Helping Families Respond to Stimulant Misuse Under the Marchman Act

Yes. Florida’s Marchman Act can apply when a loved one misuses a stimulant such as Adderall or methamphetamine. This page explains how that test works, who can file, and what happens after a petition is filed.

What the Marchman Act Is and Who It Covers

The Marchman Act is a Florida law that lets a court order assessment and treatment for a person with substance abuse impairment. Its official short title is the Hal S. Marchman Alcohol and Other Drug Services Act, and it sits in Chapter 397 of the Florida Statutes.

The law covers substance abuse in general. It is not limited to alcohol or to one drug, which is why it can reach stimulant misuse.

A family member can start the process. Under who may petition, for an adult respondent, an adult’s spouse or legal guardian, any relative, a service provider, or an adult with direct personal knowledge of the impairment and of the prior course of assessment and treatment can file. The person named in the petition is called the respondent.

The Marchman Act is a court process aimed at assessment and treatment. A separate Florida law covers mental illness, so it is a different process.

Why Stimulant Misuse Falls Under the Same Framework

Stimulant misuse can fall under the Marchman Act because the test looks at impairment, not the name of the drug. The criteria in § 397.675 are written around substance abuse impairment.

Adderall is a prescription amphetamine. Misuse can mean taking it without a prescription, taking more than prescribed, or taking it more often than prescribed. Methamphetamine is an illegal stimulant.

A prescription does not settle the question by itself. How the medication is taken matters, and the facts of each case shape the outcome.

Criteria for Involuntary Assessment Under the Marchman Act

The same § 397.675 text also covers a person with a substance use disorder and a co-occurring mental health disorder.

The statute then gives two routes. One is a need for services, plus impaired judgment that keeps your loved one from seeing that need or making a rational choice about it. The other is a likely failure to care for themselves that poses a real and present threat of substantial harm, with no help from willing family, friends, or other services that could prevent it. Fla. Stat. § 397.675(2)(b) reads: “Without care or treatment, is likely to suffer from neglect or refuse to care for himself or herself; that such neglect or refusal poses a real and present threat of substantial harm to his or her well-being; and that it is not apparent that such harm may be avoided through the help of willing, able, and responsible family members or friends or the provision of other services, or there is substantial likelihood that the person has inflicted, or threatened to or attempted to inflict, or, unless admitted, is likely to inflict, physical harm on himself, herself, or another.” A substantial likelihood of physical harm to self or others also meets this part. Fla. Stat. § 397.675 reads: “(b) Without care or treatment, is likely to suffer from neglect or refuse to care for himself or herself; that such neglect or refusal poses a real and present threat of substantial harm to his or her well-being; and that it is not apparent that such harm may be avoided through the help of willing, able, and responsible family members or friends or the provision of other services, or there is substantial likelihood that the person has inflicted, or threatened to or attempted to inflict, or, unless admitted, is likely to inflict, physical harm on himself, herself, or another.”

One rule matters for families. Mere refusal to accept services is not, by itself, evidence of lack of judgment about the need for them. Fla. Stat. § 397.675 reads: “(b) Without care or treatment, is likely to suffer from neglect or refuse to care for himself or herself; that such neglect or refusal poses a real and present threat of substantial harm to his or her well-being; and that it is not apparent that such harm may be avoided through the help of willing, able, and responsible family members or friends or the provision of other services, or there is substantial likelihood that the person has inflicted, or threatened to or attempted to inflict, or, unless admitted, is likely to inflict, physical harm on himself, herself, or another.”

The petition must also show the facts. Under § 397.68141, it must give the reasons you believe your loved one is impaired and has lost self-control. It must also give the reasons they have harmed or are likely to harm themselves or others, or why their refusal rests on impaired judgment.

Recognizing Stimulant Misuse in Your Loved One

Families often notice changes in money, sleep, work, and daily routines before anything else. Common signs include running out of prescription pills early, getting pills from other people, binge episodes, long stretches without sleep, fast weight loss, agitation or paranoia, and missed work, school, or family duties.

Write down what you see. Record dates, specific incidents, and the exact words your loved one used. Note any calls to police, emergency visits, or medical care. A petition has to rest on facts. Vague complaints like “they’re always high” say little about dates or harm.

Ask whether your loved one was ever assessed or refused one. The petition must say so if there was no assessment or a refusal (§ 397.68141). A report from a qualified professional who examined your loved one within 30 days before filing may go with the petition.

How a Marchman Act Petition Is Filed and What Happens Next

A petition is filed with the clerk of the court in the county where your loved one is located. The clerk may not charge a filing fee (§ 397.681). Under Fla. Stat. § 397.681(1), involuntary treatment petitions “must be filed with the clerk of the court in the county where the person is located.” Under Fla. Stat. § 397.681(1), an involuntary treatment petition for a substance abuse impaired person must be filed with the clerk of the court in the county where the person is located.

The court must schedule a hearing within 10 court working days unless a continuance is granted (§ 397.68151). In an emergency, the court may rely on the petition alone and, without appointing an attorney, enter an ex parte order for your loved one’s involuntary assessment and stabilization while the hearing on the treatment petition is pending (§ 397.6818).

Outside the emergency ex parte order, which the court may enter without appointing an attorney, your loved one has a right to counsel at every stage of the proceeding. A court can appoint a lawyer if they cannot afford one (§ 397.681). At the hearing, the court hears relevant evidence, including testimony from family members who know the person’s history, and it may order drug tests (§ 397.6957).

If the conditions are proved by clear and convincing evidence, the court may order treatment for up to 90 days (§ 397.697).

Common Misconceptions About Stimulants and the Marchman Act

The Marchman Act is not limited to alcohol, and a family member does not have to wait for an arrest. Several myths can get in the way of a family’s decision.

• “It only covers alcohol.” It covers substance abuse impairment generally, and the criteria name no drug.
• “You must wait for an arrest.” Eligible family members can file a petition directly under § 397.68112.
• “Prescribed Adderall can never count.” The question is loss of self-control from impairment, and how the medication is taken matters.
• “Refusing help proves a lack of judgment.” The statute says mere refusal is not, by itself, evidence of that.
• Your loved one has a right to a lawyer. The respondent has the right to counsel at every stage of a judicial proceeding about involuntary treatment, however the respondent may waive that right if present and the court finds the waiver is knowing, intelligent, and voluntary, and can get an appointed lawyer if unable to afford one (§ 397.681).
• “The Marchman Act and the Baker Act are the same.” They address different conditions under different laws.

Talk With Robinson Casey About Your Loved One’s Stimulant Use

If your loved one’s stimulant use is leading to harm, Robinson Casey can help you judge whether a Marchman Act petition fits your facts. The firm limits its practice to Marchman Act petitions and guardianship matters, serving families across South Florida and statewide. Richard J. Casey III, Esq. is responsible for this page.

Related reading: involuntary commitment for addiction, my 18-year-old son is using, my brother refuses care, and court-ordered sober living.

Common Questions