Drug treatment grads more likely to reoffend

[George_S]

EDIT (spelled gooder): Already they are trying to convince the nation to give up on this. It won't be long before some druggie does something stupid, like a robbery or something, and they will throw the baby out with the water. It never fails. Oh, no, it's not perfect! Scrap it!

CALIFORNIA
Drug treatment grads more likely to reoffend
Rearrest rate 48% higher than for those put in jail, study finds

Cicero A. Estrella, Chronicle Staff Writer

Friday, November 26, 2004


Drug offenders steered into treatment programs instead of jail under provisions set by Proposition 36 in 2000 were more likely to be rearrested for drug-related crimes than defendants who went through non-Prop. 36 treatments, according to a study released today.

UCLA researcher David Farabee said that Prop. 36 participants were 48 percent more likely to be rearrested for drug-related crimes within a year of starting treatment.

Prop. 36, the Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act, places first- and second-time nonviolent drug offenders into county-supervised drug treatment programs instead of jails and prisons. Its supporters argued in 2000 that incarceration without rehabilitation only worsened the drug epidemic and that inmates often developed harsher drug habits.
...

Farabee said the gap in recidivism rates might be attributed to under treatment.

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/11/26/BAG60A1QLH1.DTL

[Fovea]

1. 48 percent more likely to be rearrested

Or, perhaps arrest is a poor indicator of use. In jail they learn how to properly hide and dispose of drugs.

They also learn how to intimidate possible stool pidgeons.

Folks out of treatment too soon might even attempt re-arrest to get back into treatment...


More great science from the media whores.

[depakid]

2. I couldn't have said it better

touche'

It never fails to amaze me how the American media latches onto stories or press releases without the slightest critical thought.

[jamesinca]

3. Going to rehab does not help

It does not help unless you want to be there. To give a court ordered rehab is almost senseless. The person does not want to change at that point, they have to hit bottom before that desire to change sets in usually. Unless the court ordered rehab of prop 36 had some mind changing component to it I am surprised that it has only a 48% recidivism rate.

People who go to AA voluntarily have lapses at times, and AA is considered one of the best things out there for rehab. A lot of the steps in the AA program are used in other programs too.

One has to ask, do we really want to clean up drug abuse in this country? What is the point of the war on nouns, I mean drugs? From his book "The Culture of Fear; Why Americans are Afraid of the Wrong Things" Barry Glassner addresses the fear of drugs, specifically street drugs. He states:
"Federal drug enforcement, a $6 million expense in the 1960s, passed the $1billion mark in the mid-1980s during Ronald Reagan's presidency and more than $17 billion during Bill Clinton's. Throughout the 1980s and 1990s, an era of budget cutting and distaste for Big Government, agencies involved in drug control were about the only places within the federal government to grow.

The money has been spent almost exclusively on curbing illegal drugs, a curious policy given that abuse of legal drugs is a huge problem. More Americans use legal drugs for nonmedical reasons than use cocaine or heroin; hundreds of millions of prescription pills are used illicitly each year. More than half of those who die of drug-related medical problems or seek treatment for those problems are abusing prescription drugs. By the American Medical Association's own estimates one in twenty doctors is grossly negligent in prescribing drugs, and according to the Drug Enforcement Agency, at least 15,000 doctors sell prescriptions to addicts and pushers. Yet less than 1 percent of the nation's antidrug budget goes to stopping prescription drug abuse.

The gargantuan disparity in spending reflects-and is perpetuated by-what the nation's media and political leaders have chosen to focus on. Scares about heroin, cocaine, and marijuana issue forth continually from politicians and journalist. But except for burps when a celebrity overdoses, they have been largely silent about the abuse of legal drugs"

[George_S]

4. having to "hit bottom" is a myth.

Not everyone has lose everything or even a lot to want to quit. That is why the rate is not higher. As the rest of the article explains, many counties don't have a good program implemented yet, and some that are aren't up to par. Also...

"Proposition 36 ordered treatment instead of jail for some drug offenders. Prop 36 saved $275 million dollars in the first year according to a July 2003 UCLA study. Treatment rather than jail does save money. Another positive note: Arnold Schwartznegger has appointed Jeanne Woodford as new head of the California Department of Corrections. California has a 70% recividism rate (return to jail rate), the highest in the nation. The hope is that Ms. Woodford, who ran San Quentin, the most humanitarian prison in California, will implement policies that will result in less prisoners returning to jail."

Liberals gave up and compassionate conservatism is filling the void.

[jamesinca]

9. I think they usually have to hit bottom

Maybe that was a poor choice of words. There has to be something that makes them want to change, IMO. If that is not there then there is no reason to change. I personally don't feel a court order will be the reason for change, in some people it may be though.

In any case I agree that rehab is better than jail time.

[jdj]

12. when 12 step started, "bottom" meant homeless in the alley

pissing on yourself. Nowadays, the bottom has been raised considerably, and having spent over a decade in AA and NA I can say that most people don't go that far down before cleaning up. Some relapse of course, and some never get clean...that's the nature of addiction. Since we are paying something like $40,000 a year per person to keep people in jail, it might be wise to send folks to a treatment center instead.

Unless the Bush admin is spinning this to use federal money on "faith-based" Wackenhut run prisons.

[leanin_green]

5. I'm One of the 52% that didn't.

When your in treatment you are told that only 1 in 5 will actually staty clean. Not good odds, but, the teaching stays with you and even those who return to their habits don't do it with the same abandon and the bottom comes faster. Believe me, treatment for the first two offenses is still a better way to go. Like you say, if you want it, maybe by the second time you'll want to be there.

GOING ON TWELVE YEARS CLEAN!!!!

[Tikki]

7. Thank you, leanin_green....

We also have a family member who is one of the 52%ers....

Clean and Sober One Year+ Two Months.

[They_LIHOP]

13. Congrats 2 both of you...

From someone who's out there, wishes to god that they'd never left, and will be joining you again soon ... easy does it!

[2Design]

15. catch a meeting in the next week - I dare you

[rppper]

14. right on the money LG.....

actually it's about a 30% success rate...give or take 5%. the right hates rehabs...always have and always will....i am a drug and alcohol councelor in florida...i work at a non profit center. florida has it's own separate systems of drug courts to deal with addicts, generally an 18 month program of court dates, mandatory attendence to AA or NA meetings, daily and weekly urinalysis, etc, etc....it is actually a prety fair program...almost a 3 strikes set-up. during your time in the drug courts you can opt for treatment centers. about 40% of our people come ordered from court this way, the rest being volunteers.

there is really no way to tell whether or not the court ordered clients or the vol's do better...it is about the same as i have seen. the court ordered client tend to stay clean for their drug court time, but often relapse after. by the same token, many of the volenteers leave and take up right where they left off, and i have seen very few who didn't have at least one relapse before they got it all together. i have also seen people with 25 years of sobriety fall as well.....

you are always an addict once you become an addict.

probably the best thing i have seen is that people who have relapsed after attending a program seem to put the brakes on it faster and get help before they have fallen too far. sometimes it takes a few relapses to get it together...it's the nature of the beast...it is not a science.....

go to meetings, get a sponsor...practice the steps...it has worked for untold millions....

[leanin_green]

16. I'm reminded of the story. . .

of an interview with a Father Paul from the monastary in Big Sir, CA.
He was asked that if Jesus returned to modern day America where he might be found. His reply? Probably in an AA meeting.

There is honesty among us reform(ing) drunks and addicts. We know all the covers and ways to fool ourselves. I myself suffer from "terminal uniqueness." Not unheard of in our circles. And they_LIHOP, keep coming back. Get the help you need and remember, your not alone and your not unique to the problem, we inherit it and it's more about the way we handle our life problems. Drinking and using are no longer an option for us. We have to learn new methods. It can be done, believe me. LOL

[Jackpine Radical]

6. From reading the report, it's not clear when the start the clock

on the incarcerated people. The Prop 36 people get measured from the onset of treatment. Does the jailed group start on the clock at the beginning of their jail sentences?

In other words, arte they comparing the reoffending rates of people in jail with those loose on the streets? If so, it doesn't take a lot of sophistication to guess that people are more likely to reoffend when out of jail than when inside.

Whoopee.

[George_S]

8. Or it's harder to get caught while imprisoned...

... even though law enforcement per capita there is higher than anywhere.

[Jackpine Radical]

10. When you get caught in jail, you get sanctioned--

not re-arrested.

[jdj]

11. two very important points from article:

"Seventy-five percent of Prop. 36 participants with severe drug problems were placed in outpatient programs instead of more intensive residential care, compared with 71 percent for non-Prop. 36 criminal cases and 56 percent for noncriminal cases."

also, it only followed the first six months:

"Judith Appel, attorney with the Drug Policy Alliance in Oakland, says the window for Farabee's research was too narrow to draw any long-term conclusions.

"The first six months doesn't really give an indication of what's happened with Prop. 36," said Appel, who wrote an opposing commentary to Farabee's findings, which were published today in Criminology and Public Policy. "Many of the counties hadn't even gotten their programs off the ground. "

I was under the impression that treatment is cheaper, however, outpatient treatment doesn't make any sense whatsoever in place of jail, that's like letting someone walk.

[Mandate My Ass]

17. They're expected to re-offend in treatment

and especially during the first few months. This article is crap. Court mandated treatment is usually a year to year and a half or longer. That's because they have to break the physical addiction to get to the client's emotional triggers and deactivate them. They're then given the psychiatric and life skills assistance that enables them to give it up for good. I've met some of these people and when they became empowered rather than punished, they got sober.

Almost none became an addict in a six-month period, they're certainly not going to be "cured" in that amount of time either.