Assessing UK drug policy from a crime control perspective

Reuter, Peter; Stevens, Alex

doi:10.1177/1748895808096473

Cited by 25 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Like the Johnson‐era report (Commission, ), today's commission would emphasize the limits of enforcement to address the complex problems associated with drug abuse. It might even note what other countries have acknowledged, namely, that there are no “solutions” to the drug problem, just as there is none to the crime problem (Hughes and Stevens, ; Reuter and Stevens, ). Law enforcement will remain an important component of addressing problematic use of intoxicants.…”

Section: What Might a Similar Commission Today Recommend For Both Prmentioning

confidence: 99%

Narcotics and Drug Abuse

Pardo

Reuter

2018

Criminology & Public Policy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fifty years ago, the U.S. President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice saw drugs as a modest but growing problem for the criminal justice system. The reemergence of heroin occupied the Commission's attention. Many recommendations are admirable, such as a focus on public health interventions and a concern about the appropriateness of criminal prohibitions on marijuana use. Throughout the past 50 years, the problem has both massively expanded and changed in many ways; the principal drug of abuse has shifted multiple times, as has the populations most affected by them. Policy, largely stuck on tough enforcement for 30 years, is now moving in a direction more consistent with the Commission's views. Researchers have made only modest advances in understanding what enforcement can do to reduce drug use and related problems, but society has made some progress in developing interventions that have both a sound theoretical base and the promise of avoiding the unintended negative consequences of the highly punitive system of the 1980s and 1990s. A Commission in 2018 would face a much different and larger problem that has transformed many aspects of criminal justice. Investing in more data collection and evaluation research would be among its major recommendations, as would an admission of considerable uncertainty about what to do with the latest twist in the U.S. drug problem, the addition of the much more dangerous fentanyls.

show abstract

Section: What Might a Similar Commission Today Recommend For Both Prmentioning

confidence: 99%

Narcotics and Drug Abuse

Pardo

Reuter

2018

Criminology & Public Policy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…41 A number of previous studies suggest that drug treatment impacts favourably on reducing levels of offending. 34,42,43 Evaluation of DIP indicates that levels of offending are reduced following contact with the programme, 44 although the evidence for this is weak.…”

Section: Rationale For This Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Hayhurst

Leitner

Davies

et al. 2015

Health Technology Assessment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe societal costs of problematic class A drug use in England and Wales exceed £15B; drug-related crime accounts for almost 90% of costs. Diversion plus treatment and/or aftercare programmes may reduce drug-related crime and costs.ObjectivesTo assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of diversion and aftercare for class A drug-using offenders, compared with no diversion.PopulationAdult class A drug-using offenders diverted to treatment or an aftercare programme for their drug use.InterventionsProgrammes to identify and divert problematic drug users to treatment (voluntary, court mandated or monitored services) at any point within the criminal justice system (CJS). Aftercare follows diversion and treatment, excluding care following prison or non-diversionary drug treatment.Data sourcesThirty-three electronic databases and government online resources were searched for studies published between January 1985 and January 2012, including MEDLINE, PsycINFO and ISI Web of Science. Bibliographies of identified studies were screened. The UK Drug Data Warehouse, the UK Drug Treatment Outcomes Research Study and published statistics and reports provided data for the economic evaluation.MethodsIncluded studies evaluated diversion in adult class A drug-using offenders, in contact with the CJS. The main outcomes were drug use and offending behaviour, and these were pooled using meta-analysis. The economic review included full economic evaluations for adult opiate and/or crack, or powder, cocaine users. An economic decision analytic model, estimated incremental costs per unit of outcome gained by diversion and aftercare, over a 12-month time horizon. The perspectives included the CJS, NHS, social care providers and offenders. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis and one-way sensitivity analysis explored variance in parameter estimates, longer time horizons and structural uncertainty.ResultsSixteen studies met the effectiveness review inclusion criteria, characterised by poor methodological quality, with modest sample sizes, high attrition rates, retrospective data collection, limited follow-up, no random allocation and publication bias. Most study samples comprised US methamphetamine users. Limited meta-analysis was possible, indicating a potential small impact of diversion interventions on reducing drug use [odds ratio (OR) 1.68, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.12 to 2.53 for reduced primary drug use, and OR 2.60, 95% CI 1.70 to 3.98 for reduced use of other drugs]. The cost-effectiveness review did not identify any relevant studies. The economic evaluation indicated high uncertainty because of variance in data estimates and limitations in the model design. The primary analysis was unclear whether or not diversion was cost-effective. The sensitivity analyses indicated some scenarios where diversion may be cost-effective.LimitationsNearly all participants (99.6%) in the effectiveness review were American (Californian) methamphetamine users, limiting transfer of conclusions to the UK. Data and methodological limitations mean it is unclear whether or not diversion is effective or cost-effective.ConclusionsHigh-quality evidence for the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of diversion schemes is sparse and does not relate to the UK. Importantly this research identified a range of methodological limitations in existing evidence. These highlight the need for research to conceptualise, define and develop models of diversion programmes and identify a core outcome set. A programme of feasibility, pilot and definitive trials, combined with process evaluation and qualitative research is recommended to assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of diversionary interventions in class A drug-using offenders.Funding detailsThe National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

show abstract

“…Between 1993 and 2003, the average length of custodial sentences for drugs offences increased by a quarter, while that for burglary increased by more than half (Home Office, 2005). As more people were sent to prison for longer, drug offences attracted nearly three times as much prison time in 2004 than they had ten years earlier (Reuter and Stevens, 2008).…”

Section: Drug Policy and The Culture Of Controlmentioning

confidence: 99%

British Drug Policy and the Modern State: Reconsidering the Criminalisation Thesis

Shiner

2013

J. Soc. Pol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent developments in the drug field have prompted claims that criminal justice has displaced health from its formerly dominant position and have also been used to support general claims about the criminalisation of social policy. This article critically assesses such claims and offers an alternative interpretation, arguing that British drug policy has been shaped and reshaped by the broader workings of the modern state. Early controls reflected the influence of medicine and public health over emerging forms of state interventionism, while subsequent arrangements were consistent with the penal-welfare tradition that dominated criminal justice for much of the last century. More recently, it is the transformation of this tradition that has played a key role in reshaping the drug field, producing evidence of both continuity and change. What others have attributed to ‘criminalisation’, therefore, is said to reflect broader changes in the nature of criminal justice itself. Whilst the transformation of penal-welfarism helps to explain the development of more punitive and coercive forms of drug control, this is only part of the story. As with criminal justice more generally, the limitations of the sovereign state have given rise to various adaptive strategies and it is here that considerable continuity can be seen, particularly in relation to the on-going importance of drug treatment and harm reduction.

show abstract

Assessing UK drug policy from a crime control perspective

Cited by 25 publications

References 44 publications

Narcotics and Drug Abuse

Narcotics and Drug Abuse

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

British Drug Policy and the Modern State: Reconsidering the Criminalisation Thesis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About