Skip to main content
Log in

Provision of drug treatment services in the juvenile justice system: A system reform

  • Articles
  • Published:
The Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article proposes a systemic reform of the organizational structure and delivery of substance abuse services for adolescents within the juvenile justice system. It first discusses the impact of substance use on the juvenile justice system and then reviews which drug treatment programs and services are currently available. Following an evaluation of the most effective drug treatment programs and modalities, recommendations for system reform are given. The recommendations are based on a graduated sanctions framework, supported by systems collaboration and comprehensive case management. Systems collaboration between service providers must exist for juveniles to receive appropriate and comprehensive services. Case managers (CMs) both assess juveniles and help them move through and between judicial, drug treatment, and social service systems. In this way, juveniles receive the most suitable and complete services a community can offer while remaining firmly under juvenile justice system supervision.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. McBride DC, McCoy CB: The drugs-crime relationship: An analytical framework.The Prison Journal 1993; 73:257–278.

    Google Scholar 

  2. National Institute of Justice:Drug Use Forecasting Drugs and Crime: 1990 Annual Report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, August 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  3. National Institute of Justice: ADAM 1998 Annual Report on Adult and Juvenile Arrestees. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, April 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Johnson BD, Wish ED, Schmeidler J, et al.: Concentration of delinquent offending: Serious drug involvement and high delinquency rates. In: Dembo R (Ed.):Drugs and Crime. Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 1993, pp. 1–25.

    Google Scholar 

  5. McBride DC, Terry YM: Drugs and violence. In: Gottesman, R (Ed.):Encyclopedia of Violence in the United States. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, Reference Books, in press.

  6. Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention:Drug Identification and Testing in the Juvenile Justice System: Summary. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, May 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Dembo R, Washburn M, Wish ED, et al.: Heavy marijuana use and crime among youths entering a juvenile detention center.Journal of Psychoactive Drugs 1987; 19:47–56.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Howell JC, Krisberg B, Hawkins JD, et al. (Eds.):A Sourcebook: Serious, Violent and Chronic Juvenile Offenders. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  9. McBride DC, VanderWaal C, VanBuren H, et al.:Breaking the Cycle of Drug Use among Juvenile Offenders. Paper prepared for and presented to the National Institute of Justice, Washington, DC, Nov. 24, 1997.

  10. McLellan A, Luborsky L, Cacciola J, et al.: New data from the Addiction Severity Index: Reliability and validity in three centers.Journal of Nervous and Mental Disorders 1985; 173:412–423

    Google Scholar 

  11. Dembo R, Williams L, Schmeidler J: Addressing the problems of substance abuse in juvenile corrections. In: Inciardi JA (Ed.):Drug Treatment in Criminal Justice Settings. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1993, pp. 97–126.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Maloney D, Romig G, Armstrong T: Juvenile probation: The balanced approach.Juvenile and Family Court Journal 1988; 39(3): 1–50.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Reno J:Combating Violence and Delinquency: The National Juvenile Justice Action Plan Summary. Washington DC: Juvenile Justice Clearinghouse, Coordinating Council on Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Bilchik S:Community Assessment Centers: A Discussion of the Concept's Efficacy. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Canino IA, Spurlock J:Culturally Diverse Children and Adolescents: Assessment, Diagnosis, and Treatment. New York: Guilford, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Paniagua FA:Assessing and Treating Culturally Diverse Clients. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Ho MK:Minority Children and Adolescents in Therapy. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Flaherty JH, Gaviria FM, Pathak D, et al.: Developing instruments for cross-cultural psychiatric research.Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease 1988; 176(5) 257–263.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Winters KC, Stinchfield RD: Current issues and future needs in the assessment of adolescent drug abuse. In: Rahdert E, Sloboda Z, Czechowicz D (Eds.):Adolescent Drug Abuse: Clinical Assessment and Therapeutic Interventions, NIDA Research Monograph No. 156. Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse, 1995, pp. 146–171.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Dembo R, Problems among youths entering the juvenile justice system, their service needs and innovative approaches to address them.Substance Use and Misuse 1996; 31(1): 81–94.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Department of Health and Human Services:The Target Cities Program: Partnerships to Increase Availability of and Access to Alcohol and Other Drug Treatment. Rockville, MD: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Center for Substance Abuse Treatment, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Scott CK, Much RD, Foss MA: The Impact of Centralized Intake on Access to Treatment and Satisfaction with Intake Procedures. In: Levy J, Stephens R, McBride D (Eds.):Advances in Medical Sociology. Greenwich, CT: JAI, forthcoming.

