Offender perceptions of mandated substance abuse treatment: An exploratory analysis of offender experiences in a community-based treatment program

Journal of Drug Issues

Volumn 43, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 124-143

  Kras, Kimberly R ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI ST LOUIS   (United States)

Author keywords

Corrections; Procedural justice; Qualitative methods; Reentry; Substance abuse treatment

Indexed keywords

EID: 84877844880     PISSN: 00220426     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0022042612462219     Document Type: Article

References (64)

1. Allen, G. F. (1985). The probationers speak: Analysis of probationer's experiences and attitudes. Federal Probation, 49, 67-75.
2. Anglin, M. D., & Maugh, T. H. (1992). Overturning myths about coerced drug treatment. California Psychologist, 25(1), 19-22.
3. Applegate, B. K., Smith, H. P., Sitren, A. H., & Springer, N. F. (2009). From the inside: The meaning of probation to probationers. Criminal Justice Review, 34, 80-95.
4. Blevins, L. D., Morton, J. B., & McCabe, K. A. (1996). Using the Michigan Alcoholism Screening Test to identify problem drinkers under federal supervision. Federal Probation, 60, 38-42.
5. Brecht, M., Anglin, M. D., & Jung-Chi, W. (1993). Treatment effectiveness for legally coerced versus voluntary methadone maintenance offenders. American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, 19, 89-106.
6. Broner, N., Maryl, D. W., & Landsbery, G. (2005). Outcomes of mandates and nonmandated New York City jail diversion for offender with alcohol, drug, and mental disorders. The Prison Journal, 85, 18-49.
7. Chavaria, F. R. (1992). Successful drug treatment in a criminal justice setting: A case study. Federal Probation, 56, 48-52.
8. Cosden, M., Basch, J. E., Campos, E., Greenwell, A., Barazani, S., & Walker, S. (2006). Effects of motivation and problem severity on court-based drug treatment. Crime & Delinquency, 52, 599-618.
9. De Leon, D. (1988). Legal pressure in therapeutic communities. In C. G. Leukefeld & F. M. Tims (Eds.), Compulsory treatment of drug abuse: Research and clinical practice (pp. 160-177). Washington, DC: National Institute on Drug Abuse.
10. Duffee, D. E., & Carlson, B. E. (1996). Competing value premises for the provision of drug treatment to probationers. Crime & Delinquency, 42, 574-592.
11. Farabee, D., Prendergast, M., & Anglin, M. D. (1998). The effectiveness of coerced treatment for drugabusing offenders. Federal Probation, 62, 3-10.
12. Gideon, L. (2010). Drug offenders' perceptions of motivation: The role of motivation in rehabilitation and reintegration. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 54, 597-610.
13. Goodrum, S., Staton, M., Leukefeld, C., Webster, J. M., & Purvis, R. T. (2003). Perceptions of a prisonbased substance abuse treatment program among some staff and participants. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 37, 27-46.
14. Gottfredson, D. C., Kearley, B. W., Najaka, S. S., & Rocha, C. M. (2007). How drug treatment courts work: An analysis of mediators. Journal of Research in Crime & Delinquency, 44, 3-35.
15. Henderson, H., Wells, W., Maguire, E. R., & Gray, J. (2010). Evaluating the measurement properties of procedural justice in a correctional setting. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 37, 384-399.
16. Hepburn, J. R., & Harvey, A. N. (2007). The effect of the threat of legal sanction on program retention and completion: Is that why they stay in drug court? Crime & Delinquency, 53, 255-280.
17. Herie, M., Cunningham, J. A., & Martin, G. W. (2000). Attitudes toward substance abuse treatment among probation and parole officers. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 32, 181-195.
18. Hiller, M. L., Knight, K., Broome, K. M., & Simpson, D. D. (1998). Legal pressure and treatment retention in a national sample of long-term residential programs. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 25, 463-481.
19. Hiller, M. L., Knight, K., Leukefeld, C., & Simpson, D. D. (2002). Motivation as a predictor of therapeutic engagement in mandated residential substance abuse treatment. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 29, 56-75.
