Abstract
As drug-related deaths have surged, the number and scope of legal mechanisms authorizing involuntary commitment for substance use have expanded. Media coverage of involuntary commitment routinely ignores documented health and ethical concerns. Prevalence and dynamics of misinformation about involuntary commitment for substance use have not been assessed. Media content mentioning involuntary commitment for substance use published between January 2015 and October 2020 was aggregated using MediaCloud. Articles were redundantly coded for viewpoints presented, substances mentioned, discussion of incarceration, and mentions of specific drugs. In addition, we tracked Facebook shares of coded content. Nearly half (48%) of articles unequivocally endorsed involuntary commitment, 30% presented a mixed viewpoint, and 22% endorsed a health-based or rights-based critique. Only 7% of articles included perspectives of people with lived experience of involuntary commitment. Critical articles received nearly twice as many Facebook shares (199,909 shares) as supportive and mixed narratives combined (112,429 shares combined). Empirical and ethical concerns about involuntary commitment for substance use are largely absent from coverage in mainstream media, as are voices of those with lived experience. Better alignment between news coverage and science is vital to inform effective policy responses to emerging public health challenges.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.