Chapter Causing the Breakdown of Family Life as Liability to Take Part in Withdrawal Treatment – In Light of Judicial Practice

The provisions of the Act of 26 October 1982 on Upbringing in Sobriety and Counteracting Alcoholism provide for the possibility of applying obligatory withdrawal treatment to an addicted person. Compulsory withdrawal treatment may be provided in a stationary or inpatient system. However, both forms...

Olles dieđut

Furkejuvvon:
Bibliográfalaš dieđut
Váldodahkki: Partyk, Aleksandra
Materiálatiipa: Online
Giella:polskagiella
Almmustuhtton: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego 2025
Liŋkkat:ONIX_20250307_9788381428019_628
Fáddágilkorat: Lasit fáddágilkoriid
Eai fáddágilkorat, Lasit vuosttaš fáddágilkora!
_version_ 1869523148502728704
author Partyk, Aleksandra
author_browse Partyk, Aleksandra
author_facet Partyk, Aleksandra
author_sort Partyk, Aleksandra
collection Directory of Open Access Books
description The provisions of the Act of 26 October 1982 on Upbringing in Sobriety and Counteracting Alcoholism provide for the possibility of applying obligatory withdrawal treatment to an addicted person. Compulsory withdrawal treatment may be provided in a stationary or inpatient system. However, both forms of addiction treatment constitute a statutory exception, as withdrawal treatment is voluntary in principle. In particular, judicature points out that alcohol dependence alone is not sufficient to oblige a participant to undertake alcohol treatment. There must also be a so‑called social premise. One such premise is the fact that an addicted person is causing a breakdown of family life. In the jurisprudence of courts this circumstance is often referred to. However, whether this actually takes place is a matter of judgement. Not every conflict within a family constitutes a breakdown of family life. Moreover, the application cannot be taken into account if the family ties have already definitively disintegrated. At the same time, the court takes into account the state existing at the date of closing of the hearing, and therefore the improvement of the addicted person’s conduct, including the initiation of voluntary therapy, must influence the final direction of the court’s decision. A decision on the obligation to undertake alcohol treatment is particularly important if there is real fear that a crisis in a family affected by alcoholism of one of its members will deepen. Rapid reaction on the part of the state apparatus increases the probability of success.
format Online
id doab-20.500.12854ir-155203
institution Directory of Open Access Books
language pol
publishDate 2025
publishDateRange 2025
publishDateSort 2025
publisher Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego
publisherStr Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego
record_format ojs
spelling doab-20.500.12854ir-1552032025-03-07T14:00:30Z Chapter Causing the Breakdown of Family Life as Liability to Take Part in Withdrawal Treatment – In Light of Judicial Practice Partyk, Aleksandra The provisions of the Act of 26 October 1982 on Upbringing in Sobriety and Counteracting Alcoholism provide for the possibility of applying obligatory withdrawal treatment to an addicted person. Compulsory withdrawal treatment may be provided in a stationary or inpatient system. However, both forms of addiction treatment constitute a statutory exception, as withdrawal treatment is voluntary in principle. In particular, judicature points out that alcohol dependence alone is not sufficient to oblige a participant to undertake alcohol treatment. There must also be a so‑called social premise. One such premise is the fact that an addicted person is causing a breakdown of family life. In the jurisprudence of courts this circumstance is often referred to. However, whether this actually takes place is a matter of judgement. Not every conflict within a family constitutes a breakdown of family life. Moreover, the application cannot be taken into account if the family ties have already definitively disintegrated. At the same time, the court takes into account the state existing at the date of closing of the hearing, and therefore the improvement of the addicted person’s conduct, including the initiation of voluntary therapy, must influence the final direction of the court’s decision. A decision on the obligation to undertake alcohol treatment is particularly important if there is real fear that a crisis in a family affected by alcoholism of one of its members will deepen. Rapid reaction on the part of the state apparatus increases the probability of success. 2025-03-07T14:00:28Z 2025-03-07T14:00:28Z 2020 chapter ONIX_20250307_9788381428019_628 9788381428019 9788381428002 https://directory.doabooks.org/handle/20.500.12854/155203 pol image/jpeg Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International https://www.press.uni.lodz.pl/index.php/wul/catalog/book/1064 Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego 10.18778/8142-800-2.06 The provisions of the Act of 26 October 1982 on Upbringing in Sobriety and Counteracting Alcoholism provide for the possibility of applying obligatory withdrawal treatment to an addicted person. Compulsory withdrawal treatment may be provided in a stationary or inpatient system. However, both forms of addiction treatment constitute a statutory exception, as withdrawal treatment is voluntary in principle. In particular, judicature points out that alcohol dependence alone is not sufficient to oblige a participant to undertake alcohol treatment. There must also be a so‑called social premise. One such premise is the fact that an addicted person is causing a breakdown of family life. In the jurisprudence of courts this circumstance is often referred to. However, whether this actually takes place is a matter of judgement. Not every conflict within a family constitutes a breakdown of family life. Moreover, the application cannot be taken into account if the family ties have already definitively disintegrated. At the same time, the court takes into account the state existing at the date of closing of the hearing, and therefore the improvement of the addicted person’s conduct, including the initiation of voluntary therapy, must influence the final direction of the court’s decision. A decision on the obligation to undertake alcohol treatment is particularly important if there is real fear that a crisis in a family affected by alcoholism of one of its members will deepen. Rapid reaction on the part of the state apparatus increases the probability of success. 10.18778/8142-800-2.06 83bfe9c9-323d-4283-b087-d859fd9af314 9788381428019 9788381428002 69-81 open access
spellingShingle Partyk, Aleksandra
Chapter Causing the Breakdown of Family Life as Liability to Take Part in Withdrawal Treatment – In Light of Judicial Practice
title Chapter Causing the Breakdown of Family Life as Liability to Take Part in Withdrawal Treatment – In Light of Judicial Practice
title_full Chapter Causing the Breakdown of Family Life as Liability to Take Part in Withdrawal Treatment – In Light of Judicial Practice
title_fullStr Chapter Causing the Breakdown of Family Life as Liability to Take Part in Withdrawal Treatment – In Light of Judicial Practice
title_full_unstemmed Chapter Causing the Breakdown of Family Life as Liability to Take Part in Withdrawal Treatment – In Light of Judicial Practice
title_short Chapter Causing the Breakdown of Family Life as Liability to Take Part in Withdrawal Treatment – In Light of Judicial Practice
title_sort chapter causing the breakdown of family life as liability to take part in withdrawal treatment in light of judicial practice
url ONIX_20250307_9788381428019_628
work_keys_str_mv AT partykaleksandra chaptercausingthebreakdownoffamilylifeasliabilitytotakepartinwithdrawaltreatmentinlightofjudicialpractice