20. Hubbard, R. L., Marsden, M. E., Rachal, J. V., Harwood, H. J., Cavanaugh, E. R., & Ginzburg, H. M. (1989). Drug abuse treatment: A national study of effectiveness. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.
21. Inciardi, J. (1988). Some considerations on the clinical efficacy of compulsory treatment: Reviewing the New York experience. In C. G. Leukefeld & F. M. Tims (Eds.), Compulsory treatment of drug abuse: Research and clinical practice (pp. 126-138). Washington, DC: National Institute on Drug Abuse.
22. Inciardi, J., & Martin, S. S. (1993). Drug abuse treatment in criminal justice settings. Journal of Drug Issues, 23, 1-6.
23. Knight, K., Hiller, M. L., Broome, K. M., & Simpson, D. D. (2000). Legal pressure, treatment readiness, and engagement in long-term residential programs. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 31, 101-115.
24. Longshore, D., Prendergast, M. L., & Farabee, D. (2004). Coerced treatment for drug-using criminal offenders. In P. Bean & T. Nemitz (Eds.), Drug treatment: What works? (pp. 110-122). New York, NY: Routledge.
25. Longshore, D., & Teruya, C. (2006). Treatment motivation in drug users: A theory-based analysis. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 81, 179-188.
26. Marlowe, D. B. (2000). Coercive treatment of substance abusing criminal offenders. Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice, 1, 65-73.
27. Marlowe, D. B. (2003). Substance abuse treatment and criminal justice supervision. Science & Practice Perspectives, 2, 4-14.
28. Marshall, G. N., & Hser, Y. (2002). Characteristics of criminal justice and noncriminal justice offenders receiving treatment for substance abuse. Addictive Behaviors, 27, 179-192.
29. Martin, D. J., Garske, J. P., & Davis, M. K. (2000). Relation of the therapeutic alliance with outcome and other variables: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 68, 435-450.
30. Maxwell, S. R. (2000). Sanction threats to court-ordered programs: Examining their effects on offenders mandated into drug treatment. Crime & Delinquency, 46, 542-563.
31. McMurran, M., & Ward, T. (2010). Treatment readiness, treatment engagement and behaviour change. Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health, 20, 75-85.
32. Miller, J. (2005). The status of qualitative research in criminology. Proceedings from the National Science Foundation's Workshop on Interdisciplinary Standards for Systematic Qualitative Research. Retrieved from http://www.wjh.harvard.edu/nsfqual/Miller%20Paper.pdf
33. Miller, N. S., & Flaherty, J. A. (2000). Effectiveness of coerced addiction treatment (alternative consequences): A review of the clinical research. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 18, 9-16.
34. National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse. (2010). Behind bars II: Substance abuse and America's prison population. Retrieved from http://www.casacolumbia.org/articlefiles/575-report2010behindbars2.pdf
35. Olson, D. E., Rozhon, J., & Powers, M. (2009). Enhancing prisoner reentry through access to prison-based and post-incarceration aftercare treatment: Experiences from the Illinois Sheridan Correctional Center Therapeutic Community. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 5, 299-321.
36. Polcin, D. L. (2001). Drug and alcohol offenders coerced into drug treatment: A review of modalities and suggestions for research on social model programs. Substance Use & Misuse, 36, 589-608.
37. Prendergast, M. L., Anglin, M. D., & Wellisch, J. (1995). Up to speed: A review of research for practitioners. Treatment for drug-abusing offender under community supervision. Federal Probation, 59, 66-75.
38. Prendergast, M. L., Farabee, D., Cartier, J., & Henkin, S. (2002). Involuntary treatment within the prison setting: Impact of psychological change during treatment. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 29, 5-26.
39. Prendergast, M. L., Greenwell, L., Farabee, D., & Hser, Y. (2009). Influence of perceived coercion and motivation on treatment completion and re-arrest among substance-abusing offenders. Journal of Behavior Health Services & Research, 36, 159-176.
40. Raney, V. K., Magaletta, P., & Hubbert, T. A. (2005). Perception of helpfulness among participants in a prisonbased residential substance abuse treatment program. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 42, 25-34.