  23. Cleveland C.A.R.E.S.:Target Cities Program Description. Retrieved from the World Wide Web at http://gozips.uakron.edu/∼wjbruno/clevcare.html, May 5, 1999.

  24. Kraft MK, Dickinson JE: Partnerships for improved service delivery: The Newark Target Cities Project.Health and Social Work 1997; 22(2):143–148.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Baille D, Breslin R:TASC Treatment Alternatives for Safe Communities: Program Brief. Chicago: Treatment Alternatives for Safe Communities, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  26. National Association of Drug Court Professionals, Drug Court Standards Committee:Defining Drug Courts: The Key Components. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  27. American University:OJP Drug Court Clearinghouse and Technical Assistance Project: Drug Court Activity Update—Summary Information, June 1999. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Drug Courts Program Office, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Inciardi JA, McBride DC, Rivers JE:Drug Control and the Courts. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Belenko S: Research on drug courts: A critical review.National Drug Court Institute Review 1998; 1(1).

  30. Wiebush RG, Baird C, Krisberg B, et al.: Risk assessment and classification for serious, violent, and chronic juvenile offenders. In: Howell JC, Krisberg B, Hawkins JD, et al. (Eds.):Sourcebook on Serious, Violent, and Chronic Juvenile Offenders. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1995, pp. 171–212.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Lipsey MW, Wilson DB:Effective Intervention for Serious Juvenile Offenders: A Synthesis of Research. Paper prepared for the OJJDP Study Group on Serious and Violent Juvenile Offenders, 1997.

  32. Greenwood PW, Turner S: Evaluation of the Paint Creek Youth Center: A residential program for serious delinquents.Criminology 1993; 31(2):263–279.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Rivers J, Trotti T:South Carolina Delinquent Males: An 11-Year Follow-Up into Adult Probation and Prison. Report presented to the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, 1995.

  34. Anglin MD, Longshore D, Turner S, et al.:Studies of the Functioning and Effectiveness of Treatment Alternatives to Street Crime (TASC) Programs: Final Report. Los Angeles: UCLA Drug Abuse Research Center, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Siegel LJ, Senna JJ:Juvenile Delinquency. Fifth ed. St. Paul, MN: West, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Kehoe CJ: Dramatic changes in store for juvenile probation agencies.Corrections Today 1994; 56(7):96–98.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Drug Use Forecasting:National Institute of Justice Annual Report on Adult and Juvenile Arrestees, 1996. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Lashey DV: Mid-size facility reports success using urine drug-testing program.Corrections Today 1994; 56:180.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Hubbard RL, Marsden ME, Rachal JV, et al.:Drug Abuse Treatment: A National Study of Effectiveness. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Brown SA, Myers MG, Mott MA, Vik PW: Correlates of success following treatment for adolescent substance abuse.Applied and Preventive Psychology 1994; 3:61–73.

