Quasi-Compulsory Treatment of Drug Dependent Offenders: An International Literature Review

REFERENCES

• Alzinger J., Dexheimer M., Wolf B. Ein Jahr Motivationsstation. Kritische Auseinandersetzung Mit Konzepten Und Ersten Erfahrungen. Nervenheilkunde. Schattauer-Verlag, Stuttgart 1998
   Google Scholar
• Anglin M. D., Speckart G. Narcotics use and crime: A multisample, multiperiod analysis. Criminology 1988; 26: 197–233, [CSA]
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anglin M. D., Hser Y. I. Criminal justice and the drug-abusing offender: policy issues of coerced treatment. Behav. Sci. Law 1991; 9: 243–267, [PUBMED], [INFOTRIEVE], [CSA]
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anglin M. D., Maugh T. H. Overturning myths about coerced drug treatment. California Psychologist. 1992; 19–22
   Google Scholar
• Bean P. Drugs and Crime. Willan Publishing, Cullompton 2002
   Google Scholar
• Belenko S. Research on Drug Courts: A Critical Review. National Drug Courts Institute Review 1998; 1, [CSA]
   Google Scholar
• Belenko S. Research on Drug Courts: A Critical Review 2001 Update. National Centre on Addiction and Substance Abuse, , New York 2001
   Google Scholar
• Belenko S. The challenges of conducting research in drug treatment court settings. Subst. Use Misuse 2002; 37(1213)1635–1664, [PUBMED], [INFOTRIEVE], [CSA], [CROSSREF], [CROSSREF]
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bieleman B., Biesma S., Jetzes M., Jong A. D., Valk V. D. Opgevangen Onder Drang. Evaluatie Sov-Drang in Rotterdam. Intraval, Groningen 2002
   Google Scholar
• Broër C., Noyon R. Over Last En Beleid. Evaluatie Nota Overlast En Vijf Jaar Svo-Beleid Tegen Overlast Van Harddrugsgebruikers. . Regioplan Stad en Land, Amsterdam 1999
   Google Scholar
• Brochu S., Schneeberger P. L'impact Des Contraintes Judiciaires Dans Le Traitement De La Toxicomanie. Ministère de la Santé et des Services sociaux. Comité permanent de lutte à la toxicomanie (CPLT): Québec, 1999
   Google Scholar
• Burns R. B. Introduction to Research Methods4th. Sage, London 2000
   Google Scholar
• Carney T. New configurations of justice and services for the vulnerable: Panacea or panegyric?. Aust. N. Z. J. Criminol. 2000; 33(3)318–340
   Google Scholar
• Crété R. Le toxicomane, le juge et le soignant. psychotropes. Revue Internationale des toxicomanies 1997; 3(4)65–80
   Google Scholar
• de Vrijer P. SOV: Introducing a Compulsory Drug Abuse Treatment Programme in the Netherlands. Presentation to the European Harm Reduction Conference. Utrecht 1998
   Google Scholar
• Deitch D., Koutsenok I., Ruiz A. The relationship between crime and drugs: What we have learned in recent decades. J. Psychoactive Drugs 2000; 32(4)391–397, [PUBMED], [INFOTRIEVE], [CSA]
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dobler-Mikola A., Grichting E., Hampson D. Rehabilitationsverläufe Nach Einer Stationären Therapie. Eine Empirische Analyse Zu “Therapieerfolg,” Ressourcen, Barrieren Und Attributionen. Institut für Suchtforschung, Zürich 2000
   Google Scholar
• Edwards A., Benyon J. Networking and Crime Control at the Local Level in Policy Networks in Criminal Justice, Ryan M. Savage, S. P. Wall, D. S. Palgrave, Basingstoke 2001
   Google Scholar
• Egg R. Drogenabhängige Straftäter. Therapiemotivation Durch Justiziellen Zwang? Sonderdruck Des Verfassers. Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen-Nürnberg 1993
   Google Scholar
• Egg R., Kurze M. Drogentherapie in Staatlich Anerkannten Einrichtungen. Ergebnisse Einer Umfrage. Berichte, Materialien, Arbeitspapiere; Heft 3. Kriminologische Zentralstelle, Wiesbaden 1993