41. Rottman, D. B. (2007). Adhere to procedural fairness in the justice system. Criminology & Public Policy, 6, 835-842.
42. Salmon, R. W., & Salmon, R. J. (1983). The role of coercion in rehabilitation of drug abusers. Journal of Drug Issues, 18, 641-661.
43. Sia, T. L., Dansereau, D. F., & Czuchry, M. L. (2000). Treatment readiness training and probationer's evaluations of substance abuse treatment in the criminal justice setting. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 19, 459-467.
44. Sigler, R. T., & McGraw, B. (1984). Adult probation and parole officers: Influence of their weapons, role perceptions and role conflict. Criminal Justice Review, 9, 28-32.
45. Silverman, D. (2006). Interpreting qualitative data (3rd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.
46. Simpson, D. D., Joe, G. W., & Brown, B. S. (1997). Treatment retention and follow-up outcomes in the Drug Abuse Treatment Outcome Study (DATOS). Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 11, 294-307.
47. Sitren, A. H., & Applegate, B. K. (2006). Intentions to offend: Examining the effects of personal and vicarious experiences with punishment and punishment avoidance. Journal of Crime and Justice, 29, 25-51.
48. Smith, H. P., Applegate, B. K., Sitren, A. H., & Springer, N. F. (2009). The limits of individual control? Perceived officer power and probationer compliance. Journal of Criminal Justice, 37, 241-247.
49. Spradley, J. P. (1979). The ethnographic interview. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
50. Springer, N. F., Applegate, B. K., Smith, H. P., & Sitren, A. H. (2009). Exploring determinants of probationer's perceptions of their supervising officers. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 48, 210-227.
51. Steiner, B. (2004). Treatment retention: A theory of post-release supervision for the substance abusing offender. Federal Probation, 68, 24-29.
52. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. (2009). The TEDS report: Substance abuse treatment admissions referred by the criminal justice system. Rockville, MD: Office of Applied Studies.
53. Taxman, F. S. (1998, February). Reducing recidivism through a seamless system of care: Components of effective treatment, supervision, and transition services in the community. Office of National Drug Control Policy Treatment and Criminal Justice System Conference, Washington, DC.
54. Taxman, F. S., & Thanner, M. H. (2003). Probation from the therapeutic perspective: Results from the field. Contemporary Issues in Law, 7, 39-63.
55. Tyler, T. R. (2003). Procedural justice, legitimacy, and the effective rule of law. Crime and Justice: A Review of Research, 30, 283-357.
56. Tyler, T. R., & Huo, Y. J. (2002). Trust in the law: Encouraging public cooperation with the police and courts. New York, NY: Russell Sage.
57. Walker, R., Cole, J., & Logan, T. K. (2008). Identifying client-level indicators of recovery among DUI, criminal justice, and non-criminal justice treatment referrals. Substance Use & Misuse, 43, 1785-1801.
58. Wexler, H. K., Lipton, D., & Johnson B. (1986). A criminal justice system strategy for treating cocaine and heroin abusers in custody. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
59. Whiteacre, K. W. (2007). Strange bedfellows: The tensions of coerced treatment. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 18, 260-273.
60. Wild, T. C., Roberts, A. B., & Cooper E. L. (2002). Compulsory substance abuse treatment: An overview of the recent findings and issues. European Addiction Research, 8, 84-93.
61. Young, D. (2002). Impacts of perceived legal pressure on retention in drug treatment. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 29, 27-55.
62. Young, D., & Belenko, S. (2002). Program retention and perceived coercion in three models of mandatory drug treatment. Journal of Drug Issues, 32, 297-328.
63. Young, M. S., Fluellen, R., & Belenko, S. (2004). Criminal recidivism in three models of mandatory drug treatment. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 27, 313-323.
64. Zimring, F. E. (1993). Drug treatment as a criminal sanction. University of Colorado Law Review, 64, 809-825.