    Google Scholar 

  41. De Leon G: What psychologists can learn from addiction treatment research.Psychology of Addictive Behavior 1993; 7:103–109.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Liddle HA, Dakof GA: Family-based treatment for adolescent drug use: State of the science. In: Rahdert E, Sloboda Z, Czechowicz D (Eds.):Adolescent Drug Abuse: Clinical Assessment and Therapeutic Interventions, NIDA Research Monograph No. 156. Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse, 1995, pp. 325–340.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Henggeler SW: The development of effective drug-abuse services for youth. In: Egertson JA, Fox DM, Leshner AI (Eds.):Treating Drug Abusers Effectively. Williston, VT: Blackwell, 1997, pp. 253–279.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Harrison PA, Hoffmann NG:CATOR Report: Adolescent Completers One Year Later. St. Paul, MN: Chemical Abuse/Addiction Treatment Outcome Registry, Ramsey Clinic, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Jenson JM, Howard MO, Yaffe J: Treatment of adolescent substance abusers: Issues for practice and research.Social Work in Health Care 1995; 21(2):1–18.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Alford GS, Koehler RA, Leonard J: Alcoholics Anonymous-Narcotics Anonymous model inpatient treatment of chemically dependent adolescents: A two-year outcome study.Journal of Studies on Alcohol 1991; 52(2):118–126.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Jainchill N, Bhattacharya G, Yagelka J: Therapeutic communities for adolescents. In: Rahdert E, Sloboda Z, Czechowicz D (Eds.):Adolescent Drug Abuse: Clinical Assessment and Therapeutic Interventions, NIDA Research Monograph No. 156. Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse, 1995, pp. 146–171.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Catalano RF, Hawkins JD, Wells EA, et al.: Evaluation of the effectiveness of adolescent drug abuse treatment, assessment of risks for relapse, and promising approaches for relapse prevention.International Journal of the Addictions 1990–91; 25(9A & 10A):1085–1140.

    Google Scholar 

  49. De Leon, G: Legal pressure in therapeutic communities. In: Leukefeld CG, Tims F (Eds.):Compulsory Treatment of Drug Abuse: Research and Clinical Practice, National Institute on Drug Abuse Research Monograph No. 86, DHHS Pub. No. (ADM) 99-158. Washington, DC: Superintendent of Documents, Government Printing Office, 1988, pp. 88–158.

    Google Scholar 

  50. De Leon G:The Therapeutic Community: Study of Effectiveness. DHHS Pub. No. (ADM) 84-1286. Washington, DC: Superintendent of Documents, Government Printing Office, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Hubbard RL, Cavanaugh EA, Craddock SF, et al.: Characteristics, behaviors and outcomes for youth in the TOPS. In: Freidman AS, Beschner GM (Eds.):Treatment Services for Adolescent Substance Abusers. Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse, 1985, pp. 49–65.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Simpson DD, Sells SB: Effectiveness of treatment for drug abuse: An overview of the DARP research program.Advances in Alcohol and Substance Abuse 1982; 2(1):7–29.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Onken LS, Blaine JD, Boren JJ (Eds.):Beyond the Therapeutic Alliance: Keeping the Drug-Dependent Individual in Treatment, NIDA Research Monograph No. 165. Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Simpson DD, Joe GW, Brown BS: Treatment retention and follow-up outcomes in the Drug Abuse Treatment Outcome Study (DATOS).Psychology of Addictive Behaviors 1997; 11(4):294–307.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Winters KC, Latimer WL, Stinchfield RD: Adolescent treatment for alcohol and other drug abuse. In:Source Book on Substance Abuse: Etiology, Methodology and Intervention. New York: Allyn & Bacon, in press.

  56. Ross GR:Treating Adolescent Substance Abuse. Boston: Allyn & Bacon, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Amini F, Zilberg NJ, Burke EL, et al.: A controlled study of inpatient vs. outpatient treatment of delinquent drug abusing adolescents: One year results.Comprehensive Psychiatry 1982; 23:436–444.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Friedman AS: Family therapy vs. parent groups: Effects on adolescent drug abusers.American Journal of Family Therapy 1989; 17:335–347.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Lewis RA, Piercy FP, Sprenkle DH, et al.: Family-based interventions for helping drug-abusing adolescents.Journal of Adolescent Research 1990; 5:82–95.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Szapocznik J, Kurtines WM, Foote F, et al.: Conjoint versus one-person family therapy: Some evidence for the effectiveness of conducting family therapy through one person with drug-abusing adolescents.Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 1983; 51:889–899.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Szapocznik J, Kurtines WM, Foote F, et al.: Conjoint versus one-person family therapy: Further evidence for the effectiveness of conducting family therapy through one person with drug-abusing adolescents.Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 1986; 54:395–397.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Weinberg NZ, Rahdert E, Colliver JD, et al.: Adolescent substance abuse: A review of the past 10 years.Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry 1998; 37(3):252–261.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Stanton MD, Todd TC:The Family Therapy of Drug Abuse and Addiction. New York: Guilford, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Kumpfer KL, Molgaard V, Spoth R: The “Strengthening Families Program” for the prevention of delinquency and drug use. In: Peters R, McMahon R (Eds.):Preventing Childhood Disorders, Substance Abuse, and Delinquency. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1996, pp. 241–267.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Patterson GR: Performance models for antisocial boys.American Psychologist 1986; 41:432–444.

