No one written off? Welfare, work and problem drug use

References

• Bean P. Drugs and crime, 2nd. Willan, Collumpton 2004
   Google Scholar
• Bennett T, Holloway K. Chain reaction. Druglink 2008; 23: 6–7
   Google Scholar
• Buchanan J, Young L. Failing to grasp the nettle: UK Drug Policy. Probation Journal 1998; 45: 220–222
   Google Scholar
• Callinicos A. Against the third way. Polity Press, Cambridge 2001
   Google Scholar
• Carlen P. Women, crime and poverty. Open University Press, Buckingham 1988
   Google Scholar
• Cebulla, A., Heaver, C., Smith, A., & Sutton, L. (2004), Drug and alcohol use as barriers to employment. (Final report, CRSP 470S). Centre for Research in Social Policy.
   Google Scholar
• Cebulla A, Smith A, Sutton L. Returning to normality: Substance users’ work histories and perceptions of work during and after recovery. British Journal of Social Work 2004; 34: 1045–1054
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deacon A. Justifying conditionality: The case of anti-social tenants. Housing Studies 2004; 19: 911–926
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DWP (2003). Housing benefit sanctions and anti-social behaviour: A consultation paper. London: Department for Work and Pensions.
   Google Scholar
• DWP (2006). Welfare Reform Bill 2006–Regulatory Impact Assessment. Retrieved November 20, 2008 from http://www.dwp.gov.uk/welfarereform/docs/WelfareReformRIA.pdf
   Google Scholar
• DWP (2007). £2 Billion investment for jobs and skills, Press Release, September 4.
   Google Scholar
• Department of Social Security. A new contract for welfare (Green Paper) Cmd 3818. Stationery Office, London 1998
   Google Scholar
• Eley S. Job searching with a history of drugs and crime. The Howard Jounral 2007; 46(2)162–175
   Google Scholar
• Finch E, Ashton M. Treatment to order. The new drug treatment and testing orders. Heroin addiction and the British system. Volume 2. Treatment and policy responses, J Strang, M Gossop. Routledge, London 2005
   Google Scholar
• Flint J, Nixon J. Governing neighbours: Anti-social behaviour orders and new forms of regulating conduct in the UK. Urban Studies 2006; 43: 939–995
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Freud D. Reducing dependency, increasing opportunity: Options for the future of welfare to work. An independent report to the Department for Work and Pensions. Corporate Document Services, Leeds 2006
   Google Scholar
• Furlong A. Not a very NEET solution: Representing problematic labour market transitions among early school leavers. Work, Employment and Society 2006; 20: 553–569
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grover C. Crime and inequality. Willan, Cullompton 2008
   Google Scholar
• Grover C, Stewart J. The work connection: The role of social security in regulating British economic life. Palgrave, Basingstoke 2002
   Google Scholar
• Gyngell K. The 2008 Drug Strategy. The continuing nationalisation of addiction. Centre for Policy Studies, London 2008
   Google Scholar
• Hammersley R. Drugs and crime. Polity Press, Cambridge 2008
   Google Scholar
• Harris P. Empathy for the devil how to help people overcome drug and alcohol problems. Russell House Publishing, Lyme Regis 2007
   Google Scholar
• Hay, G. and Bauld, L. (2008). Population estimates of problematic drug users in England who access DWP benefits: A feasibility study (Working Paper No. 46). London: Department for Work and Pensions.
   Google Scholar
• Home Office. Drugs: Protecting families and communities. Home Office, London 2008
   Google Scholar
• Hutton, J. (2006). The Active welfare state: Matching rights and responsibilities, speech to the Work Foundation, 16 January. Retrieved November 20, 2008, from http://www.dwp.gov.uk/aboutus/2006/16_01_06.asp
   Google Scholar
• Jowell T. Tackling the ‘poverty of aspiration’ through the rebuilding of the Public Realm. London, DEMOS 2005, Retrieved November 20, 2008, from http://www.demos.co.uk/files/tessajowellpublicrealmessay.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Joyce, L., & Whiting, K. (2006). Sanctions: Qualitative summary report on lone parent customers, Department for Work and Pensions (Working Paper No. 27), Leeds: Corporate Document Services.
