First Amendment and Drug Alcohol Treatment Programs: To What Extent May Coerced Treatment Programs Attempt to Alter Beliefs Relating to Ultimate Concerns and Self-Concept? (From Drugs: Should We Legalize, Decriminalize or Deregulate? P 341-346, 1998, Jeffrey A. Schaler, ed. -- See NCJ-172364)

• NCJ Number: 172389
• Author(s): E Luff
• Date Published: 1998
• Length: 6 pages
• Sale Source: Prometheus Books
• Publication Type: Legislation/Policy Analysis
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: *This document is currently unavailable from NCJRS. DCC.

Annotation

State agencies and employers can avoid violating people's right to freedom of thought and belief by restricting the mandatory component of their program to alcohol education and permitting the person to select a therapy or support in which he/she wishes to participate.

Abstract

Many courts are ordering persons convicted of drunk driving and other alcohol-related and drug-related offenses to attend Alcoholics Anonymous or another 12-step program. These programs meet the legal definition of a religion because, among other things, they counsel "turning our will and our lives over to the care of God, as we understood Him," and "working" the steps culminates in a "spiritual awakening." Therefore, state- coerced attendance constitutes an establishment of a religion and violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. In addition, forcing an atheist to attend a theistic program constitutes a violation of the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment. As has been observed by various writers, secular psychotherapy has many of the characteristics of a religion. It is likely that forcing someone into a therapy that contains basic underlying assumptions contrary to those of the probationer would be considered a First Amendment violation, even if the therapy was not as obviously religious as Alcoholics Anonymous. Although the state has an interest in preventing certain behavior and may use various methods, including probation with therapy and support groups, to achieve that end, it may not attempt to alter people's beliefs concerning metaphysical issues, "ultimate concerns," or self-concept. The same reasoning could be applied to Employee Assistance Programs sponsored by employers. It is permissible for the state to require all probationers convicted of drunk-driving offenses to attend educational classes designed to persuade them to cease driving while under the influence of drugs or alcohol. It is not permissible to intrude further into the probationer's mind by forcing sustained attendance in programs designed to alter other more remotely related beliefs, such as their belief in God or their self-identity. 18 notes