Treatment Information for PA DUI-DWI-DAI suspects and people with drug or alcohol problems in Pennsylvania
Nov 26th, 2007 | By Michael L. Saile, Jr., Esq. | Category: Blogs, DUI-DWI-DAI (Drunk Driving)It is highly advisable that you should seek inpatient rehabilitation if you get a PA or NJ DUI-DWI-DAI or you have a drug and/or alcohol addiction. Not only will it help your personal problem and possibly save your life, but it will also help your case. The sentencing judge will appreciate that you took affirmative action on your own to get treatment. Also, inpatient rehab in both PA and NJ can be considered as “time-severed” for the purpose of jail sentences.
Beginning in 1989, Pennsylvania law required that all health insurance companies had to include drug and alcohol dependency treatment in their health insurance policies issued in Pennsylvania.
The treatment must include detoxification services in a licensed hospital or facility. If recommended by a physician or a psychologist, the covered treatment also must include residential care of up to 30 days in a calendar year and may be subject to a lifetime limit of 90 days of total residential care. Coverage is also required for a minimum of 30 full-session outpatient visits or equivalent partial visits per year and may be subject to a lifetime limit of 120 full-session outpatient visits or equivalent partial visits.
After the change in the law, the Pennsylvania Insurance Commission issued regulations forbidding insurance companies from imposing “managed care” or other limitations on drug and alcohol dependency treatment recommended by an insured’s physician or psychologist. In response, a group of insurance companies sued the Pennsylvania Insurance Commission, claiming that the new drug and alcohol treatment laws did not limit the provisions in health insurance policies that require “pre-certification,” “gatekeepers,” or “utilization review” and other procedures that are often found in managed care policies.
Recently, the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court dismissed the lawsuit, agreeing with the Insurance Commission that insurance companies cannot impose any additional limits on patients whose physicians or psychologists have recommended drug or alcohol treatment. Noting that the 30-day annual limit and the 90-day lifetime limit included in the statute adequately protect the interests of the health insurers, the court found that the legislature wisely limited the available care and equally wisely addressed the social importance of drug and alcohol treatment by requiring its inclusion in Pennsylvania health insurance policies.
I would think that getting treatment before a dui case is moved could be viewed as an admission of guilt and would hurt your case.
In NJ i didnt see any sentencing guidelines anywhere that said seeking treatment before a dui case is moved could affect the penalty in the statute.
the fine is 250-400 dollars, why would someone basicaly admit guilt to save 150 dollars ?
When an overall dui conviction can cost an individual ultimatley millions of dollars in income over a lifetime.
if there is any reasonable doubt as to guilt, i think all defendants in this category should fight all the way, force the state to prove it, and conceed nothing, do not go to rehab before the case is moved ,…. unless you truly have an alcohol problem and were drunk…
being arrested for dui does not mean one is guilty of dui!
‘
the proofs must be presented in court, to a judge, and beyond a reasonable doubt.
i am so frustrated that the state in my case has refused to present the proofs for well over 2 years now in my case.
obviously, they dont have them,,,,, theres no explanation for the case havinbg not been moved to date.
Jim,
Pennsylvania DUI-DWI-DAI procedure is a little different then New Jersey’s. PA has a first offenders program that offers no jail, reduced fines, reduced or no license suspension and no criminal record. On the the requirement to get into the “ARD” program is to have the CRN evaluation done before you go to court.
I think it is a good program for those defendants that know they are guilty of DUI.
I do not think a person that was not drunk should conceed and plead guilty to having a BAC of 0.08%.
My feeling on this is that people do not have built in alcohol testers in there bodies , and that in order to plead guilty in court of law, musat must tell the truth, the honest truth, and admit they had a b ac of 0,08% or greater, … and in reality unless a person was falling down drunk, there is absolutley no way for a typical ordinary person to know this…. it would be lieing to the court if they pleaded guilty.
no, that being said, in these cases, a trial is essential, under the law , no?
in other words, the state and the court can not force someone to plead guilty when thne person does not know that to be the truth.