Enforced Clinic Treatment of Paroled Criminal Alcoholics; a Pilot Evaluation

Treating the Problem Drinking Driver: Some Notes on the Time Required to Achieve Impact

“…While our data support the contention that a minimum of six months involvement in outpatient treatment appears optimal to achieve client impact, we certainly do not contend that six months involvement is necessary or sufficient for all problem drinkers. Nonetheless, it is interesting to note that our findings are in line with those of Gallant et al (1968) who examined the effectiveness of voluntary versus compulsory outpatient treatment of criminal alcoholics. Using six months as the minimum amount of time in treatment required of compulsory patients, the outcome differences between the compulsory and voluntary patients are startling: 4 of the 10 compulsory patients as compared to 1 of the 9 voluntary patients voluntarily chose to continue treatment beyond six months, 5 of the 10 compulsory patients as compared to none of the voluntary patients had achieved complete abstinence at the end of one year and, most impressive, only 2 of the 10 compulsory patients as compared to 7 of the 9 voluntary patients ran afoul of the law with 7 of the compulsory patients as compared to none of the voluntary patients being essentially abstinent and working in the community at the end of one year.…”

Treatment of Alcoholic Violent Offenders: Ethics and Efficacy

“…Brewer and Smith (1983) reported optimistically on a similar project in London with smaller numbers and a shorter follow-up period. On the other hand, Gallant et al (1968) found less success in a group of 84 habitual drunken offenders. Supervised disulfiram was one of four treatment conditions studied and while the small numbers of subjects in each group means that the 'no difference between groups' result cannot be readily interpreted, the overall success rate in terms of subsequent drinking and reconviction was very low in all groups including the disulfiram groups.…”

“…(In that study, the comparison group, while from the same range of social classes, were not necessarily offenders.) Gallant et al (1968) found that amongst clinic patients, those who were on parole from gaol after imprisonment for an alcohol-related offence attended out-patient treatment more regularly and had fewer troubles with the law than the routine voluntary patients of the clinic.…”

The Portland, Oregon ASAP : an evaluation of treatment effectiveness

“…In another evaluative study of mandated treatment, 19 parolees who had conunitted alcohol related crimes were randomly assigned to two groups (Gallant, Faulkner, Stoy, Bishop, & Langdon, 1968). The first group consisted of those who, as a condition of parole, participated in individual counseling for 6 months, with an option of an additional 6 months.…”