Skip to main content

Detoxification centers: Who's in the revolving door?

Abstract

Data from 443,812 admissions to publicly funded detoxification centers in Massachusetts (fiscal year 1984 to fiscal year 1996) were analyzed to assess changes in the population served. Substantial increases in admissions of women, African Americans, and Hispanics were apparent. Mean age at admission declined and unemployment increased. A 25% decline in admissions reporting alcohol use was coupled with a twofold increase in reported cocaine use and a fourfold increase in heroin use. Detoxification services have evolved. The older, white, male alcoholic is no longer the primary consumer. Policy initiatives (e.g., increased services for women) and the changing epidemiology of drug abuse (e.g., increased access to heroin) contributed to the changing population served in detoxification centers.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  1. 1.

    Pittman DJ, Gordon CW:Revolving Door: A Study of the Chronic Police Case Inebriate. Glencoe, IL: Free Press, 1958.

    Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Pittman DJ:Public Intoxication and the Alcoholic Offender in American Society. Task Force Report: Drunkenness. The President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice: Task Force on Drunkenness. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1967.

    Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    The President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice: Task Force on Drunkenness:Task Force Report: Drunkenness. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1967.

    Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Plaut TFA:Alcohol Problems: A Report to the Nation by the Cooperative Commission on the Study of Alcoholism. New York: Oxford University Press, 1967.

    Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism:First Special Report to the U.S. Congress on Alcohol & Health. Rockville, MD: National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Finn P: Decriminalization of public drunkenness: Response of the health care system.Journal of Studies on Alcohol 1985; 46:7–23.

    Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Blumberg L: Comment on “The Uniform Alcoholism and Intoxication Treatment Act.”Journal of Studies on Alcohol 1976; 37:105–110.

    Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Chafetz ME: Comment on “The Uniform Alcoholism and Intoxication Treatment Act.”Journal of Studies on Alcohol 1976; 37:100–101.

    Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Kurtz NR, Regier M: The Uniform Alcoholism and Intoxication Treatment Act: The compromising process of social policy formation.Journal of Studies on Alcohol 1975; 36:1421–1441.

    Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Regier M, Kurtz NR: Policy lessons of the Uniform Act: A response to comments.Journal of Studies on Alcohol 1976; 37:382–392.

    Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Room R: Comment on “The Uniform Alcoholism and Intoxication Treatment Act.”Journal of Studies on Alcohol 1976; 37:113–144.

    Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Scrimgeour GJ, Palmer JA:Report on the Impact Study of the Uniform Alcoholism and Intoxication Treatment Act. Washington, DC: Council of State and Territorial Alcoholism Authorities, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Annis HM, Smart RG: Arrests, readmissions and treatment following release from detoxification centers.Journal of Studies on Alcohol 1978; 39:1276–1283.

    Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    McCarty D, Mulligan DH, Argeriou M: Admission and referral patterns among alcohol detoxification patients.Alcoholism Treatment Quarterly 1987; 4(1):79–90.

    Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Richman A: Cost/effectiveness analysis of alcoholism and drug abuse treatment programs: The relevance of recidivism and resource absorption.Evaluation and Program Planning 1983; 6:49–52.

    Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Daggett LR, Rolde EJ: Decriminalization of drunkenness: Effects on the work of suburban police.Journal of Studies on Alcohol 1980; 41:819–828.

    Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    U.S. General Accounting Office:Block Grants: Characteristics, Experience, and Lessons Learned. Washington, DC: U.S. General Accounting Office, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Besteman KJ: Federal leadership in building the national drug treatment system. In: Gerstein DR, Harwood HJ (Eds.):Treating Drug Problems: Volume 2. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1992, pp. 63–88.

    Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Division of Alcoholism:Massachusetts State Plan for the Prevention, Treatment, and Control of Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism. Boston: Massachusetts Department of Public Health, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Landsman S: Massachusetts' comprehensive alcoholism law—Its history and future.Massachusetts Law Quarterly 1973; 58:273–290.

    Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    McCarty D, LaPrade J, Botticelli M: Substance abuse treatment and HIV services: Massachusetts' policies and programs.Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment 1996; 13:429–438.

    Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Callahan JJ, Shepard DS, Beinecke RH, et al.: Mental health/substance abuse treatment in managed care: The Massachusetts Medicaid experience.Health Affairs 1995; 14(3):173–184.

    Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Wesson DR:Detoxification from Alcohol and Other Drugs. Rockville, MD: Center for Substance Abuse Treatment, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    McCarty D, Argeriou M:Massachusetts Alcoholism Management Information System: User's Manual. Boston: Massachusetts Department of Public Health, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    McCarty D:Massachusetts' Drug Rehabilitation Management Information System: User's Manual. Boston: Massachusetts Department of Public Health, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Camp JM, Krakow M, McCarty D, et al.: Substance abuse treatment management information systems: Balancing federal, state, and service provider needs.Journal of Mental Health Administration 1992; 19:5–20.

    Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Elliott EA, Reynes J, Berger M, et al.:Indicators of Substance Use in Massachusetts: 1985–1995. Boston: Massachusetts Department of Public Health, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Weisner C: The merging of alcohol and drug treatment: A policy review.Journal of Public Health Policy 1992; 13(Spring):66–79.

    Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Weisner C: The social ecology of alcohol treatment in the United States. In: Galanter M. (Ed.):Recent Developments in Alcoholism. Vol. 5. New York: Plenum, 1987, pp. 203–243.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dennis McCarty Ph.D..

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

McCarty, D., Caspi, Y., Panas, L. et al. Detoxification centers: Who's in the revolving door?. The Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research 27, 245–256 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02291737

Download citation

Keywords

  • Public Health
  • Alcohol
  • Cocaine
  • Drug Abuse
  • Health Promotion