Residential Recovery Homes/Oxford Houses

  • Leonard A. Jason
  • Bradley D. Olson
  • David G. Mueller
  • Lisa Walt
  • Darrin M. Aase
Chapter
First Online:
Part of the Current Clinical Psychiatry book series (CCPSY)

Abstract

Over 10,000 people live in recovery homes called Oxford Houses throughout the USA. Among these approximately 1,400 abstinent living environments, residents are provided an unlimited period of time to gain fellowship and support for becoming productive members of society. The evolution of 17 year collaboration between this Oxford House organization and a research team at DePaul University is described. In addition, economic issues are explored including the finding that this recovery community appears to have both low costs and high benefits. Issues involving the sustainability of the Oxford Houses are also presented. The chapter also reviews gender roles and women’s specific issues to highlight how Oxford Houses have the potential to be empowering. Finally, comorbid psychiatric conditions are reviewed in the context of how Oxford Houses can promote not only abstinence among this group, but also improved psychological functioning.

Keywords

Addiction recovery management Recovery homes Abstinent living environment Recovery community Long-term abstinence 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. 1.
    Oxford House, Inc. Oxford House manual. Silver Spring, MD: Oxford House, Inc.; 2006.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Davis MI, Jason LA, Ferrari JR, Olson BD, Alvarez JA. A collaborative action approach to researching substance abuse recovery. Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse. 2005;31:537–53.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Reason P, Bradbuy H. Handbook of action research. Participatory inquiry & practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2001.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Suarez-Balcazar Y, Davis M, Ferrari J, Nyden P, Olson B, Alvarez J, et al. Fostering university-community partnerships: a framework and an exemplar. In: Jason LA, Keys CB, Suarez-Balcazar Y, Taylor RR, Davis M, Durlak J, Isenberg J, editors. Participatory community research: theories and methods in action. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; 2004. p. 105–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Parsons M, Warner-Robbins C. Formerly incarcerated women create healthy lives through participatory action research. Holist Nurs Pract. 2002;16:40–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Riger S. Epistemological debates, feminist voices. Am Psychol. 1992;47:730–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hill J, Bond M, Mulvey A, Terenzio M. Methodological issues and challenges for a feminist community psychology issue. Am J Community Psychol. 2000;28:759–72.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Berkowitz B, Wolff T. The spirit of the coalition. Washington, DC: American Public Health Association; 2000.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Davis MI, Olson BD, Jason LA, Alvarez J, Ferrari JR. Cultivating and maintaining effective action research partnerships: the DePaul and Oxford House collaborative. J Prev Interv Community. 2006;31:3–12.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Olson BD, Jason LA, Davidson M, Ferrari JR. Increases in tolerance within naturalistic, self-help recovery homes. Am J Community Psychol. 2009;44:188–195.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Chavis D, Florin P. Community development, community participation. San Jose, CA: Prevention Office, Bureau of Drug Abuse Services; 1990.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jason LA, Olson BD, Ferrari JR, LoSasso AT. Communal housing settings enhance substance abuse recovery. Am J Public Health. 2006;91:1727–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jason LA, Groh DR, Durocher M, Alvarez J, Aase DM, Ferrari JR. Counteracting “Not in My Backyard”: the positive effects of greater occupancy within mutual-help recovery homes. J Community Psychol. 2008;36:947–58.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Jason LA, Olson BD, Foli K. Rescued lives: The Oxford House approach to substance abuse. New York: Routledge; 2008.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Olson BD, Street P, Rider P, Whitney T. Social and economic report for treatment-on-demand in Illinois. 2006. http://psychoanalystsopposewar.org/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/01/social-and-economic-report-olson-et-al.pdf. Accessed 17 Aug 2009.
  16. 16.
    Olson BD, Viola JJ, Jason LA, Davis MI, Ferrari JR, Rabin-Belyaev O. Economic costs of Oxford House inpatient treatment and incarceration: a preliminary report. J Prev Interv Community. 2006;31:63–74.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    French MT. Drug Abuse Treatment Cost Analysis Program (DATCAP): program version user’s manual. 8th ed. Florida: University of Miami; 2003.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Jason LA, Olson BD, Ferrari JR, Majer JM, Alvarez J, Stout J. An examination of main and interactive effects of substance abuse recovery. Addiction. 2007;102:1114–1121.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Oxford House Inc. Annual report. 2007. http://www.oxfordhouse.org/userfiles/file/doc/ar2007.pdf. Accessed 12 July 2008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Jason LA, Braciszewski JM, Olson BD, Ferrari JR. Increasing the number of mutual help recovery homes for substance abusers: effects of government policy and funding assistance. Behav Soc Issues. 2005;14:71–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Braciszewski JM, Olson BD, Jason LA, Ferrari JR. The influence of policy on the differential expansion of male and female self-run recovery settings. J Prev Interv Community. 2006;31:51–62.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mortensen J, Jason LA, Aase D, Mueller D, Ferrari J. Organizational factors related to the sustainability of recovery homes. Manuscript submitted for publication. 