Juvenile drug courts: Emerging outcomes and key research issues

Current Opinion in Psychiatry

Volumn 20, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 242-246

  Henggeler, Scott W ^a  

^a MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA   (United States)

Author keywords

Adolescent substance abuse; Evidence based treatment; Juvenile drug court

Indexed keywords

COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; COURT; CRIME; CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR; DRUG ABUSE; DRUG DEPENDENCE TREATMENT; FAMILY FUNCTIONING; HIGH RISK BEHAVIOR; HUMAN; JUSTICE; PERSONALITY DISORDER; POLICY; PRISON; PROBATION; RESEARCH; REVIEW;

ADOLESCENT; COOPERATIVE BEHAVIOR; CRIME; DRUG AND NARCOTIC CONTROL; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; HUMANS; JUVENILE DELINQUENCY; PATIENT CARE TEAM; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS; REFERRAL AND CONSULTATION; SUBSTANCE-RELATED DISORDERS; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 34247164040     PISSN: 09517367     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/YCO.0b013e3280ebb601     Document Type: Review

References (25)

1. Government Accountability Office. Adult drug courts: evidence indicates recidivism reductions and mixed results for other outcomes. Washington, DC: US Government Accountability Office 2005 Feb. Report No. GAO-05-219. Provides an outstanding and impartial review of the effectiveness of adult drug courts.
2. Marlowe DB, DeMatteo DS, Festinger DS. A sober assessment of drug courts. Federal Sentencing Reporter 2003; 16:153-157.
3. Huddleston CW, Freeman-Wilson K, Marlowe DB, Roussell A. Painting the current picture: a national report card on drug courts and other problem solving court programs in the United States. Alexandria, VA: National Drug Court Institute, Bureau of Justice Assistance, US Department of Justice 2005 May. Gives an excellent overview of the prevalence of juvenile drug courts and other problem-solving courts in the United States.
4. Belenko S. Research on drug courts: a critical review 2001 update. New York: The National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse, Columbia University 2001 June.
5. Belenko S, Dembo R. Treating adolescent substance abuse problems in the juvenile drug court. Int J Law Psychiatry 2003; 26:87-110.
6. Belenko S, Logan TK. Delivering more effective treatment to adolescents: improving the juvenile drug court model. J Subst Abuse Treat 2003; 25:189-211.
7. National Association of Drug Court Professionals, Drug Court Standards Committee. Defining drug courts: the key components. Washington, DC: Drug Courts Program Office, Office of Justice Programs, US Department of Justice 1997.
8. Marlowe DB, Heck C, Huddleston CW, Casebolt R. A national research agenda for drug courts: plotting the course for second generation scientific inquiry. Drug Court Review 2006; 5:1-30. Provides a solid overview of key research priorities pertaining to adult drug courts.
9. Cissner AB, Rempel M. The state of drug court research: moving beyond 'Do they work?'. New York: Center for Court Innovation; 2005.
10. Roman J, Townsend W, Bhati AS. Recidivism rates for drug court graduates: nationally based estimates, final report. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute 2003 July; Document No. 201229.
11. Marlowe DB, Festinger DS, Lee PA, et al. Matching judicial supervision to clients' risk status in drug court. Crime and Delinquency 2006; 52:52-76. Describes an extremely well conceived set of studies that demonstrate the importance of matching the intensity of judicial supervision with drug court participants' risk status.
12. Henggeler SW, Halliday-Boykins CA, Cunningham PB, et al. Juvenile drug court: enhancing outcomes by integrating evidence-based treatments. J Consult Clin Psychol 2006; 74:42-54. Describes the first well implemented randomized clinical trial to evaluate the effectiveness of juvenile drug court and to determine whether the integration of evidence-based substance-abuse treatments enhanced the effectiveness of juvenile drug court.
13. Henggeler SW, Schoenwald SK, Borduin CM, et al. Multisystemic treatment of antisocial behavior in children and adolescents. New York: Guilford Press; 1998.
14. Petry NM. A comprehensive guide to the application of contingency management procedures in clinical settings. Drug Alcohol Depend 2000; 58:9-25.
15. Altschuler DM, Armstrong TL, MacKenzie DL. OJJDP Juvenile Justice Bulletin: Reintegration, supervised release, and intensive aftercare. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Office of Justice Programs, US Department of Justice 1999 July.
16. McLellan AT, Carise D, Kleber HD. Can the national addiction treatment infrastructure support the public's demand for quality care? J Subst Abuse Treat 2003; 25:117-121.
17. Dodge KA, Dishion TJ, Lansford JE. Deviant peer influences in programs for youth: problems and solutions. New York: Guilford Press; 2006. Provides an excellent review of the iatrogenic effects of treating antisocial adolescents in groups as well as the major theories explaining such outcomes.
18. Dakof GA. Family-based juvenile drug court services. Miami, FL: Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Miami Medical School 2003-2008; Grant No. R01DA017478.
19. Liddle HA, Dakof GA, Diamond GS, et al. Multidimensional family therapy for adolescent substance abuse: results of a randomized clinical trial. Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse 2001; 27:651-687.
20. Rutherford MJ. Factors related to juvenile drug court completion. Seattle, WA: University of Washington 2006-2008; Grant No. R21DA018382.
21. Whiteacre KW. Denial and adversity in a juvenile drug court. International Journal of Drug Policy 2004; 15:297-304.
22. Schaeffer CM, Borduin CM. Long-term follow-up to a randomized clinical trial of multisystemic therapy with serious and violent juvenile offenders. J Consult Clin Psychol 2005; 73:445-453. Shows the potential for evidence-based treatments to reduce long-term rates of substance-related arrests for serious juvenile offenders.
23. Rodriguez N, Webb VJ. Multiple measures of juvenile drug court effectiveness: results of a quasi-experimental design. Crime and Delinquency 2004; 50:292-314.
24. Gilmore AS, Rodriguez N, Webb VJ. Substance abuse and drug courts: the role of social bonds in juvenile drug courts. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice 2005; 3:287-315.
25. Huey SJ, Henggeler SW, Brondino MJ, Pickrel SG. Mechanisms of change in multisystemic therapy: reducing delinquent behavior through therapist adherence and improved family and peer functioning. J Consult Clin Psychol 2000; 68:451-467.