Abstract

Abstract:In spite of a tendency to view rural areas generally and the rural South particularly as comparatively free of the social problems which beset urban areas, there is both historic and contemporary evidence that rural areas have a significant drug abuse problem. They also tend to lack treatment facilities, finding it difficult to attract the specialized personnel and considerable financial resources which are often required. But if treatment is viewed as a triphasic process consisting of evaluation, definitive intervention, and aftercare, the scarce and costly definitive intervention programs can be used on a regional or state-wide basis by rural “core” programs serving the more general functions of evaluation and aftercare. Such a flexible arrangement would provide improved patient evaluation, more precise referral, and better continuity of care. Drug abuse patterns unique to the area could be identified more readily, leading to varieties of definitive intervention better suited to regional needs.