   Google Scholar
• Eisner M. Crime, problem drinking, and drug use: Patterns of problem behavior in cross-national perspective. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 2002; 580: 201–225, [CSA]
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elzo J. Study on Alternatives to Prison: Summary of the Final Report. Clairenity, Deusto-Bilbao 1998
   Google Scholar
• Ernst M.-L., Aeschbacher M., Spencer B. Les Aspects Sanitaires Du Travail De La Police Avec Les Consommateurs De Drogues. Institut universitaire de médecine sociale et préventive, Lausanne 2000, Raisons De Santé 37b
   Google Scholar
• Farabee D., Prendergast M., Anglin M. D. The effectiveness of coerced treatment for drug-abusing offenders. Fed. Probat. 1998; 62(1)3–10
   Google Scholar
• Garland D. The Culture of Control: Crime and Social Order in Contemporary Society. Oxford University Press, Oxford 2001
   Google Scholar
• Goldkamp J., White M., Robinson J. Do drug courts work? Getting inside the drug court black box. J. Drug Issues 2000; 31: 27–72, [CSA]
   Google Scholar
• Goldstein P. The drugs-violence nexus; a tripartite framework. J. Drug Issues 1985; Fall: 493–506
   Google Scholar
• Gostin L. O. Compulsory treatment for drug-dependent persons: Justifications for a public health approach to drug dependency. Milbank Q. 1991; 69(4)561–593, [PUBMED], [INFOTRIEVE], [CSA]
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Grichting E., Uchtenhagen A., Rehm J. Modes and Impact of Coercive Inpatient Treatment for Drug-Related Conditions in Switzerland. Eur. Addict. Res. 2002; 8: 78–83, [PUBMED], [INFOTRIEVE], [CSA], [CROSSREF], [CROSSREF]
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gross P. Juvenile Delinquency and Drugs in Germany. Council of Europe Pompidou Group, Strasbourg 1998
   Google Scholar
• Hall W. The role of legal coercion in the treatment of offenders with alcohol and heroin problems. Aust. N. Z. J. Criminol 1997; 30(2)103–120
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herbst K. Verlaufsanalyse bei Drogenabhängigen nach stationärer Behandlung. Sucht—Zeitschrift für Wissenschaft und Praxis. 1992; 3: 147–154
   Google Scholar
• Hiller M. L., Knight K., Broome K. M., Simpson D. D. Legal pressure and treatment retention in a national sample of long-term residential programs. Crim. Justice Behav. 1998; 25(4)463–481, [CSA]
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hiller M. L., Knight K., Leukefeld C., Simpson D. D. Motivation as a predictor of therapeutic engagement in mandated residential substance abuse treatment. Criminal Justice and Behavior 2002; 29(1)56–75, [CSA], [CROSSREF], [CROSSREF]
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hoffman M. B. The drug court scandal. North Carolina Law Review 2000; 76
   Google Scholar
• Hough M. Drug user treatment within a criminal justice context. Subst. Use Misuse 2002; 37(8–10)985–996, [PUBMED], [INFOTRIEVE], [CSA], [CROSSREF], [CROSSREF]
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Howard D. L., McCaughrin W. C. The treatment effectiveness of outpatient substance misuse organizations between court-mandated and voluntary clients. Subst. Use Misuse 1996; 31(7)895–926, [PUBMED], [INFOTRIEVE], [CSA]
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Joe G. W., Simpson D. D., Broome K. M. Effects of readiness for drug abuse treatment on client retention and assessment of process. Addiction 1998; 93(8)1177–1190, [PUBMED], [INFOTRIEVE]
