In Case You Haven't Heard…

Abstract

Every year AMERSA, the Association for Multidisciplinary Education and Research in Substance use and Addiction, at its annual conference, features days and tracks of young researchers presenting the latest on addiction treatment, including posters and valuable networking for trainees. A feature of the meeting is a “spicy debate,” which usually pits two experts against one another in a controversal topic. This year that debate fell flat. The topic — whether to abolish mandated treatment — was indeed a good one. In favor of mandated treatment was Harvard Medical School psychiatrist, researcher, and addiction expert Bertha Madras, M.D., who has solid conservative credentials. Unfortunately, AMERSA chose a non‐scholar, Kassandra Frederique, head of the Drug Policy Alliance, to debate her. Frederique's opposition to treatment in general predicted her opposition to mandated treatment, but even more concerning was the lack of scholarship in her responses. This was not a fair or clean debate. That would have required a solid researcher on the other side, and in fact, the audience was full of many, who would have all been worthy opponents of Madras. Our vote: Madras won hands down, citing anecdotes as well as peer reviewed research to support her side.