    Google Scholar 

  66. Brook JS, Brook DW, Gordon AS, et al.: The psychosocial etiology of adolescent drug use: A family interactional approach.Genetic Social General Psychology Monograph 1990; 116:2.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Coyne J, Liddle HA: The future of systems therapy: Shedding the myths and facing opportunities.Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, and Practice 1992; 29:44–50.

    Google Scholar 

  68. Gurman AS, Kniskern DP: The future of marital and family therapy.Psychotherapy 1992; 29:65–71.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Henggeler SW, Bourdin CM:Family Therapy and Beyond: A Multisystemic Approach to Treating the Behavior Problems of Children and Adolescents. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Liddle HA, Dakof GA, Diamond G: Adolescent substance abuse: Multidimensional family therapy in action. In: Kaufman E, Kaufman P (Eds.):Family Therapy of Drug and Alcohol Abuse. Boston: Allyn & Bacon, 1991, pp. 120–171.

    Google Scholar 

  71. Lewis RA, Piercy FP, Sprenkle DH, et al.: The Purdue brief family therapy model for adolescent substance abusers. In: Todd T, Selekman M (Eds.):Family Therapy with Adolescent Substance Abusers. New York: Allyn & Bacon, 1991, 29–48.

    Google Scholar 

  72. Henggeler SW, Bourdin CM, Melton GB, et al.: Effects of multisystemic therapy on drug use and abuse in serious juvenile offenders: A progress report from two outcome studies.Family Dynamics of Addiction Quarterly 1991; 1:40–51.

    Google Scholar 

  73. Henggeler SW:Treating Serious Anti-Social Behavior in Youth: The MST Approach. Washington, DC: Juvenile Justice Bulletin, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, U.S. Department of Justice, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  74. Henggeler SW, Pickrel SG, Brondino MJ: Multisystemic treatment of substance abusing and dependent delinquents: Outcomes for drug use, criminality, and out-of-home placement at posttreatment and 6-month followup.Mental Health Services Research, in press.

  75. Pickrel SG, Henggeler SW: Multisystemic therapy for adolescent substance abuse and dependence.Child and Adolescent Clinics of North America 1996; 5:201–211.

    Google Scholar 

  76. Hall JA: Skills training for pregnant and parenting adolescents. In: Rahdert E, Sloboda Z, Czechowicz D (Eds.):Adolescent Drug Abuse: Clinical Assessment and Therapeutic Interventions, NIDA Research Monograph No. 156. Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse, 1995, pp. 255–290.

    Google Scholar 

  77. Hawkins JD, Catalano RF, Miller JY: Risk and protective factors for alcohol and other drug problems in adolescence and early adulthood: Implications for substance abuse prevention.Psychological Bulletin 1992; 112:64–105.

    Google Scholar 

  78. Anglin MD, Hser Y: The Treatment of Drug Abuse. In: Terry M, Wilson JQ (Eds.):Drugs and Crime. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1990, pp. 393–460.

    Google Scholar 

  79. Bale R, Stone W, Kuldan J, et al.: Therapeutic communities versus methadone maintenance.Archives of General Psychiatry 1980; 37:170–193.

    Google Scholar 

  80. Hubbard RL, Marsden ME, Rachal JV, et al.:Drug Abuse Treatment: A National Study of Effectiveness. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  81. Mejita CL, Bokos PR, Mickenberg J, et al.: Improving substance abuse treatment access and retention using a case management approach.Journal of Drug Issues 1997; 27(2):329–340.