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Joe G. W., Simpson D. D., Broome K. M. Retention and patient engagement models for different treatment modalities in DATOS. Drug Alcohol Depend. 1999; 57(2)113–125, [PUBMED], [INFOTRIEVE], [CSA], [CROSSREF], [CROSSREF]
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kellerhals C., Morency P., Zobel F., Dubois-Arber F. Drogues Illégales Et Santé Publique: Stratégie De La Confédération: Étude Menée Dans Le Cadre De L'évaluation Globale Du Promedro, 4ème Phase 1999–2003. Institut universiatire de médecine sociale et préventive, Lausanne 2002, Raisons De Santé 76
   Google Scholar
• Koeter M. Vroeghulp Aan Verslaafden. Het Effect Van De Vroeghulp Interventie Aanpak Op Criminele Recidive En Verslavingsgedrag. Amsterdam Institute of Addiction Research, Amsterdam 2002
   Google Scholar
• Korf D. J., Wijngaarden V., Koeter M. W. J., Riper H., Seeman C. Vroeghulp Aan Verslaafden. Evaluatie Van De Vroeghulp Interventie Aanpak (Via) Van De Justitiële Verslavingszorg. Amsterdam Institute for Addiction Research & Criminologisch Instituut Bonger, Amsterdam 2000
   Google Scholar
• Kothari G., Marsden J., Strang J. Opportunities and obstacles for effective treatment of drug misusers in the criminal justice system in England and Wales. Brit. J. Criminol. 2002; 42(2)412–432
   Google Scholar
• Lang M., Belenko S. Predicting retention in a residential drug treatment alternative to prison program. J. Subst. Abuse Treat. 2000; 19: 145–160, [PUBMED], [INFOTRIEVE], [CSA], [CROSSREF], [CROSSREF]
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leukefeld C. G., Tims F. M. Compulsory treatment for drug abuse. Int. J. Addict. 1990; 25(6)621–640, [PUBMED], [INFOTRIEVE], [CSA]
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lurigio A. J. Drug treatment availability and effectiveness—Studies of the general and criminal justice populations. Crim. Justice Behav. 2000; 27(4)495–528, [CSA]
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Magura S., Nwakeze P. C., Kang S.-Y., Demsky S. Program quality effects on patient outcomes during methadone maintenance: A study of 17 clinics. subst. Use Misuse 1999; 34(9)1299–1324, [PUBMED], [INFOTRIEVE], [CSA]
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maier T. J. Die Bedeutung Von Zwangsmassnahmen Für Die Rehabilitation Von Drogenabhängigen. Med. Diss, Zürich 1994
   Google Scholar
• Marlowe D. B., Merikle E. P., Kirby K. C., Festinger D. S., MacLellan A. T. Multi-dimensional assessment of perceived treatment-entry pressures among substance abusers. Psychol. Addict. Behav. 2001; 15: 97–108, [PUBMED], [INFOTRIEVE], [CSA], [CROSSREF], [CROSSREF]
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maxwell S. R. Sanction threats in court-ordered programs: Examining their effects on offenders mandated into drug treatment. Crime Delinquency 2000; 46(4)542–563, [CSA]
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McBride D. C., McCoy C. B. The drugs-crime relationship: An analytical framework. Prison J. 1993; 73: 257–278
   Google Scholar
• McNulty J., Kouimtsidis C. Outcomes of treatment interventions in drug abuse. Curr. Opin. Psychiatr. 2001; 14(3)201–205, [CROSSREF], [CROSSREF]
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meijer R., Grapendaal M., van Ooyen M., Wartna B., Brouwers M., Essers A. Geregistreerde Drugscriminaliteit in Cijfers. Achtergrondstudie Bij Het Justitieonderdeel Van De Nationale Drug Monitor, Jaarbericht 2002. WODC/KLPD, Den Haag 2003
   Google Scholar
• Miller N. S., Flaherty J. A. Effectiveness of coerced addiction treatment (alternative consequences): A review of the clinical research. J. Subst. Abuse Treat. 2000; 18: 9–16, [PUBMED], [INFOTRIEVE], [CSA], [CROSSREF], [CROSSREF]
