2004
DOI: 10.1016/j.jsat.2004.08.007
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Criminal recidivism in three models of mandatory drug treatment

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

1
33
0
1

Year Published

2007
2007
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 33 publications
(35 citation statements)
references
References 39 publications
1
33
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Findings indicated that the DTAP patients had higher rates of retention than the other groups at both 6 and 12 month post-admission follow-ups (Young, 2002;Young & Belenko, 2002). Further, a follow-up study examining the effectiveness of DTAP reported that criminal recidivism among DTAP participants were substantially below those of a matched comparison group of offenders who were mandated to treatment from conventional criminal justice sources (Young, Fluellen, & Belenko, 2004). In considering the effects of pretrial release to treatment programs on individuals with ASPD, one study examining treatment outcome in a group of court-mandated substance users found that comorbid ASPD was not associated with treatment dropout, and that this group fared equally well compared to the court mandated non-ASPD patients in terms of reduced drug use and recidivism rates (Messina, Wish, & Nemes, 1999), suggesting the feasibility of court mandated programs in retaining substance abusing clients with ASPD in treatment.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 95%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Findings indicated that the DTAP patients had higher rates of retention than the other groups at both 6 and 12 month post-admission follow-ups (Young, 2002;Young & Belenko, 2002). Further, a follow-up study examining the effectiveness of DTAP reported that criminal recidivism among DTAP participants were substantially below those of a matched comparison group of offenders who were mandated to treatment from conventional criminal justice sources (Young, Fluellen, & Belenko, 2004). In considering the effects of pretrial release to treatment programs on individuals with ASPD, one study examining treatment outcome in a group of court-mandated substance users found that comorbid ASPD was not associated with treatment dropout, and that this group fared equally well compared to the court mandated non-ASPD patients in terms of reduced drug use and recidivism rates (Messina, Wish, & Nemes, 1999), suggesting the feasibility of court mandated programs in retaining substance abusing clients with ASPD in treatment.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…As one example, individuals in pretrial release to treatment programs are offered the opportunity to avoid a criminal record or incarceration contingent upon the successful completion of a substance use treatment program (Young, Fluellen, & Belenko, 2004). Overall, empirical evidence suggests that these programs are effective in retaining patients in treatment, reducing substance use, and reducing rates of recidivism compared to criminal offenders not mandated to court and those mandated to programs such as probation and drug court (Harrell & Cavanaugh, 1995;Harrell, 1998;Young, 2002;Young & Belenko, 2002;Young, Fluellen, & Belenko, 2004). For instance, patients in a pretrial program in Brooklyn, NY, the Drug Treatment Alternative to Prison (DTAP) program, were compared to control offenders and patients mandated to treatment through parole, probation, and drug court programs.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although comparatively few individuals receive drug abuse treatment while incarcerated (Belenko & Peugh, 1999;Lowinson, Ruiz, Millman, & Langrod, 2005;Volkow, 2006), many high-risk high-need drug users who may not have otherwise entered community-based treatment are doing so for the very first time via criminal justice arrangements (Young, Fluellen, & Belenko, 2004). The CJS serves as an effective referral source to treatment services in the community and can be a mechanism for enhancing treatment retention and compliance (Anglin, Prendergast, & Farabee, 1998;Hiller, Knight, Broome, & Simpson, 1998;Marlowe, 2001;Young, 2002;Young & Belenko, 2002).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Those who were mandated were more likely to successfully complete treatment. In a more recent study, lower criminal recidivism for both genders was seen among participants mandated to treatment (Young, Fluellen, & Belenko, 2004).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 87%