Coerced treatment for methamphetamine abuse: Differential patient characteristics and outcomes

American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse

Volumn 31, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 337-356

  Brecht, Mary Lynn ^a   Anglin, M Douglas ^a   Dylan, Michelle ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b Zynx Health   (United States)

Author keywords

Child protective services; Coerced treatment; Criminal justice; Drug treatment outcomes; Methamphetamine; Relapse

Indexed keywords

METHAMPHETAMINE;

ADULT; AGE; ARTICLE; CHILD ABUSE; CHILD NEGLECT; CHILD WELFARE; CONTROLLED STUDY; COURT; CRIME; CRIMINAL JUSTICE; DISEASE COURSE; DRUG DEPENDENCE; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HUMAN; INTERVIEW; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; OUTCOMES RESEARCH; PERSUASIVE COMMUNICATION; PROTECTION; RELAPSE; RESIDENTIAL CARE; SELF REPORT; UNITED STATES;

ADULT; AMPHETAMINE-RELATED DISORDERS; COERCION; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MANDATORY PROGRAMS; MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES; METHAMPHETAMINE; MOTIVATION; PATIENT COMPLIANCE; PUBLIC POLICY; UNITED STATES;

EID: 18544383449     PISSN: 00952990     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1081/ADA-200056764     Document Type: Article

References (64)