   Google Scholar
• Kemp PA, Neale J. Employability and Problem Drug users. Critical Social Policy 2005; 25: 46
   Google Scholar
• Klee H, McLean I, Yavorsky C. Employing drug users. Joseph Rowntree Foundation, York 2002
   Google Scholar
• Knepper P. Criminology and social policy. Sage, London 2007
   Google Scholar
• Levitas R. The Concept of social exclusion and the new Durkheimian Hegemony. Critical Social Policy 1996; 16: 5–20
   Google Scholar
• Levitas R. The inclusive society? social exclusion and new labour. Macmillan, Basingstoke 1998
   Google Scholar
• Lewandowski C, Hill T. The impact of foster care and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) on women's drug treatment outcomes. Children and Youth Services Review 2008; 30: 942–954
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lister R. From equality to social inclusion: New labour and the welfare state. Critical Social Policy 1998; 18(2)215–25
   Google Scholar
• Longshore D, Prendergast M, Farabee D. Coerced treatment for drug-using criminal offenders. Drug treatment–what works?, P Bean, T Nemitz. Routledge, Abingdon 2004
   Google Scholar
• MacCoun R. Drugs and the law: A Psychological Analysis of Drug prohibition. Psychological Bulletin 1993; 113(3)497–512
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marlowe DB, Kirby KC, Bonieskie LM, Glass DJ, Dodd LD, Husband SO, et al. Assessment of coercive and noncoercive pressures to enter drug abuse treatment. Drug and Alcohol Dependence 1996; 42: 77–84
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McSweeney T, Hough M, Turnbull PJ. Drugs and Crime: Exploring the Links. Drugs in Britain, M Simpson, T Shildrick, R McDonald. Palgrave, Basingstoke 2007
   Google Scholar
• Millburn A. Inequality, mobility and opportunity: The politics of aspiration 2004, Retrieved November 20, 2008, from http://www.ippr.org/articles/index.asp?id=484
   Google Scholar
• Muncie J, Hughes G. Modes of youth governance: Political rationalities, criminlization and resistance. Youth justice. critical readings, J Muncie, G Hughes, E McLaughlin. Sage, London 2002
   Google Scholar
• National Statistics. Statistics from the national Drug Treatment Monitoring System (NDTMS) 1 April 2007-31 March 2008. National Statistics, London 2008
   Google Scholar
• Neale J. Drug users in society. Palgrave, Basingstoke 2002
   Google Scholar
• Nixon J, Hunter C. Taking a stand against anti-social behaviour?, No, not in these shoes 2004, Retrieved March 20, 2007, from www.york.ac.uk/inst/chp/hsa/papers/spring%2004/Nixon&Hunter.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Pawson H, Davidson E, Lederle N. Housing associations’ use of anti-social behaviour powers (Sector Study 59). Housing Corporation, London 2007
   Google Scholar
• Paylor I. Social work and drug use. Social work: An introduction to contemporary practice, K Wilson, G Ruch, M Lymbery, A Cooper, S Becker, A Brammer, et al. Pearson Longman, Harlow 2008
   Google Scholar
• Paylor I, Measham F, Wilson A. Social work and drug use. Open University Press, Buckingham, forthcoming
   Google Scholar
• Peck J, Theodore N. Beyond employability. Cambridge Journal of Economics 2000; 24: 729–749
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prendergast ML, Farabee D, Cartier J, Henkin S. Involuntary treatment within a prison setting: Impact on psychosocial change during treatment. Criminal Justice and Behaviour 2002; 29: 5–27
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rodger J. Antisocial families and withholding welfare support. Critical Social Policy 2006; 26: 121–143
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rolles S. Reaction from the experts. Druglink 2008; 23(2)2
   Google Scholar
• Schmidt L, McCarty D. Welfare reform and the changing landscape of substance abuse services for low-income women. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research 2000; 24: 1298–1311
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schur EM. Crimes without victims: Deviant behaviour and public policy-abortion, homosexuality, drug addiction. Prentice-Hall, New Jersey 1965
   Google Scholar
• Secretary of State for Work and Pensions. Department for Work and Pensions Five Year Strategy. Opportunity and security throughout life, Cm 6447. The Stationery Office, Norwich 2005
   Google Scholar
• Secretary of State for Work and Pensions. No one written off: Reforming welfare to reward responsibility, Cm 7363. The Stationery Office, Norwich 2008a
   Google Scholar
• Secretary of State for Work and Pensions. Raising expectations and increasing support: Reforming welfare for the future, Cm 7506. The Stationery Office, London 2008b
   Google Scholar
• Seddon T. Explaining the drug-crime link: Theoretical, policy and research issues. Journal of Social Policy 2000; 29: 95–107
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seddon T. Drugs, crime and social exclusion: Social context and social theory in British drugs-crime rersearch. British Journal of Criminology 2006; 46: 680–703
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seddon T, Ralphs R, Williams L. Risk, security and the criminalisation of British drug policy. British Journal of Criminology 2008; 48: 818–834
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shapiro H. Editorial. Druglink 2008; 23(2)1
   Google Scholar
• Smith C, Young D. The multiple impacts of TANF, ASFA, and Mandatory Drug Sentencing for Families Affected by Maternal Incarceration. Children and Youth Services Review 2003; 25: 535–552
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stevens A. When two dark figures collide: Evidence and discourse on drug-related crime. Critical Social Policy 2007; 27(1)77–99
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thane P. Women and the Poor Law. History Workshop Journal 1978; 6: 29–51
   Google Scholar
• Wild TC, Newton-Taylor B, Alletto R. Perceived coercion among clients entering substance abuse treatment: Structural and psychological determinants. Addictive Behaviors 1998; 23: 81–95
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Young N. Alcohol and other drugs: The scope of the problem among pregnant and parenting women in California. Journal of Pyschoactive Drugs 1997; 29: 3–22
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar