We do not yet know how many veterans with post-combat stress effects will seek substance use disorder (SUD) treatment through civilian rather than military systems in the months to come. We do know that some VA centers already have waiting lists, and that significant numbers of veterans may be avoiding treatment for fear of the stigma associated with post-deployment stress effects (Tanielian and Jaycox, 2008). We know even less about the extent of the challenges that the civilian SUD field will face as veterans begin to return in high numbers from Iraq and Afghanistan, and about the long-term demands on civilian treatment systems.
In general, though, the connection between post-trauma effects and substance use disorders is well known to the treatment field.
One preliminary study of Department of Defense prevalence surveys shows that “this generation of veterans has been much closer to trauma, has completed or may complete multiple tours of duty, and experience a greater prevalence of mental health issues (40%) and of those upwards of 60% also have an SUD” (Danforth, 2007, p. 11). And our experience with Vietnam veterans has revealed that significant long-term problems can follow the stress of war, including chronic substance use disorders and a host of complicating factors (Kulka et al., 1990; Schnurr et al., 2003).
The role of the substance use disorder (SUD) treatment field in mobilizing to meet these challenges is an essential one, for several reasons:
The SUD treatment field has begun to mobilize toward a focus on recovery, recovery management and recovery-based systems of care. In many cases, the needs that make recovery management so essential for clinical populations with substance dependence disorders are linked to clients’ experiences of hardship and trauma (White, 2006). The concept of recovery-based care is in many ways a bridge between our responses to substance use disorders and our responses to trauma. As more and more new veterans return, the needs of those with substance dependence disorders will be important considerations in building new recovery-oriented systems of care.
The standard of care for co-occurring SUDs and post-trauma effects is simultaneous, co-located treatment of both illnesses. In a recovery-based, trauma-informed model of care, SUD clinicians both refer to and coordinate closely with mental health and trauma specialists (White, 2006). However, that model will not succeed unless SUD clinicians and recovery support service providers also receive all appropriate training in:
The effects of trauma reach throughout the human being. Anyone providing services to someone affected by trauma—even if those services seem unconnected to the post-trauma symptoms—is in effect working with trauma, an often-volatile condition. As the SUD field has learned in its work with survivors of childhood abuse, a failure to understand and respect the complexities of trauma can derail the treatment process and drive the trauma deeper into the human body, mind, and spirit (White, 1998). An understanding of trauma can elevate the safety and effectiveness of SUD treatment and make ongoing recovery far more likely, and far more complete.
Next: Overview of Clinical Challenges
The material on all of the Clinical Pages is taken directly from the clinicians' manual Finding Balance: Considerations in the Treatment of Post-deployment Stress Effects, published by the Great Lakes Addiction Technology Transfer Center and Human Priorities. This manual is copyright © 2008, Pamela Woll. Reprint permission is universally granted, but attribution is requested. Click here for References and Other Resources.
Click the following links for PDFs of materials in the Finding Balance series: Clinicians' Guide <> Workbook for Service Members and Veterans <> Quick Guide for Service Members and Veterans <> Workbook for Military Families <> Suggestions for Facilitators (Counselors, Trainers, Mentors) using the workbooks