1. Office of the National Drug Control Policy. National Drug Control Strategy. A Ten-Year Plan. Washington, DC: The White House, 1998, Available at http://www.ncjrs.org/ondcppubs/pdf/strat_ptl .pdf (accessed February 1, 2004).
2. Herz D. Drugs in the Heartland: Methamphetamine Use in Rural Nebraska. National Institute of Justice Research in Brief: April 2000. Available at http://www.ncjrs.org/pdffilesl/nij/180986.pdf (accessed February 1, 2004).
3. NIDA Community Epidemiology Work Group (CEWG). Epidemiologic Trends in Drug Abuse Advance Report. Washington, DC: National Institute on Drug Abuse, 2001.
4. Office of the National Drug Control Policy. National Drug Control Strategy. Washington, DC: The White House, 2001. Available at http:// www.ncjrs.org/ondcppubs/publications/policy/ndcs01/ (accessed February 1, 2004).
5. National Drug Intelligence Center. National Drug Threat Assessment. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, 2003. Available at http:// www.usdoj.gov/ndic/pubs3/3300/meth.htm (accessed February 1, 2004).
6. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Office of Applied Studies. Treatment Episode Data Set (TEDS): 1992-2000. National Admissions to Substance Abuse Treatment Services, DASIS Series S-17 DHHS Publication No. (SMA)02-3727. Rockville. MD: SAMHSA, 2002.
7. Urada D, Brecht M-L, Anglin MD, Hser Y-I. California alcohol and other drug treatment: trends in client characteristics, treatment progress, service capacity, and utilization. In: A State Treatment and Demand Needs Assessment: Alcohol and Other Drugs. Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs, Office of Applied Research and Analysis. Sacramento, CA: State of California Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs, Office of Applied Research and Analysis, 2002.
8. Travis J, Vareen D. Final Report, Mehamphetamine Interagency Task Force. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice. 2000. Available on the Internet at http://www.ncjrs.org/pdffiles1/nij/180155.pdf. Accessed March 21, 2005.
9. Anglin MD, Perrochet B. Drug use and crime: a historical review of research conducted by the UCLA drug abuse research center. Subst Use Misuse 1998; 33(9):1871-1914.
10. Rittner B, Dozier C. The effects of court-ordered substance abuse treatment in child protective services cases. Social Work 2000; 442(2):131-140.
11. Farabee D, Prendergast M, Anglin MD. The effective of coerced treatment for drug-abusing offenders. Fed Probat 1998; 62(1):3-10.
12. Anglin MD, Hser Y. Criminal justice and the drug-abusing offender: policy issues of coerced treatment. Behav Sci Law 1991; 9:243-267.
13. Gostin L. Compulsory treatment for drug-dependent persons: justification for a public health approach to drug dependency. Millbank Quart 1991; 69:561-593.
14. Leukefeld C, Tims F. Compulsory Treatment of Drug Abuse: Research and Clinical Practice. Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse, 1988.
15. Rosenthal M. The constitutionality of involuntary civil commitment of opiate addicts. J Drug Issues 1988; 18:641-661.
16. Wild T, Newton-Taylor B, Alleto R. Perceived coercion among clients entering substance abuse treatment: Structural and psychological determinants. Addict Behav 1998; 23(1):81-95.
17. Platt J, Buhringer G, Kaplan C, Brown B, Taube D. The prospects and limitations of compulsory treatment for drug addiction. J Drug Issues 1988; 18(4):505-525.
18. De Leon G, Melnick G, Kressel D, Jainchill N. Circumstances, motivation, readiness and suitability (the CMRS scales): predicting retention in therapeutic community treatment. Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse 1994; 20(4):495-515.
19. Joe G, Simpson D, Broome K. Retention and patient engagement models for different treatment modalities in DATOS. Drug Alcohol Depend 1999; 57:113-125.
20. Simpson D, Joe G. Motivation as a predictor of early dropout from drug abuse treatment. Psychotherapy 1993; 30(2):357-368.
21. Brecht M-L, Anglin MD, Wang JC. Treatment effectiveness for legally coerced vs. voluntary methadone maintenance clients. Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse 1993; 19(1):89-106.
22. Hiller M, Knight K, Broome K, Stimpson D. Legal pressure and treatment retention: a national sample of long-term residential programs. Crim Justice Behav 1998; 25(4):463-481.
23. McGlothlin WH, Anglin MD, Wilson BD. An evaluation of the California Civil Addict Program. NIDA Services Research Monograph Series DHEW Publication No. ADM 78-558. Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse, 1977.
24. Miller N, Flaherty J. Effectiveness of coerced addiction treatment (alternative consequences). A review of the clinical research. J Subst Abuse Treat 2000; 18:9-16.
25. Prendergast M, Maugh TH. Drug courts: diversion that works. Judges J 1995; 34:10-15,46-47.
26. Anglin MD, Longshore D, Turner S, McBride D, Inciardi J, Prendergast M. Studies of the Functioning and Effectiveness of Treatment Alternatives to Street Crime (TASC) Programs: Final Report (National Institute on Drug Abuse Contract N0iDA-1-8408. Santa Monica, CA: UCLA Drug Abuse Research Center Los Angeles RAND, 1996.
27. Maugh T, Anglin MD. Court-ordered drug treatment does work. Judges J 1994; 33(1):10-13, 38-40.
28. Collins J, Allison M. Legal coercion and retention in drug abuse treatment. Hosp Commun Psychiatry 1983; 34(12):1145-1149.
29. Prendergast M, Anglin MD, Wellisch J. Treatment for drug-abusing offenders under community supervision. Fed Probat 1995; 59(4):66-75.
30. Belenko S. Research on drug courts: a critical review. Natl Drug Court Inst Rev 1998; 1:1-42.
31. Drug Court Clearinghouse and Technical Assistance Project [DCCTAP]. Looking at a Decade of Drug Court. Washington, DC: American University Office of Justice Programs DCCTAP, 1999.
