Treating drug-abusing offenders: Initial findings from a five-county study on the impact of California's proposition 36 on the treatment system and patient outcomes

Evaluation Review

Volumn 27, Issue 5, 2003, Pages 479-505

  Hser, Yih Ing ^a   Teruya, Cheryl ^a,b   Evans, Elizabeth A ^a,b   Longshore, Douglas ^a,b   Grella, Christine ^a,b   Farabee, David ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

California Proposition 36; Criminal justice system; Drug treatment system; Drug abusing offenders; Patient outcome

Indexed keywords

ADDICTION; ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ARTICLE; CHILD; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CRIME; DRUG CONTROL; DRUG DEPENDENCE TREATMENT; EVALUATION; FEMALE; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; HUMAN; LEGAL ASPECT; MALE; MENTAL HEALTH SERVICE; MIDDLE AGED; TREATMENT OUTCOME; UNITED STATES; UTILIZATION REVIEW;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; CALIFORNIA; CHILD; COMMUNITY MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES; CRIME; DRUG AND NARCOTIC CONTROL; FEMALE; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; SUBSTANCE ABUSE TREATMENT CENTERS; SUBSTANCE-RELATED DISORDERS; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 0142244214     PISSN: 0193841X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0193841X03255774     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Anglin, M. D., D. Longshore, and S. Turner. 1999. Treatment alternatives to street crime: An evaluation of five programs. Criminal Justice and Behavior 26 (2): 168-95.
2. Anglin, M. D., and B. Perrochet. 1998. Drug use and crime: A historical review of research conducted by the UCLA Drug Abuse Research Center. Substance Use and Misuse 33 (9): 1871-914.
3. Ball, J. C., L. Rosen, J. A. Flueck, and D. N. Nurco. 1981. The criminality of heroin addicts: When addicted and when off opiates. In The Drugs-Crime Connection, edited by J. A. Inciardi, 39-65. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
4. Belenko, S. 2001. Research on drug courts: A critical review, 2001 update. Retrieved May 7, 2003, from http://www.casacolumbia.org/usr_doc/ researchondrug.pdf.
5. Bureau of Justice Statistics. 1999. Substance Abuse and Treatment, State and Federal Prisoners, 1997, NCJ 172871. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics, Department of Justice.
6. California Department of Corrections. 2000a. CDC facts - Second quarter 2000. Retrieved May 7, 2003, from http://www.cdc.state.ca.us/factsht.htm.
7. California Department of Corrections. 2000b. CDC facts - Third quarter 2000. Retrieved May 7, 2003, from http://www.cdc.state.ca.us/factsht.htm.
8. Camp, C. G., and G. M. Camp. 1998. The Corrections Yearbook 1998. Middletown, CT: Criminal Justice Institute, Inc.
9. Chaiken, M. R. 1986. Crime rates and substance abuse among types of offenders. In Crime Rates Among Drug-Abusing Offenders, edited by B. D. Johnson, and E. Wish, 12-54. Final Report to the National Institute of Justice. New York: Narcotic and Drug Research, Inc.
10. Chaiken, J. M., and M. R. Chaiken. 1982. Varieties of Criminal Behavior, R-2814-NIJ. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
11. _. 1990. Drugs and predatory crime. In Drugs and Crime, edited by M. Tonry and J. Q. Wilson, 203-39. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
12. Fagan, J. A. 1990. Treatment and reintegration of violent delinquents: Experimental results. Justice Quarterly 1 (2): 233-63.
13. Farabee, D., V. Joshi, and M. D. Anglin. 2001. Addiction careers and criminal specialization. Crime & Delinquency 47 (2): 196-220.
14. Feinblatt, J., G. Berman, and A. Fox. 2000. Institutionalizing innovation: The New York drug court story. Fordham Urban Law Journal 16:277-92.
15. Hser, Y., M. Maglione, V. Joshi, and M. D. Anglin. 1998. Effects of treatment program and client characteristics on client treatment retention. Final report: Center for Substance Abuse Treatment Office of Scientific Analysis and Evaluation Scientific Branch. Los Angeles: University of California, Drug Abuse Research Center.
