescents, emphasizing family involvement, school coordination, and skill-building that supports lasting change without the disruption of residential placement unless needed. Second, outpatient treatment supports the stepwise intensification of care if needed (e.g., progressing to IOP or partial hospitalization) in response to the adolescent’s progress, family dynamics, or risk factors. This flexibility is consistent with the continuum approach described by Capuzzi & Stauffer (2016) and recent reviews that stress tailoring intensity to readiness and impairment (Kennedy & Gregoire, 2009; Harrell et al., 2013). (Capuzzi & Stauffer, 2016; Kennedy & Gregoire, 2009; Harrell et al., 2013).

From a theoretical perspective, outpatient work with adolescents benefits from motivational interviewing and readiness-to-change concepts (Prochaska & DiClemente, 1983). Integrating Self-Determination Theory helps clinicians support autonomous motivation and internal commitment to change (Deci & Ryan, 2000). In practice, this translates to collaborative goal setting, patient-centered planning, and family-mediated accountability, which are central to outpatient adolescent treatment (Prochaska & DiClemente, 1983; Deci & Ryan, 2000; Walitzer et al., 2015). (Prochaska & DiClemente, 1983; Deci & Ryan, 2000; Walitzer et al., 2015).

Implementation plan for outpatient services with Anthony

An implementation plan would include: (1) an initial assessment integrating school, family, and peer contexts; (2) a structured treatment plan emphasizing motivational interviewing, CBT addressing cannabis use triggers, coping skills, and relapse prevention; (3) weekly individual sessions with parallel family sessions to build supportive routines and reduce relapse risk; (4) coordination with school personnel to ensure attendance and performance support; (5) ongoing monitoring of use through self-reports, collateral information, and, if feasible, biologic screening; (6) a staged progression to less frequent contact as goals are achieved, with clear criteria to escalate if significant risk emerges. This approach reflects the levels-of-care framework and emphasizes evidence-based practices for adolescents (Capuzzi & Stauffer, 2016; Edwards, 2018; SAMHSA; Prochaska & DiClemente, 1983). (Capuzzi & Stauffer, 2016; Edwards, 2018; SAMHSA; Prochaska & DiClemente, 1983).

Conclusion

In summary, Anthony’s case is well-suited for outpatient services augmented by family involvement and evidence-based modalities. This level of care provides a developmentally appropriate, less restrictive starting point with a clear pathway for escalation if needed. The integration of motivational interviewing, CBT, and family-based strategies, anchored in established theoretical models of change, supports adolescent engagement and relapse prevention. Future steps include formalizing an assessment, developing a family-centered treatment plan, and establishing a robust aftercare and school-liaison framework to sustain gains (Capuzzi & Stauffer, 2016; Edwards, 2018; Prochaska & DiClemente, 1983; Deci & Ryan, 2000). (Capuzzi & Stauffer, 2016; Edwards, 2018; Prochaska & DiClemente, 1983; Deci & Ryan, 2000).

References

  • Capuzzi, D., & Stauffer, M. D. (2016). Foundations of addictions counseling (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Pearson Education, Inc.
  • Edwards, D. (2018). Levels of treatment for substance abuse. Psych Central. Retrieved from https://PsychCentral.com
  • Harrell, P. T., Trenz, R. C., Scherer, M., Martins, S. S., & Latimer, W. W. (2013). A latent class approach to treatment readiness corresponds to a transtheoretical (“Stages of Change”) model. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 45(3), 1-12.
  • Kennedy, K., & Gregoire, T. K. (2009). Theories of motivation in addiction treatment: Testing the relationship of the transtheoretical model of change and self-determination theory. Journal of Social Work Practice in the Addictions, 9(2), 123-141.
  • Walitzer, K. S., Dermen, K. H., Barrick, C., & Shyhalla, K. (2015). Modeling the innovation–decision process: Dissemination and adoption of a motivational interviewing preparatory procedure in addiction outpatient clinics. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 57, 18-29.
  • Prochaska, J. O., & DiClemente, C. C. (1983). Stages and processes of self-change in addiction: A transtheoretical model of change. American Psychologist, 38(11), 1069-1077.
  • Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “Self-Determination Theory” of motivation. In E. L. Deci & R. M. Ryan (Eds.), Handbook of Self-Determination Research (pp. 23-27). Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press.
  • Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA). (n.d.). Levels of Care for Substance Use Disorder: The Continuum of Care. Retrieved from https://www.samhsa.gov/
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA). (2020). Treatment approaches for substance use disorders. National Institutes of Health. Retrieved from https://www.nida.nih.gov/

Related Assignments