Legal Pressure and Treatment Retention in a National Sample of Long-Term Residential Programs

Abstract

This study examined the association between legal pressure and treatment retention in a national sample of 2,605 clients admitted to 18 long-term residential facilities that participated in the Drug Abuse Treatment Outcome Study (DATOS). Hierarchical linear models were used to assess the relationship of background factors and legal pressure with treatment participation for 90 days or longer. Two thirds of the sample entered residential treatment with moderate to high pressure from legal authorities, and they were significantly more likely than the low-pressure clients to stay 90 days or more. Moreover, the difference in retention between moderate-to-high-and low-pressure clients was even greater in programs with proportionally larger caseloads under legal surveillance. The criminal justice system (CJS) can influence treatment participation and retention, and it appears essential for the CJS and treatment programs to maintain an open and constructive relationship to maximize their potential combined impact.

The National Criminal Justice Treatment Practices survey: Multilevel survey methods and procedures

“…In contrast, research on programs and services for offenders is dominated by individual studies that present a collage of findings and only small glimmers of insight into the characteristics of effective programs. Examples include residential drug treatment programs (Hiller, Knight, Broome, & Simpson, 1998;Inciardi, 1999;Knight, Simpson, & Hiller, 1999;Martin, Butzin, Saum, & Inciardi, 1999;Pearson & Lipton, 1999;Simpson, Wexler, & Inciardi, 1999;Wexler & Melnick, 1999), drug courts (Belenko, 2002;Marlowe, DeMatteo, & Festinger, 2003;Marlowe, Festinger, Lee, Dugosh, & Benasutti, 2006;Taxman & Bouffard, 2002Wenzel, Longshore, Turner, & Ridgley, 2001), and community supervision (Taxman, 2002;Taxman & Thanner, 2006;Thanner & Taxman, 2003;Sherman et al, 1997). The collage is incomplete, and our knowledge of effective offender treatment, particularly in system-related issues, lags far behind the general treatment field (Farabee, Prendergast, & Anglin, 1998).…”

Comparing Outcomes of ‘Voluntary’ and ‘Quasi-Compulsory’ Treatment of Substance Dependence in Europe

“…In general, studies -predominately from English-speaking countriestend to agree that QCT can be effective in reducing substance use and crime, and that it can improve health and social integration. They suggest that QCT is at least as effective as voluntary treatment [15][16][17][18][19] and that legal compulsion can improve retention in treatment [20,21] . Longer retention has repeatedly been associated with improved outcome [22][23][24][25][26] .…”

The Relationship between Legal Status, Perceived Pressure and Motivation in Treatment for Drug Dependence: Results from a European Study of Quasi-Compulsory Treatment

“…It has been argued that this 'can at least partly be traced to conceptual and methodological problems in the research', which has not suffi ciently recognised the diversity of treatment settings and types of coercion [16] . Recent studies have tended to suggest that legal pressure can predict better retention [17] , especially when factors such as previous criminal history are taken into account [18] . One of the conceptual confusions that has hindered previous research in this area is on the difference between legal status and perceived coercion [16,19,20] .…”