16. Hser, Y., L. Evans, C. Teruya, M. Hardy, D. Urada, Y. Huang, R. Picazo, H. Shen, J. Hsieh, and M. D. Anglin. 2002. The California treatment outcome project (CalTOP). Final report: California Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs. Los Angeles; University of California, Integrated Substance Abuse Programs.
17. Johnson, B., P. Goldstein, E. Preble, J. Schmeidler, D. Lipton, B. Spunt, and T. Miller. 1985. Taking Care of Business: The Economics of Crime by Heroin Abusers. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
18. Katz, D., and R. Kahn. 1966. The Social Psychology of Organizations. New York: Wiley.
19. Lowe, L. 1995. A Profile of the Young Adult Offender in California Prisons as of December 31, 1989 1994. Prepared for the Substance Abuse Research Consortium, Spring 1995. Sacramento: Office of Substance Abuse Programs, California Department of Corrections.
20. McBride, D. C., and C. B. McCoy. 1993. The drugs-crime relationship: An analytic framework. Prison Journal 73 (3-4): 257-78.
21. McLellan, A. T., J. Cacciola, H. Kushner, F. Peters, I. Smith, and H. Pettinati. 1992. The fifth edition of the Addiction Severity Index: Cautions, additions and normative data. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment 5:312-16.
22. Morgan, G. 1986. Images of Organization. London: Sage.
23. National Institute of Justice. 1998. 1997 Annual Report on Adult and Juvenile Arrestees, NCJ-171672. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice, Department of Justice.
24. National Institute of Justice. 2000. 1999 Annual Report on Drug Use Among Adult and Juvenile Arrestees. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
25. Parker, R., and K. Auerhahn. 1998. Alcohol, drugs, and violence. Annual Review of Sociology 24:291-311.
26. Peyton, E. A., and R. Gossweiler. 2001. Treatment Services in Adult Drug Courts: Report on the 1999 National Drug Court Treatment Survey [Drug Courts Resource Series]. Washington, DC: Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs.
27. Prendergast, M. L., and T. H. Maugh. 1995. Drug courts: Diversion that works. The Judges 'Journal 34(3): 10-17.
28. Riley, K. J., P. Ebener, J. Chiesa, S. Turner, and J. Ringel. 2000. Drug Offenders and the Criminal Justice System: Will Proposition 36 Treat or Create Problems?, IP-204. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
29. Scott, W. R. 1992. Organizations: Rational, Natural and Open Systems, 3d ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
30. Speckart, G. R., and M. D. Anglin. 1985. Narcotics and crime: An analysis of existing evidence for a causal relationship. Behavioral Sciences and the Law 3 (3): 259-82.
31. _. 1986. Narcotics use and crime: An overview of recent research advances. Contemporary Drug Problems 13:741-69.
32. Tonry, M., and J. Q. Wilson, eds. 1990. Drugs and Crime, Chicago: University of Chicago
33. U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs. 1998. Looking at a Decade of Drug Courts. Retrieved May 7, 2003, from http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/ dcpo/decade98.htm.
34. von Bertalanffy, L. 1956. General system theory. General Systems 1:1-10.
35. von Bertalanffy, L. 1968. General System Theory: Foundations, Development, Applications. New York: Braziller.
36. Wellisch, J., M. L. Prendergast, and M. D. Anglin. 1993. Criminal justice and drug treatment systems linkage: Federal promotion of inter-agency collaboration in the 1970s. Contemporary Drug Problems 20 (4): 611-50.
37. White, H. R., and D. M. Gorman. 2000. Dynamics of the drug-crime relationship. In Crime and Justice 2000, Vol. 1: The Nature of Crime: Continuity and Change, edited by E. Jeffires and J. Munsterman, 151-218. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice, Department of Justice.