2009.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Shediac-Rizkallah MC, Bone LR. Planning for the sustainability of community-based health programs: Conceptual frameworks and future directions for research, practice, and policy. Health Ed Res. 1998;13:87–108.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hitlin S. Doing good, feeling good: values and the self’s moral center. J Posit Psychol. 2007;2:249–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Taylor TP, Pancer SM. Community service experiences and commitment to volunteering. J Appl Soc Psychol. 2007;37:320–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Jason LA, Aase DM, Mueller DG, Ferrari JR. Current and previous residents of self-governed recovery homes: characteristics of long-term recovery. Alcohol Treat Q. 2009;27:442–452.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Evashwick C, Ory M. Organizational characteristics of successful innovative health care programs sustained over time. Fam Community Health. 2003;26:177–93.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Carmeli A, Schaubroeck J. Organizational crisis-preparedness: the importance of learning from failures. Long Range Plann. 2008;41:177–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Hunter DE. Using a theory of change approach to build organizational strength, capacity, and sustainability with not-for-profit organizations in the human services sector. Eval Program Plann. 2006;29:193–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Davis MI, Jason LA. Sex differences in social support and self-efficacy within a recovery community. Am J Community Psychol. 2005;36:259–74.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Jason LA, Ferrari JR. Oxford house recovery homes: Characteristics and effectiveness. Psych Services. 2010;7:92–102.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Belyaev-Glantsman O, Jason LA, Ferrari JR. The relationship of gender and ethnicity to employment in recovery homes. In: Jason LA, Ferrari JR, editors. Recovery from addiction in communal living settings: The Oxford House model [Special Issue]. J Groups Addict Recover. 2009;4:92–9.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Brown JT, Davis MI, Jason LA, Ferrari JR. Stress and coping: the roles of ethnicity and gender in substance abuse recovery. J Prev Interv Community. 2006;31:75–84.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Viola JJ, Ferrari JR, Davis MI, Jason LA. Measuring in-group and out-group helping in communal living: helping and substance abuse recovery. In: Jason LA, Ferrari JR, editors. Recovery from addiction in communal living settings: The Oxford House model [Special Issue]. J Groups Addict Recover. 2009;4:110–28.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Green LL, Fullilove MT, Fullilove RE. Remembering the lizard: reconstructing sexuality in the rooms of narcotics anonymous. J Sex Res. 2005;42:28–34.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    MacRae R, Aalto E. Gendered power dynamics and HIV risk in drug using sexual relationships. AIDS Care. 2000;12:505–15.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Grant BF, Stinson FS, Dawson DA, Chou SP, Dufour MC, Compton W, et al. Prevalence and co-occurrence of substance use disorders and independent mood and anxiety disorders. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2004;61:807–16.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Khantzian EJ. The self-medication hypothesis of addictive disorders. Am J Psychiatry. 1985;142:1259–64.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Ferrari JR, Jason LA, DaviS MI, Olson BD, Alvarez J. Assessing similarities and differences in governance among residential recovery programs: self vs. staff rules and regulations. Ther Communities Int J Ther Support Org. 2004;25:185–98.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Jason LA, Olson BD, Ferrari JR, Layne A, Davis MI, Alvarez J. A case study of self-governance in a drug abuse recovery home. North Am J Psychol. 2003;5:499–514.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Aase DM, Jason LA, Ferrari JR, Groh DR, Alvarez J, Olson BD, Davis MI. Anxiety symptoms and alcohol use: a longitudinal analysis of length of time in mutual help recovery homes. Int J Self Help Self Care. 2006–2007;4:21–35.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Aase DM, Jason LA, Olson BD, Majer JM, Ferrari JR, Davis MI, Virtue SM. A longitudinal analysis of criminal and aggressive behaviors among a national sample of adults in mutual-help recovery homes. In: Jason LA, Ferrari JR, editors. Recovery from addiction in communal living settings: The Oxford House model [Special Issue]. J Groups Addict Recover. 2009;4:82–91.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Burns L, Teesson M, O’Neill K. The impact of comorbid anxiety and depression on alcohol treatment outcomes. Addiction. 2005;100:787–96.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Jason LA, Olson BD, Ferrari JR, Majer JM, Alvarez J, Stout J. An examination of main and interactive effects of substance abuse recovery. Addiction. 2007;102:1114–21.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Majer JM, Jason LA, North CS, Ferrari JR, Porter NS, Olson BD, et al. A longitudinal analysis of psychiatric severity upon outcomes among substance abusers residing in self-help settings. Am J Community Psychol. 2008;42:145–53.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Jason LA, Davis MI, Ferrari JR, Anderson E. The need for substance abuse after-care: longitudinal analysis of Oxford House. Addict Behav. 2007;32:803–18.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Leonard A. Jason
    • 1
  • Bradley D. Olson
  • David G. Mueller
  • Lisa Walt
  • Darrin M. Aase
  1. 1.Psychology Department, Center for Community ResearchDePaul UniversityChicagoUSA

Personalised recommendations