Future directions for alcohol and other drug treatment in Australia

Ali, Robert; Miller, Mel; Cormack, Simone

doi:10.1037/e677592010-001

Cited by 5 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Also, this policy recognises that total abstinence may be neither appropriate nor desirable for some people. The most significant impact of the principle of harm minimisation has been that it has allowed non-abstinence treatment goals in the illicit drug area while not excluding abstinence as a treatment goal (Ali et al 1992;FIONA McDERMOTT AND PR1SCILLA PYFTT McDonald and Patterson 1991;Connexions 1991;O'Hare et al 1992;Whelan 1992).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Co‐existent psychiatric illness and drug abuse: A community study

Ba¹,

1994

Psychiatry, Psychology and Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper the authors discuss recent research in Victoria exploring the dimensions of co-occurring serious I psychiatric disorder and problematic drug or alcohol use. A mutt-method approach was adopted in the light of I the absence of any previous local studies. The findings highlighted the critical lack of service and care for this most severely disadvantaged group. Of particular importance is the evidence of conflicting conceptualisations of the problem amongst service providers in different health and welfare sectors and the impact of administrative divisions which serve to exacerbate the difficulties of people with these dual problems. The evidence from the research points to a need to develop a common philosophical outlook amongst service providers. It is argued that the social policy of "harm minimisation" may, if developed within the mental heafth domain, provide a crucial first step in addressing the urgent and critical needs for services and management strategies for people with these dual problems.PAUL is in his mid-forties and has professional qualifications. Presently he is free-lancing as he has difficulties working with people. He has been married and has a daughter with whom he has regular contact. He describes himself as having paranoid schizophrenia. He uses alcohol when he is psychotic. Paul does not distinguish between prescribed and non-prescribed drugs because he believes that people use them both for the same thing. He uses alcohol when hearing attacking voices because he states that the alcohol diminishes the voices or makes them kind.SIMON is 30 and has only recently been diagnosed as having chronic schizophrenia. His main concern at present is dealing with his dependency to an over-the-counter medication. Recently he has been in a therapeutic community but although he describes it as 'really good' he was expelled. He also uses marijuana because it is enjoyable and heightens his perceptions: he becomes 'spiritually aware'. His main reasons for using drugs are to remove emotional difficulties, to give himself pleasure, as an escape, because they make him more creative, or to enhance his imagination and spirituality. • JAMES is in his early 20s and is receiving help and support from workers at an outreach service. He has been using drugs (glue sniffing and alcohol) since he was about 14 years of age. He attended a private school and later a community school. At 19 he was hospitalised for alcoholism and mental illness. He is unable to work and unable to stop drinking. When he has been drinking he becomes angry and violent.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Co‐existent psychiatric illness and drug abuse: A community study

Ba¹,

1994

Psychiatry, Psychology and Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Public health principles suggest that the success of any specific health intervention should not only be judged in terms of success at an individual level, but also at the broader economic and socio-cultural (political) levels [2].…”

Section: Public Health Principlesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the long term, a greater emphasis on strategies targeting low to mild dependent drinkers is likely to produce significant improvements in the health status of Australians and result in fewer people requiring specialist and intensive services for alcohol-related problems [2]. The continued investment of resources in in-patient treatment of alcohol dependence, despite evidence of its limited effectiveness and poor cost-effectiveness relative to other available treatments, compromises the development and implementation of effective strategies targeting low to mild dependence drinkers.…”

Section: The Futurementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Secondly, homelessness and/or socially instability among alcohol-dependent people are also questionable reasons to support the need for in-patient treatment. Residential respite care (often termed 'supported accommodation') may be indicated in these situations but, as we have argued elsewhere, there is little justification for considering that this constitutes treatment for alcohol dependence [2]. The findings of better outcomes for in-patient treatment over less intensive interventions for socially unstable, severely deteriorated individuals do not seem to have satisfactorily eliminated the explanation that supported accommodation alone accounts for the majority of improvement.…”

mentioning

confidence: 96%

See 1 more Smart Citation

In‐patient treatment for the alcohol‐dependent person: a public health perspective

Ali¹,

Cormack²

1994

Drug and Alcohol Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In accordance with public health principles, this paper is concerned with examining the individual, economic and political outcomes of in-patient treatment for alcohol dependence. It is argued that in-patient treatment for alcohol dependence per se is not justifiable at any of these levels, although in-patient treatment is justifiable for the treatment of the serious biomedical sequelae of dependence. For the alcohol-dependent person, the drinking, social, financial, psychological, work-related and health outcomes of out-patient treatment are as good as those for in-patient treatment; economically, out-patient programmes are more cost-effective than in-patient programmes; politically, moving the focus of treatment away from in-patient services is more likely to contribute to a cultural milieu which recognizes problems associated with alcohol dependence early and in their many different forms, rather than only by their long-term health consequences.

show abstract

“…Sometimes the school˜s staff possess the skills required, at other times they refer students to medical practitioners, adolescent, health, family or drug services. There is a strong therapeutic argument for schools to emphasise support and counselling rather than punishment because the drug treatment field finds early intervention programmes are more successful, and less expensive, than treatment at a later stage [28].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

‘Zero tolerance’ and drug education in Australian schools

Munro

Midford

2001

Drug and Alcohol Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For a decade in Australia, drug education in schools has been shaped by the approach of harm minimization adopted by state and national governments alike. Harm minimization has been accepted broadly by drug educators, and has encouraged schools to deepen their commitment to drug education, allowed them to communicate honestly with students, and to respond to instances of drug use in a less confrontational and more caring manner. Despite those advances, the notion of -zero tolerance˜ within schools has been promoted recently by protagonists in the formulation of drug policy and it is mentioned in the recently published national school drug education policy. This article suggests that the adoption of a zero tolerance policy will end the consensus among drug educators, reduce the efficacy of drug education, lead to more punitive treatment of youthful drug experimenters, while doing nothing to reduce drug use. It concludes the existing policy of harm minimization offers schools more scope to address drug issues in a constructive manner than does zero tolerance, which in practice may inflate the harmful effects on young people of drug use.[Munro G, Midford R. -Zero tolerance˜ and drug education in Australian Schools. Drug Alcohol Rev 2001;20:105 109]

show abstract

Future directions for alcohol and other drug treatment in Australia

Cited by 5 publications

References 0 publications

Co‐existent psychiatric illness and drug abuse: A community study

Co‐existent psychiatric illness and drug abuse: A community study

In‐patient treatment for the alcohol‐dependent person: a public health perspective

‘Zero tolerance’ and drug education in Australian schools

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About