Best Practices in Substance Abuse Treatment for Offenders – Research Paper Example

Download full paperFile format: .doc, available for editing

The paper "Best Practices in Substance Abuse Treatment for Offenders" is an excellent example of a research paper on sociology. Over the years, research has been conducted to establish the best practice(s) in the treatment of offenders in substance abuse. This paper will review Pearce & Holbrook (2002) paper on “ Research findings and best practices in substance abuse treatment for offenders. The structure of the paper will follow Purpose of the study, theories of drug abuse treatment used, research participants, methodology, i.e. data gathering procedures and respective model findings.

It will also look at its contribution to the general topic, limitations and how they can be addressed in future research in addition to evaluation of the limitations and strengths of the research before finally concluding. This review uses terms that shall be referenced as they are used. The major findings of the paper concluded that there is no single effective programme that can be applied to the (AOD Alcohol and other drug-involved offenders’ rehabilitation. Purpose of the study The purpose of this study was to summarize the findings and best practices in the treatment of substance and drug abuse by offenders. Theories of drug abuse treatment There are two main theories of drug treatment used by the researchers that are either applied as single models or in combined form.

The disease theory proposes drug abuse and addiction to be a primary illness chronic in nature and described in three parts: physical, spiritual and mental. It is based on teaching the addicts coping skills for the illness throughout life by abstaining from them. The second theory, Social learning theory by Albert Bandura, holds that drug addiction can be treated by teaching and reinforcing acceptable pro-social behaviour.

Offenders learn drug abuse from the social arena which is later reinforced by the benefits derived from it such as pleasure and euphoric feelings. Treatments based on this model include reducing the availability of substances through restricted access, interdiction, and treatment (Parks et al. , 1999). Research participants The research participants in these researches were mainly (AOD offenders from correctional facilities: prison and jails in areas where the particular studies were carried out such as Texas, New York, New Jersey, Delaware and California. The population comprised both males and females of both high and low-risk offences out of prison with the varied duration from release date and in others in prison. MethodologyThe researches employed different tools and instruments in collecting data.

Screening, assessment and individual treatment planning was used where individuals were screened and assessed before being placed in the programs. Screening is the initial activity that identifies offenders likely to be having AOD problems whereas assessment is a process that helps determine an individual’ s problem with alcohol and other drugs and appropriate level of treatment (Pearce & Holbrook 2002).


Andrews, A., Bonta, J., & Hoge, R. (1990). Classification for Effective Rehabilitation: Rediscovering Psychology. Criminal Justice and Behavior. 17, 19-52.

Anglin, M.D., & Hser, Y. (1991). Treatment of Drug Abuse. In Tonry, M. & Wilson, J. (eds.), Drugs and Crime. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Bryant, J., Etheridge, R., &Hubbard, L. (2000). Process Evaluation Of The RSAT State Alliance For Recovery and General Education (SARGE) Program, Draft Report.

Butzin, C. A., Scarpitti, F., Nielsen, L., Martin, S., & Inciardi., J. (1999). Measuring the Impact of Drug Treatment; Beyond Relapse and Recidivism. Corrections Management Quarterly, 3 (4), pp. 1-7.

CSAT (1995). Planning for Alcohol and Other Drug Abuse Treatment for Adults in the Criminal Justice System. U. S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.

Harrell, A. (2001). The Impact of Jacksonville’s breaking the Cycle Demonstration on Drug Use and Crime: Findings from Offender Interviews. Urban Institute Report.

Hubbard, R., Collins, J., Rachal, V., & Cavanaugh, R. (1988). The Criminal Justice Client in Drug Abuse Treatment. In C.G. Leukefel and F.M. Tims (eds.), Compulsory Treatment of Drug Abuse: Research and Clinical Practice. Research Monograph Series 86. Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse.

Kennedy, S. (1999) The BTC Review, Issue 2. U. S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice.

Lightfoot, L., & Hodgins, D. (1988). A survey of Alcohol and Drug Problems in Incarcerated Candian Offenders. International Journal of the Addictions. 23 (7), 687-706.

MacKenzie, D., & Hickman, L. (1998). What Works in Corrections? An Examination of the Effectiveness of the Type of Rehabilitation Programs Offered by Washington State Department of Corrections. University of Maryland.

Parks, G., & Marlatt, A. (1999), Keeping “What Works” Working: Cognitive Behavioral Relapse Prevention Therapy with Substance Abusing Offenders. In Latessa (ed) Strategic Solutions: The International Community Corrections Association Examines Substance Abuse. American Correctional Association.

Pearce, S., & Holbrook, D. (2002) Research Findings And Best Practices In Substance Abuse Treatment For Offenders. North Carolina Department of Correction Substance Abuse Advisory Council

Simpson, D., Knight, L. (1997). Research Focus of the IBR at TCU. Research Summary, Special Issue April, 1997.

Taxman, F. (1998). Reducing Recidivism Through a Seamless System of Care: Components of Effective Treatment, Supervision, and Transition Services in the Community. Office of National Drug Control Policy Conference. Washington, D.C.

Download full paperFile format: .doc, available for editing
Contact Us