Defending Opioid Treatment Agreements: Disclosure, Not Promises

Hastings Center Report 47 (3):24-33 (2017)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In order to receive controlled pain medications for chronic non-oncologic pain, patients often must sign a “narcotic contract” or “opioid treatment agreement” in which they promise not to give pills to others, use illegal drugs, or seek controlled medications from health care providers. In addition, they must agree to use the medication as prescribed and to come to the clinic for drug testing and pill counts. Patients acknowledge that if they violate the opioid treatment agreement, they may no longer receive controlled medications. OTAs have been widely implemented since they were recommended by multiple national bodies to decrease misuse and diversion of narcotic medications. But critics argue that OTAs are ethically suspect, if not unethical, and should be used with extreme care if at all. We agree that OTAs pose real dangers and must be implemented carefully. But we also believe that the most serious criticisms stem from a mistaken understanding of OTAs’ purpose and ethical basis.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,349

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

What makes placebo-controlled trials unethical?Franklin G. Miller & Howard Brody - 2002 - American Journal of Bioethics 2 (2):3 – 9.
Novel peripheral mechanisms of opioid analgesia.Christoph Stein & Michael Schäfer - 1997 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 20 (3):465-466.
The Patient-Centered Opioid Treatment Agreement.Seddon Savage - 2010 - American Journal of Bioethics 10 (11):18-19.

Analytics

Added to PP
2017-05-25

Downloads
107 (#160,505)

6 months
7 (#425,192)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Peter H. Schwartz
Indiana University Purdue University, Indianapolis