FORCED TREATMENT NECESSARY

Drunk and high on drugs, a 17-year-old boy bolted from a car on the
way to his group home, ran into highway traffic outside Edmonton,
tore off his clothes and was hit and killed.

The unnamed youth died in 2005 but, as was evident in the grim
details of this week's fatality inquiry report, the poor young man
had been dying in bits and pieces all his life.

His mother was high on solvents throughout her pregnancy, triggering
his organic brain disorder. His father was an alcoholic.

Child protection officials scooped him up when he was only three
months old and he spent the rest of his life in foster homes or group homes.

His choices were stark, Alberta provincial court Judge Hugh Fuller
noted in his report -- remain at the group home and hopefully reach a
level of maturity that would allow him to function without a
meaningful relationship with his family, or ignore the danger of
alcohol and drugs in order to maintain that family link.

"It was a classic conflict of standing firm or adopting the old
adage, 'if you can't beat them, you may as well join them,'" said
Fuller. "Despite (his) awareness of the consequences ... he began to
follow the path of least resistance."

The tragic circumstances surrounding this young man's bleak life and
terrible death only hit the headlines because he happened to be in
government care when he died.

But there are countless other teen addicts out there who are unable
to go straight, whether they're living desperate lives on the margins
of society or clinging to families who don't know how to help them.

In the Prairie provinces, severely addicted teens can be forced into
detox (for five days in Alberta and Saskatchewan and up to a week in Manitoba).

Alberta's legislation didn't come into effect until 2006, a year
after the teen's death. But even if the province could have compelled
him to get treatment, it likely wouldn't have been enough.

That stark reality prompted Fuller to recommend teen addicts be
forced into treatment for as long as necessary, provided there are
timely court reviews and continued care is recommended by experts.

"I appreciate the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
considerations, but also recognize an obligation to impose treatment
for a minor if it is justified," the judge said.

Alberta's legislation allows only "a five-day window of opportunity"
to assess and treat kids with serious addictions, he pointed out.

The Alberta government will only say that the legislation is being reviewed.

But it's clear that Fuller is right.

More than half of the 400-odd kids placed into forced treatment in
Alberta over the past year have continued with voluntary treatment.

"Nothing's going to work for all kids all the time," says Sylvia
Vajushi, executive director of youth services for the Alberta Alcohol
and Drug Abuse Commission.

Nevertheless, a much longer mandatory drug treatment period would save lives.

And the CEO of the non-profit Pine River Institute, an intensive
therapeutic boarding school for addicted youth near Toronto, says
other provinces should adopt the Prairie approach of mandatory care.

"You need to have the option to provide treatment when someone is so
sick they don't know they need help," says Karen Minden.

"Knowing the decision to leave cannot be realized on a whim gives
both the young person and the therapist valuable room to navigate the
rough spots."