When the courts intervene and demand that a person pursue drug rehabilitation, that person can feel diminutive and without any power over their life, especially if money has been an ongoing concern. It costs money to afford treatments and this burden often falls at the feet of the addict. Understanding the ins and outs of paying for court-ordered drug rehab is a crucial early step in planning and pursuing rehabilitation.

Payment Varies by Circumstances

Most of the time, the burden of court-ordered drug rehab falls upon the plaintiff’s shoulders-the drug addicted individual. In truth, it is never expected or required of a court to fund treatments; while this may sound harsh, the purpose of court-ordered rehab is to help a serious criminal case, often petitioned by family.

Casey’s Law

Some states, like Ohio and Kentucky, invoke Casey’s Law. This legislation stipulations that anyone petitioning for the addict’s treatment must also work toward funding said treatment. This is severe enough that the petitioner must sign a legally-binding agreement verifying that payment will be addressed.

Jennifer’s Act

Indiana takes a similar page from Casey’s Law by modifying payment for rehabilitation. Jennifer’s Act seeks to eliminate the strain of paying out of pocket for successful drug rehabilitation through measures like reducing the fee to file a petition

The Average Cost

Most of the time, private rehab programs charge thousands of dollars. While these centers tend to provide the best means for an addict to overcome their habit, the high cost of admission not only serves as a walled garden but can also foster resentment from the addict at having to pay a costly sum of money on a service they may not always be keen on pursuing.

Fortunately, there are dozens of no-cost rehab centers throughout the United States, all focused on helping addicts get the care they desperately need. As just one example, several religious groups provide access to sober house living, possibly a soup kitchen and simple, cheap rehab. While petitioning the court to have an addict sent to these later avenues is advised, especially if the addict’s funds are limited, there are a multitude of reasons why the court may deny such a request. As just one example, the court may feel that free alternatives are unsuited to properly handle the addict’s needs.

Do Not Forget About Insurance

In cases where the addict happens to be able to afford health insurance, there is a good chance that their policy will cover the costs of rehabilitation. 2008 saw the passage of the Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act, preventing insurers from manufacturing strict limitations on benefits for people struggling with mental health issues or addiction disorders.

Unfortunately, that particular act focused on large group health plans, like the ones received via an employer. While MHPAEA also addresses individual insurance policities, it can be a challenge to find the ones that will fully cover the cost of rehabilitation; occasionally, a given insurer may only cover a portion of the expenses like a co-pay.

In the event that a person is expecting to undergo court-ordered drug rehabilitation, it would be prudent for them to discuss coverage options with their insurer. There is a reasonable chance that their insurer may be willing to work with the addict in order to reduce the personal cost of rehabilitation, either wholly or by just a portion.

Enter the Sliding Fee Services

In the seemingly-cruel scenarios where neither the addict’s insurer is willing to help with the cost nor the courts believe a free rehabilitation center is viable, there is still a chance the addict can receive financial assistance in the form of low-cost centers. The Bureau of Drug and Alcohol Services provides a list of non-profit programs engineered to help addicts finance their rehabilitation.

A BDAS service center provides residential in- and outpatient services by way of a sliding scale fee. Said fee is based on an assessment of the addict’s personal finances, ensuring that he never pays more than he could afford; in instances where there is no income, there is a decent chance that the service will be provided at no cost to the addict.

Fortunately, being allowed to receive treatment at such a center is quite high thanks to being designed with crisis intervention in mind. Judges tend to favor sentencing addicts to these sliding fee centers as they are deemed able of offering more comprehensive rehabilitation than what a free religious service can.

Focus on the Rehabilitation, Not the Costs

Court-ordered rehab for drug addiction is usually a much-needed slap in the face for people struggling with severe addiction. That being said, it can also be a daunting and intimidating process. The addict should know that she is not alone and that her friends, family and the treatment facility staff are there to see her improve.

Share this article

Facebook Comments