The words we choose to describe alcohol and other drug (AOD) treatments and interventions reveal assumptions about how we understand AOD use. Moreover, they have important implications for how the treatment is imagined, implemented and funded. Service provision which follows engagement in an intensive (usually residential) program is often called ‘aftercare’ in the international AOD field. In this commentary, we argue that the term ‘aftercare’ fails to articulate the nature of ongoing care required by people who are managing AOD use. We maintain that ‘aftercare’ positions post-residential care as being less important than other treatment modalities, rather than as integral to a continuum of care. It is a term that implies that care should be acute, like much treatment delivered through a medical model, and assumes that people follow linear pathways in managing their AOD use. Assumptions embedded in the term ‘aftercare’ such as these may disincline governments from funding ongoing services for people exiting intensive programs. Alternative terms including ‘continuing coordinated care’ more aptly signal the integrated and ongoing service provision that should be available to support people in sustaining changes initiated through other AOD interventions.

中文翻译：

---

为什么我们停止使用“善后”一词

我们选择描述酒精和其他药物 (AOD) 治疗和干预措施的词语揭示了我们如何理解 AOD 使用的假设。此外，它们对如何设想、实施和资助治疗具有重要意义。参与密集（通常是住宅）计划后的服务提供在国际 AOD 领域通常被称为“善后”。在本评论中，我们认为“后期护理”一词未能阐明管理 AOD 使用的人所需的持续护理的性质。我们认为，“后期护理”将住院后护理定位为不如其他治疗方式重要，而不是连续护理的组成部分。这个术语暗示护理应该是急性的，就像通过医疗模式提供的许多治疗一样，并假设人们在管理 AOD 使用时遵循线性路径。诸如此类的“善后”一词中的假设可能会使政府不愿为退出密集计划的人们提供持续的服务。包括“持续协调护理”在内的替代术语更恰当地表明应提供综合和持续的服务，以支持人们维持通过其他 AOD 干预措施引发的变化。