The comparative recidivism rates of voluntary- and coerced admission male alcoholics

Abstract

The outcomes of inpatient alcoholics who reported that they had been coerced into treatment by commitment or pressure from others were compared in a follow‐up study to those of alcoholics who described themselves as voluntary admissions. Ten assessments of control over drinking, number of drinking days in the past week, and intoxication since previous appraisal were made by collaterals between 2 weeks and 18 months after treatment. Even though the data were analyzed in several ways, the number of significant differences did not exceed chance expectations. This suggests that the prognoses of alcoholics who present for treatment under court order or interpersonal pressure were not substantially different from those of men who claim to have entered without coercion. However, the differences between the groups' Control over Drinking ratings, even though not statistically significant, consistently favored the coerced admissions, which raises the possibility that their outcomes may have been slightly better than those of the voluntary admissions.

Substance use and treatment seeking in young offenders on community orders

“…Mandated treatment works at least as well as bvoluntaryQ treatment (Dembo et al, 1993;Hall, 1997;Rotgers, 1992;Watson, Brown, Tilleskjor, Jacobs, & Pucel, 1989), and higher treatment gains are found for adolescent offenders compared to adult offenders (Day, Howells, & Rickwood, 2004). It is necessary that programs be of sufficient intensity and treatment integrity to meet the treatment needs of young people.…”

Does Mandatory Inpatient Alcohol Detoxification Reduce Emergency Department Recidivism, Hospital Admissions, and Emergency Medical Services Transports for Patients with Chronic, Severe Alcohol Dependence?

“…The study found that, after an average of 29 weeks of involuntary commitment, subjects were able to maintain abstinence, felt the severity of their alcohol problems were less, and that commitment was well tolerated. Watson et al analyzed treatment outcomes after completion of an inpatient alcohol treatment program and found little difference between coerced and self-referred patients (15). However, others have found that patients who had been coerced into a residential treatment program stayed longer than those who had enrolled voluntarily (7).…”

The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of diversion and aftercare programmes for offenders using class A drugs: a systematic review and economic evaluation

“…Within North America, several studies have concluded that legal pressure has a strong and positive impact on treatment entry and, subsequently, retention and positive outcomes. [56][57][58][59] Indeed, three of these studies suggest significantly improved performance for legally referred compared with voluntary clients However, it should be noted that they relate to either primary alcohol users, 59 adolescents in specialist (CJS referral only) residential units 58 or female offenders serving out alternatives to custody and/or child custody procedures. 56 Each of these represents a specific set of circumstances and motivational issues.…”

“…[59][60][61][62] Again, the context of these studies varies and two of these 59,60 were concerned with adolescents or primary alcohol users only. There is also literature that theorises the possible negative results of a policy of criminal justice referrals into treatment based on presumptions of need and non-empirical evidence bases.…”