    Google Scholar 

  82. McLellan A, Luborsky L, Woody G, et al.: Increased effectiveness of substance abuse treatment: A prospective study of patient treatment matching.Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease 1983; 171:597–605.

    Google Scholar 

  83. Hayes SC: Treatment validity: An approach to evaluating the quality of assessment. In: Rahdert ER, Grabowski J (Eds.):Adolescent Drug Abuse: Analyses of Treatment Research, National Institute on Drug Abuse Research Monograph No. 77. Washington, DC: Superintendent of Documents, Government Printing Office, 1988, pp. 113–127.

    Google Scholar 

  84. Godley SH, Godley MD, Pratt A, et al.: Case management services for adolescent substance abusers: A program description.Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment 1994; 11(4):309–317.

    Google Scholar 

  85. Brown SA, Vik PW, Creamer VA: Characteristics of relapse following adolescent substance abuse treatment.Addictive Behaviors 1989; 14:291–300.

    Google Scholar 

  86. Spear SF, Skala SY: Posttreatment services for chemically dependent adolescents. In: Rahdert E, Sloboda Z, Czechowicz D (Eds.):Adolescent Drug Abuse: Clinical Assessment and Therapeutic Interventions, NIDA Research Monograph No. 156. Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse, 1995, pp. 341–364.

    Google Scholar 

  87. Armstrong TL (Ed.):Intensive Interventions with High-Risk Youths: Promising Approaches in Juvenile Probation and Parole. Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  88. Catalano RF, Wells E, Jenson J, et al.: Aftercare services for drug-using institutionalized delinquents.Social Service Review 1989; 63(4):553–577.

    Google Scholar 

  89. Hepworth DH, Rooney RH, Larson JA:Direct Social Work Practice: Theory and Skills. Third ed. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  90. Agranoff R: Human services integration: Past and present challenges in public administration.Public Administration Review 1991; 51(6):532–542.

    Google Scholar 

  91. North Central Regional Educational Laboratory:Human Services Coordination: Who Cares? Policy Briefs, Report No. 1. Oak Brook, IL: Evaluation and Policy Information Center of NCREL, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  92. Bailey D, Koney K: Interorganizational community-based collaboratives: A strategic response to shape the social work agenda.Social Work 1996; 41(6):602–611.

    Google Scholar 

  93. Tauber J, Huddleston CW:Development and Implementation of Drug Court Systems. Monograph Series 2. Alexandria, VA: National Drug Court Institute, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  94. Mull E:Developing a Managed Care Response for Juvenile Justice: A Guide. Chicago: TASC, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  95. Gutierrez L, Alvarez AR, Nemon H, et al.: Multicultural community organizing: A strategy for change.Social Work 1996; 41(5):501–508.

    Google Scholar 

  96. Chrislip DD: Pulling together.National Civic Review 1995; 84(1):21–29.

    Google Scholar 

  97. Rosenblum L, DiCecco MB, Taylor L, et al.: Upgrading school support programs through collaboration: Resource coordinating teams.Social Work in Education 1995; 17(2):117–249.

    Google Scholar 

  98. Weinstock P: Mental health and vocational rehabilitation collaboration: Local strategies that work.Psychosocial Rehabilitation Journal 1995; 18(4):35–51.

    Google Scholar 

  99. Markze C, Both D:Getting Started: Planning a Comprehensive Services Initiative. Resource Brief No. 5. New York: Columbia University, National Center for Service Integration, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  100. Rivers JE:Legacies from Five 1st Round Target Cities Projects: Executive Summary and Final Report. Rockville, MD: Center for Substance Abuse Treatment, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  101. Mull E: Personal Interview. Chicago: June 11, 1999.

  102. Wraparound Milwaukee: Serving Children and Families with Complex Needs. Milwaukee, WI: Milwaukee County Mental Health Division Child and Adolescent Services, 1998.

