• Home
  • Counseling
  • Consulting
  • Teaching
  • Directions and Hours
  • Bio/Curriculum Vitae
  • Links/Resources
  • Contact Me
  • Blog
Kevin Doyle, Ed.D., LPC, LSATP

Richmond Coach resigns after DUI

8/24/2011

 
Musing on the resignation of University of Richmond football coach Latrell Scott...

News reports today informed us that University of Richmond football coach Latrell Scott resigned after being arrested early this morning for a DUI outside Richmond, reportedly his second in the past 5-10 years. It is natural, I think, for us to think that he did the right thing in resigning, that a football coach at a major university should set a better example for his players, or that someone in the public eye should not put himself (or herself) in such a situation--all defensible positions.

Another thought hit me, however, understanding that I do not know Coach Scott or all of the details of this incident. A second DUI raises a major red flag for the possibility of a substance use disorder (abuse or dependence). What would the reaction have been if Coach Scott had immediately requested a leave of absence to seek treatment for this problem? Would he have been permitted to step aside for a period of time while attending an inpatient or residential treatment program--or given the time he might need to go to outpatient treatment?

Yes, it is about setting an example--but I am not sure that stepping down was the right example to set.

How about this: "Coach Scott announced today that he was seeking an evaluation of issues relating to his use of substances, and that he would follow the recommendations produced by this evaluation. In his absence, his associate head coach will assume responsibility for the day-to-day operations of the team.  Coach Scott indicated that he is committed to receiving the help that he needs and that he looks forward to returning to the team at the appropriate time." Could this have been an alternative ending--or beginning--to the story?

Would we not have done that if he had previously had cancer and his cancer returned? Was not Pat Summitt applauded for her courage in adddressing her early onset dementia--and for contining to coach?

It just seems to me that even though we give lip service to the idea of the disease concept of addiction, when we are presented with opportunities to really operationalize this, as Coach Scott's situation may have offered, we respond with the same old moral model response, in this case resignation (or the termination that may have resulted any way) rather than assessment or treatment. Your thoughts?
John
9/3/2011 12:05:32 pm

Indeed, there are possible alternate endings, and addressing his substance abuse and seeking help would not only be inspirational, but the right thing to do. Would this help him keep his job, is the question. Richmond's policies regarding such matters may not allow him to work there any longer. Many educational positions are not given to an individual who has been convicted of a DUI, let alone a repeat offender. I believe that repeat offenders are sentenced to some mandatory interventions regardless, making a public statement saying, "I am addressing my problem and seeking help, and will continue my duties as a coach", seem like he does not have any repercussions for his illegal actions.


Comments are closed.

    Author

    Kevin Doyle, Ed.D., LPC, LSATP. Addiction counselor, teacher, and trainer.

    Archives

    December 2011
    November 2011
    October 2011
    September 2011
    August 2011
    June 2011
    May 2011
    January 2011
    September 2010
    November 2008

    Categories

    All
    Addiction
    Alcohol
    Athletes
    Drugs
    Recovery
    Sports

    RSS Feed

Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.