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morel A. Les Intervenants En Toxicomanie Et La Loi De 1970. Psychotropes. Revue Internationale des toxicomanies. 1997; 3(4)81–92
   Google Scholar
• National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse. Crossing the Bridge: An Evaluation of the Drug Treatment Alternative-to-Prison (Dtap) Program. A Casa White Paper. National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse, Columbia University, , New York 2003
   Google Scholar
• Nolan J. L. The Therapeutic State: Justifying Government at Century's End. New York University Press, , New York 1998
   Google Scholar
• Pawson R., Tilley N. Realistic Evaluation. SAGE Publications, London 1998
   Google Scholar
• Pearson F. S., Lipton D. S. A meta-analytic review of the effectiveness of corrections-based treatments for drug abuse. Prison J 1999; 79(4)384–410
   Google Scholar
• Peyton E. A., Gossweiler R. Treatment Services in Adult Drug Courts: Report on the 1999 National Drug Court Treatment Survey, Executive Summary. Drug Courts Program Office, Office of Justice Programs, US Dept. of Justice, and the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Center for Substance Abuse Treatment, US Dept. of Health and Human Services (US Dept. of Justice and US Dept. of Health and Human Services): Washington, DC, 2001
   Google Scholar
• Polcin D. L. Drug and alcohol offenders coerced into treatment: A review of modalities and suggestions for research on social model programs. Subs. Use Misuse 2001; 36(5)589–608, [CSA], [CROSSREF], [CROSSREF]
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Porter L., Arif A., Curran W. J. The Law and Treatment of Drug and Alcohol Dependent Persons—a Comparative Study of Existing Legislation. World Health Organization, Geneva 1986
   Google Scholar
• Prendergast M. L., Podus D., Chang E., Urada D. The effectiveness of drug abuse treatment: A meta-analysis of comparison group studies. Drug Alcohol Depen 2002; 67(1)53–72, [CSA], [CROSSREF], [CROSSREF]
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Projektgruppe Rauschmittelfragen. Forschungsprojekt “Amsel.” Abschlussbericht Band 1. Jugendberatung und Jugendhilfe e.V., Frankfurt/Main 1991
   Google Scholar
• Rosenfield P. L. The potential of transdisciplinary research for sustaining and extending linkages between the health and social sciences. Social Science & Medicine 1992; 35(11)1343–1357, [CROSSREF], [CROSSREF]
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenthal M. P. The constitutionality of involuntary civil commitment of opiate addicts. J. Drug Issues 1988; 18(4)641–661, [PUBMED], [INFOTRIEVE], [CSA]
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Schalast N. Therapiemotivation Im Massregelvollzug Gemäss S 64 Stgb. Patientenmerkmale, Rahmenbedingungen, Behandlungsverläufe. W. Fink Verlag, München 2000
   Google Scholar
• Seddon T. Explaining the drug-crime link: Theoretical, policy and research issues. J. Soc. Policy 2000; 29(1)95–107, [CSA], [CROSSREF], [CROSSREF]
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Setbon M. L'injonction Thérapeutique. Evaluation Du Dispositif Légal De Prise En Charge Sanitarie Des Usagers De Drogues Interpellés. CNRS—GAPP, Paris 2000
   Google Scholar
• Sickinger R. Ausstieg Aus Der Heroinabhängigkeit. Lambertus Verlag, Freiburg 1994
   Google Scholar
• Simmat-Durand L. Les Obligations De Soins Aux Toxicomanes. Psychotropes. Rev. Int. des toxicomanies 1997; 3(4)127–144, [CSA]
   Google Scholar
• Simpson D. D., Joe G. W., Brown B. S. Treatment retention and follow-up outcomes in the drug abuse treatment outcome study (Datos). Psychol. Addict. Behav. 1997; 11(4)294–307, [CSA], [CROSSREF], [CROSSREF]
