Second DUI, Denial, and Rising Withdrawal
Marcus is a 34-year-old man referred by county probation after his second DUI in three years (BAC 0.19). He arrives 90 minutes late, smells of alcohol, and says, 'I just have bad luck with cops.' Intake scores: AUDIT 23, DAST-10 2, PHQ-9 8. He reports drinking a pint of vodka daily for two years, first drink within 20 minutes of waking, and two blackouts last month. Last drink was 18 hours ago. Vitals: BP 154/96, HR 112, temperature 99.8; visible tremor, sweating, and anxiety. CIWA-Ar is 12. He denies withdrawal seizures but had 'the shakes' once. He lives alone, has no car, and is on Medicaid. His wife declined to attend but phoned to say he drinks in the morning and has been fired twice. He says he does not need treatment and only wants the court paperwork signed.
1. What is the immediate clinical priority, and what level of care should be pursued? Explain your reasoning using the information given.
Read the worked answer
The immediate priority is preventing complicated alcohol withdrawal. A CIWA-Ar of 12 with HR 112, BP 154/96, tremor, sweating, and anxiety after 18 hours of abstinence places Marcus in moderate withdrawal. His daily pint of vodka and prior 'shakes' raise the risk of seizure and progression to delirium tremens. He should not be sent home to manage alone; he lives alone and has no transportation. Arrange same-day medical evaluation and referral to medically monitored withdrawal management (ASAM 3.7-WM). If that is unavailable and he is medically stable, clinically managed residential withdrawal (3.2-WM) with 24-hour support is the minimum. Do not let the AUDIT score or his denial drive this decision; physiological data drive it. Confirm Medicaid coverage, arrange transport, give written return precautions, and reassess suicide risk and other substance use.
2. How should you respond to Marcus's minimization, and what diagnosis is supported? Show how you would document it.
Read the worked answer
Use motivational interviewing rather than confrontation. His 'bad luck' statement is consistent with precontemplation; arguing will increase defensiveness. Reflect the discrepancy between his stated goal of getting the court off his back and the consequences: two DUIs, blackouts, morning drinking, and job losses. An AUDIT of 23 is in the high-risk range. His report meets multiple DSM-5 criteria: tolerance, withdrawal, craving, drinking more than intended, unsuccessful attempts to cut down, giving up activities, and use despite physical and legal consequences. That supports severe alcohol use disorder. Document objective findings, his own words, screening scores, and collateral only with consent. Note that diagnosis is clinical and not based on a single score. Reassess after withdrawal management, when he is cognitively clearer.
3. The wife calls back asking what Marcus said and whether he can come home tonight. What do you do?
Read the worked answer
Do not confirm or deny that Marcus is a client or disclose any details. Explain that federal and state confidentiality rules prevent sharing without his specific written consent and that consent is revocable. Offer to take a message and to ask Marcus whether he wants to sign a release. If the wife describes an immediate danger to Marcus or to children, follow emergency and mandated-reporting procedures; otherwise listen supportively without confirming treatment. Document the call, the information requested, and your response. This protects the therapeutic alliance and avoids a confidentiality violation.