Attitudes Toward Compulsory Substance Abuse Treatment: A Comparison of the Public, Counselors, Probationers and Judges' Views

• NCJ Number: 186944
• Journal: Drugs: Education, Prevention and Policy Volume: 8 Issue: 1 Dated: February 2001 Pages: 33-45
• Author(s): T. Cameron Wild; Brenda Newton-Taylor; Alan C. Ogborne; Robert Mann; Patricia Erickson; Scott Macdonald
• Date Published: February 2001
• Length: 13 pages
• Publication Format: Article
• Publication Type: Report (Study/Research)
• Language: English
• Country: United Kingdom

Annotation

This study compares the public's, counselors', probationers', and judges' views regarding compulsory substance abuse treatment.

Abstract

The study included a representative sample (N = 994) and convenience samples of substance abuse counselors (N = 700), probationers (N = 35), and judges (N = 89). All participants believed that compulsory substance abuse treatment is less effective than voluntary treatment and most justified only for individuals whose substance abuse was associated with serious crimes and impaired job performance. The general public reported significantly greater support for compulsory treatment and expected forced treatment to help significantly more individuals, compared to probationers and substance abuse counselors. Judges and the general public were significantly less likely to respect client choices about engaging in treatment compared to probationers and substance abuse counselors. Based on these findings, the study suggests that broad implementation of compulsory substance abuse treatment policies and programs would not be uniformly supported across key stakeholders. The article discusses implications of the findings for substance abuse policy, programming, and theory. Tables, notes, references