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sinha R., Easton C. Substance abuse and criminality. J. Am. Acad. Psychiatry 1999; 27(4)513–526
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sonntag D., Kunzel J. Hat die therapiedauer bei alkohol—und drogenabhangigen patienten einen positiven einfluss auf den therapieerfolg?. Sucht—Zeitschrift für Wissenschaft und Praxis 2000; 46(2)
   Google Scholar
• Sottet F. Le Juge Et Le Toxicomane. Interventions 1996; 55: 14–20
   Google Scholar
• Spooner C., Hall W., Mattick R. P. An overview of diversion strategies for Australian drug-related offenders. Drug Alcohol Rev. 2001; 20(3)281–294, [CSA], [CROSSREF], [CROSSREF]
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Drugs and Crime, M. Tonry, J. Q. Wilson. University of Chicago Press, Chicago 1990
   Google Scholar
• Turner S., Longshore D., Wenzel S., Deschenes E., Greenwood P., Fain T., Harrell A., Morral A., Taxman F., Iguchi M., Greene J., McBride D. A Decade of Drug Treatment Court Research. Subst. Use Misuse 2002; 37(12–13)1489–1527, [PUBMED], [INFOTRIEVE], [CSA], [CROSSREF], [CROSSREF]
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Gestel B. Tussen Straat En Kliniek. Evaluatie Van Vier Intramurale Motivatiecentra Voor Harddrugsverslaafden. Regioplan Stad en Land, Amsterdam 1999
   Google Scholar
• Vermeulen K. T., Hendriks V. M., Zomerveld R. Drangbehandeling in Den Haag: Evaluatieonderzoek Naar De Effectiviteit Van Het Behandelprogramma Triple-Ex Voor Justitiabele Verslaafden. Parnassia Addiction Research Centre, Den Haag 2000
   Google Scholar
• Wenzel S. L., Longshore D., Turner S., Ridgely M. S. Drug Courts—a bridge between Criminal Justice and Health Services. J. Crim. Just 2001; 29(3)241–253, [CROSSREF], [CROSSREF]
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Werdenich W., Waidner G. Final report on QCT system descriptions. Zeitschrift für Verhaltenstherapie und Verhaltensmedizin, In press
   Google Scholar
• Wild T. C., Newton-Taylor B., Alleto R. Perceived coercion among clients entering substance abuse treatment: Structural and psychological determinants. Addict. Behav. 1998; 23: 81–95, [PUBMED], [INFOTRIEVE], [CSA], [CROSSREF], [CROSSREF]
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wild T. C., Newton-Taylor B., gborne A. C., Mann R., Erickson P., Macdonald S. Attitudes toward compulsory substance abuse treatment: A comparison of the public, counselors, probationers and judges' views. Drugs-Educ. Prev. Policy 2001; 8(1)33–45, [CSA], [CROSSREF], [CROSSREF]
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wild T. C., Roberts A. B., Cooper E. L. Compulsory substance abuse treatment: An overview of recent findings and issues. Eur. Addict. Res. 2002; 8(2)84–93, [PUBMED], [INFOTRIEVE], [CSA], [CROSSREF], [CROSSREF]
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Young D. Impacts of perceived legal pressure on retention in drug treatment. Criminal Justice and Behavior 2002; 29(1)27–55, [CSA], [CROSSREF], [CROSSREF]
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Young D., Belenko S. Program retention and perceived coercion in three models of mandatory drug treatment. J. Drug Issues 2002; Winter 2002: 297–328
   Google Scholar
• Zarkin G. A., Dunlap L. J., Bray J. W., Wechsberg W. M. The effect of treatment completion and length of stay on employment and crime in outpatient drug-free treatment. J. Subst. Abuse Treat. 2002; 23: 261–271., [PUBMED], [INFOTRIEVE], [CSA]
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar