We will not reverse the district court's finding of chemical dependency unless it is clearly erroneous. Minnesota law provides that if the district court finds by clear and convincing evidence that the proposed patient is a chemically dependent person, it shall commit the patient to the least restrictive treatment program capable of meeting the patient's needs, provided there is no suitable alternative to commitment. 2, refers to the handling of ordinary events that arise in daily living. Id. Karr concedes that she uses chemicals, but argues that she does not meet the definition of a chemically dependent person, because her chemical use does not render her incapable of self-management. Here, the evidence shows that Karr attempted suicide twice within four days and she threatened to try again if released from the treatment facility.
Suicide attempts imply an inability to self-manage.
Karr's inability to self-manage is demonstrated by her lack of housing, her debt, and her physical health problems. There was testimony that Karr believed that she was evicted from her hotel. Zwecker testified that Karr cannot manage her personal affairs because she chooses to buy drugs rather than pay to maintain shelter. Karr has also bounced several checks, at least some of which were for drug purchases. Zwecker testified that a physician expressed concern about Karr's physical health due to her drug abuse.