32. Guydish J, Wolfe E, Tajima B, Woods W. Drug court effectiveness: a review of California evaluation reports, 1995-1999. J Psychoact Drugs 2001; 33(4):369-378.
33. Terry WC. The Early Drug Courts: Case Studies in Judicial Innovation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 1999.
34. U.S. General Accounting Office. Drug Courts: Better DOJ Data Collection and Evaluation Efforts Needed to Measure Impact of Drug Court Programs. Washington, DC: U.S. General Accounting Office, 2002. Available at http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d02434.pdf (accessed February 1, 2004).
35. Zweben J. The role of drug courts in methamphetamine treatment. Methamphetamine Abuse. In: Proceedings from the Center for Substance Abuse Treatment Regional Conference, Hawaii, December 1999; Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration: Rockville, MD, 1999.
36. Longshore D, Evans E, Urada D, Teruya C, Hardy M, Hser Y-H, Prendergast M, Ettner S. Evaluation of the Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act 2002 Report. Los Angeles: UCLA Integrated Substance Abuse Programs, 2002.
37. Downs S, Costin L, McFadden E. Child Welfare and Family Service: Policies and Practice. White Plains, NY: Longman, 1996.
38. Azzi-Lessing L, Olsen L. Substance abuse-affected families in the child welfare system: new challenges, new alliances. Social Work 1996; 41(1):15-23.
39. Chaffin M, Kellerher K, Hollenberg J. Onset of physical abuse and neglect: psychiatric, substance abuse, and social risk factors from prospective community data. Child Abuse Neglect 1996; 20(2):191-203.
40. Dore M, Doris J, Wright P. Identifying substance abuse in maltreating families: a child welfare challenge. Child Abuse Neglect 1995; 19(5):531-543.
41. National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse. No Safe Haven: Children of Substance-Abusing Parents. New York: National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University, 1999:4-5.
42. Smyth J, Miller B. Parenting issues for women with alcohol and other drug problems. In Straussner S, Zelvin E, eds. Gender Issues in Addictions. New York: Jason Aronson, 1997:123-150.
43. Berkowitz G, Brindis C, Clayson Z. Peterson S. Options for recovery: promoting success among women mandated to treatment. J Psychoact Drugs 1996; 28(1):31-38.
44. Anglin MD, Hser Y-I, Chou C-P. Reliability and validity of retrospective self-report by narcotics addicts. Eval Rev 1993; 17(1):90-107.
45. Chou C-P, Hser Y-I, Anglin MD. Pattern reliability of narcotics addicts' self-reported data: a confirmatory assessment of construct validity and consistency. Subst Use Misuse 1996; 31(9):1189-1216.
46. Hser Y-I, Anglin MD, Chou C-P. Reliability of retrospective self-report by heroin addicts. Psychological assessment. J Consult Clin Psychol 1992; 4(2):207-213.
47. Wild T. Compulsory substance-abuse treatment and harm reduction: a critical analysis. Subst Use Misuse 1999; 3(1):83-102.
48. McKay J, Alterman A, Koppenhaver J, Mulvaney F, Bovasso G, Ward K. Continuous, categorical, and time to event cocaine use outcome variables: degree of intercorrelation and sensitivity to treatment group differences. Drug Alcohol Depend 2001; 62:19-30.
49. Farabee D, Hser Y-I, Anglin MD, Huang D. Recidivism among an early cohort of California's Proposition 36 offenders. Criminology & Public Policy 2004; 3(4):501-522.
50. Brewer D, Catalano R, Haggerty K, Gainey R, Fleming C. A meta-analysis of predictors of continued drug use during and after treatment for opiate addiction. Addiction 1998; 93(1):73-92.
51. McKay J, Weiss R. A review of temporal effects and outcome predictors in substance abuse treatment studies with long-term follow-ups. Eval Rev 2001; 25(2):113-161.
52. Prendergast M, Podus D, Chang E, Urada D. The effectiveness of drug abuse treatment: a meta-analysis of comparison group studies. Drug Alcohol Depend 2002; 67:53-72.
53. Brecht M-L, von Mayhauser C, Anglin MD. Predictors of relapse after treatment for methamphetamine use. J Psychoact Drugs 2000; 32(3):211-220.
54. Brecht M-L, Greenwell L, von Mayhauser C, Anglin MD. Two-year outcomes of treatment for methamphetamine use. J Psychoact Drugs. In press.
55. Hser Y-I, Grella C, Hsieh S, Anglin MD, Brown B. Prior treatment experience related to process and outcomes in DATOS. Drug Alcohol Depend 1999; 57(2):137-150.
56. Longshore D. Treatment motivation among Mexican-American drug-using arrestees. Hisp J Behav Sci 1997; 19(2):214-229.
57. Hser Y-I, Anglin MD, Fletcher B. Comparative treatment effectiveness. J Subst Abuse Treat 1998; 15(6):513-523.
58. Simpson D, Joe G, Fletcher B, Hubbard R, Anglin MD. A national evaluation of treatment outcomes for cocaine dependence. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1999; 56(6):507-514.
59. Zhang Z, Friedmann P, Gerstein D. Does retention matter? Treatment duration and improvement in drug use. Addiction 2003; 98(5):673-684.
60. Brecht M-L, O'Brien A, von Mayrhauser C, Anglin MD. Methamphetamine use behaviors and gender differences. Addict Behav 2004; 29(1):89-106.
61. Polcin D. Drug and alcohol offenders coerced into treatment: a review of modalities and suggestions for research on social model programs. Subst Use Misuse 2001; 36(5):589-608.
62. Taylor B, Fitzgerald N, Hunt D, Reardon J, Brownstein H. ADAM Preliminary 2000 Findings on Drug Use and Drug Markets. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, 2001.
63. Longshore D, Turner S, Wenzel S, Morral A, Harrell A, McBride D, Deschenes E, Iguchi M. Drug courts: a conceptual framework. J Drug Issues 2001; 31(1):7-26.
64. Rapp R, Li L, Siegal H, DeLiberty R. Demographic and clinical correlates of client motivation among substance abusers. Health Soc Work 2003; 28(2):107-115.