  103. Bokos PJ, Mejta CL, Mickenberb JH, et al.: Case management: An alternative approach to working with intravenous drug users. In: Ashery RS (Ed.):Progress and Issues in Case Management, NIDA Research Monograph Series, No. 127, DHHS Pub. No. (ADM)92-1946. Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse, 1992, pp. 92–111.

    Google Scholar 

  104. Godley SH, Godley MD, Pratt A, et al.: Case management services for adolescent substance abusers: A program description.Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment 1994; 11(4):309–317.

    Google Scholar 

  105. Rapp RC: The strengths perspective and persons with substance abuse problems. In: Saleebey D (Ed.):The Strengths Perspective in Social Work Practice. Second ed. New York: Longman, 1997, pp. 77–96.

    Google Scholar 

  106. Rapp RC, Siegal HA, Li L, et al.: Predicting post-primary treatment services and drug use outcome: A multivariate analysis.American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse 1998; 24(4):603–615.

    Google Scholar 

  107. Kolden GG, Howard KI, Bankoff EA, et al.: Factors associated with treatment continuation: Implications for the treatment of drug dependence. In: Onken LS, Blaine JD, Boren JJ (Eds.):Beyond the Therapeutic Alliance: Keeping the Drug-Dependent Individual in Treatment, NIDA Research Monograph No. 165. Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse, 1997, pp. 110–130.

    Google Scholar 

  108. Siegal HA, Rapp RC, Kelliher CW, et al.: The strengths perspective of case management: A promising inpatient substance abuse treatment enhancement.Journal of Psychoactive Drugs 1995; 27(1):67–72.

    Google Scholar 

  109. Siegal HA, Fisher JA, Rapp RC, et al.: Enhancing substance abuse treatment with case management: Its impact on employment.Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment 1996; 13(2):93–98.

    Google Scholar 

  110. Dennis ML, Karuntzos GT, Rachal JV: Accessing additional community resources through case management to meet the needs of methadone clients. In: Ashery RS (Ed.):Progress and Issues in Case Management, NIDA Research Monograph Series No. 127, DHHS Pub. No. (ADM)92-1946. Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse, 1992, pp. 54–78.

    Google Scholar 

  111. Schlenger WE, Kroutil LA, Roland EJ: Case management as a mechanism for linking drug abuse treatment and primary care: Preliminary evidence from the ADAMHA/HRSA linkage demonstration. In: Ashery RS (Ed.):Progress and Issues in Case Management, NIDA Research Monograph Series No. 127, DHHS Pub. No. (ADM)92-1946. Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse, 1992, pp. 316–330.

    Google Scholar 

  112. Westermeyer J: Non-treatment factors affecting treatment outcome in substance abuse.American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse 1989; 15(1):13–29.

    Google Scholar 

  113. Babor TF, Del Boca FK, McLaney MA, et al.: Just Say Y.E.S.: Matching adolescents to appropriate interventions for alcohol and other drug-related problems.Alcohol Health & Research World 1991; 15(1):77–86.

    Google Scholar 

  114. Ballew JR, Mink G:Case Management in Social Work: Developing the Professional Skills Needed for Work with Multiproblem Clients. Springfield, IL: Charles C Thomas, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  115. Siegal, HA (Consensus Panel Chair):Comprehensive Case Management for Substance Abuse Treatment. DHHS Pub. No. (SMA)98-3222. Rockville, MD: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  116. Mahoney B, Carver JA, Cooper C, et al.:Drug Court Monitoring, Evaluation, and Management Information Systems. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Drug Courts Program Office, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  117. System Design Associates:Person Tracking System: An Overview as Implemented in the Philadelphia Target Cities Project. Retrieved May 5, 1999 from the World Wide Web at http://www.phlhealth.org/sda/ptsov/html, May 6, 1996.

  118. Fielder T: Managing conflict constructively.Training and Development 1996; 50(7):11–14.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yvonne M. Terry M.S.A..

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Terry, Y.M., VanderWaal, C.J., McBride, D.C. et al. Provision of drug treatment services in the juvenile justice system: A system reform. The Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research 27, 194–214 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02287313

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02287313

Keywords

Navigation