2012
DOI: 10.1080/10550887.2012.694604
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Rate and Predictors of Employment Among Formerly Polysubstance Dependent Urban Individuals in Recovery

Abstract: Employment is a key functioning index in addiction services and consistently emerges as a goal among persons in recovery. Research on employment in the addictions has focused on treatment populations and/or welfare recipients; little is known of employment rates or their predictors among persons in recovery. This study seeks to fill this gap, capitalizing on a sample (N = 311) of urban individuals at various stages of recovery. Fewer than half (44.5%) were employed; in logistic regressions, male gender and Cau… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
34
0
2

Year Published

2014
2014
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 46 publications
(37 citation statements)
references
References 70 publications
1
34
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Ongoing substance use among mothers is of particular concern because of its effects on maternal and child health during pregnancy (Covington et al, 2002; Dixon et al, 2008; Johnson and Leff, 1999; Keegan et al, 2010; Sood et al, 2001) but also because the dysfunctional home environment it creates can have detrimental effects on parenting styles (De La Rosa et al, 2010) and on child growth and development (Chatterji and Markowitz, 2001; Clark et al, 2004; Conners et al, 2004; Hanson et al, 2006; Linares et al, 2006). In addition, low-income single mothers are at risk for persistent poverty (Edin and Lein, 1997) and the physical, mental, and behavioral health problems that can accompany substance abuse are significant barriers to employability, employment, and economic self-sufficiency (Hogue et al, 2010; Jayakody et al, 2000; Laudet, 2012; Phinney et al, 2007; Pollack and Reuter, 2006; Schmidt and McCarty, 2000). Research on treatment outcomes among women with substance use disorders has mostly focused on identifying individual factors and service system interactions (e.g., drug treatment, criminal justice system involvement) that are associated with improved health and social outcomes (e.g., Evans et al, 2013; Greenfield et al, 2007; Hser et al, 2003; Messina et al, 2006).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Ongoing substance use among mothers is of particular concern because of its effects on maternal and child health during pregnancy (Covington et al, 2002; Dixon et al, 2008; Johnson and Leff, 1999; Keegan et al, 2010; Sood et al, 2001) but also because the dysfunctional home environment it creates can have detrimental effects on parenting styles (De La Rosa et al, 2010) and on child growth and development (Chatterji and Markowitz, 2001; Clark et al, 2004; Conners et al, 2004; Hanson et al, 2006; Linares et al, 2006). In addition, low-income single mothers are at risk for persistent poverty (Edin and Lein, 1997) and the physical, mental, and behavioral health problems that can accompany substance abuse are significant barriers to employability, employment, and economic self-sufficiency (Hogue et al, 2010; Jayakody et al, 2000; Laudet, 2012; Phinney et al, 2007; Pollack and Reuter, 2006; Schmidt and McCarty, 2000). Research on treatment outcomes among women with substance use disorders has mostly focused on identifying individual factors and service system interactions (e.g., drug treatment, criminal justice system involvement) that are associated with improved health and social outcomes (e.g., Evans et al, 2013; Greenfield et al, 2007; Hser et al, 2003; Messina et al, 2006).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, in a 2001 study of substance abuse treatment providers in California, researchers estimated the cost of treatment to be, on average, $US1583 with a monetary benefit to society of $US11,487, attributed primarily to reductions in crime and increased wages from employment [5]. Similar findings have been reported in other studies of substance abuse treatment programs, particularly in relation to reduced rates of recidivism and arrests [6,7] although not all studies report improvements in employment rates or significant reductions in criminality [8,9]. Other factors, such as education level, socioeconomic class, race/ethnicity and gender, likely exercise some influence on these outcomes, however.…”
Section: Social/financial Implications Of Treatmentmentioning
confidence: 55%
“…Our results indicate that compared to disability related to physical disorders, related to substance use is significantly associated with lower likelihood of Community Ment Health J employment benefit receipt. Indeed, substance use has been reported to be a factor contributing to unemployment (Booth and Feng 2002;Johansson et al 2007;Laudet 2012;Platt 1995). The divergence of the regression results from the simple bivariate results might be attributable to the fact that the bivariate results are not adjusted for potentially confounding factors.…”
Section: Types Of Mental Disorders Versus Physical Disorders and Emplmentioning
confidence: 76%