|
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
|
Matching Judicial Supervision to Clients Risk Status in Drug Court
Douglas B. Marlowe
Treatment Research Institute at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, dmarlowe{at}tresearch.org
David S. Festinger
Treatment Research Institute at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia
Patricia A. Lee
Treatment Research Institute at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia
Karen L. Dugosh
Treatment Research Institute at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia
Kathleen M. Benasutti
Treatment Research Institute at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia
This article reports outcomes from a program of experimental research evaluating the risk principle in drug courts. Prior studies revealed that participants who were high risk and had (a) antisocial personality disorder or (b) a prior history of drug abuse treatment performed better in drug court when scheduled to attend biweekly judicial status hearings in court. In contrast, participants who were low risk performed equivalently regardless of the court hearings schedule. This study prospectively matches drug court clients to the optimal schedule of court hearings based on an assessment of their risk status and compares outcomes to clients randomly assigned to the standard hearings schedule. Results confirmed that participants who were high risk and matched to biweekly hearings had better during-treatment outcomes than participants assigned to status hearings as usual. These findings provide confirmation of the risk principle in drug courts and yield practical information for enhancing the efficacy and cost-efficiency of drug courts.
Key Words: drug court risk assessment drug abuse antisocial personality disorder
Crime & Delinquency, Vol. 52, No. 1,
52-76 (2006)
DOI: 10.1177/0011128705281746

CiteULike Complore Connotea Del.icio.us Digg Reddit Technorati Twitter What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:

|
 |

|
 |
 
J.C. Barnes, H. Ventura Miller, and J. M. Miller
Identifying Leading Characteristics Associated with Juvenile Drug Court Admission and Success: A Research Note
Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice,
October 1, 2009;
7(4):
350 - 360.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
R. K. Hanson, G. Bourgon, L. Helmus, and S. Hodgson
The Principles of Effective Correctional Treatment Also Apply To Sexual Offenders: A Meta-Analysis
Criminal Justice and Behavior,
September 1, 2009;
36(9):
865 - 891.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
E. A. Hall, M. L. Prendergast, J. M. Roll, and U. Warda
Reinforcing Abstinence and Treatment Participation Among Offenders in a Drug Diversion Program: Are Vouchers Effective?
Criminal Justice and Behavior,
September 1, 2009;
36(9):
935 - 953.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
C. Heck, A. Roussell, and S. E. Culhane
Assessing the Effects of the Drug Court Intervention on Offender Criminal Trajectories: A Research Note
Criminal Justice Policy Review,
June 1, 2009;
20(2):
236 - 246.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
C. A. Saum and M. L. Hiller
Should Violent Offenders Be Excluded From Drug Court Participation?: An Examination of the Recidivism of Violent and Nonviolent Drug Court Participants
Criminal Justice Review,
September 1, 2008;
33(3):
291 - 307.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
D. B. Marlowe, D. S. Festinger, P. L. Arabia, K. L. Dugosh, K. M. Benasutti, J. R. Croft, and J. R. McKay
Adaptive Interventions in Drug Court: A Pilot Experiment
Criminal Justice Review,
September 1, 2008;
33(3):
343 - 360.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
F. S. Taxman, K. L. Cropsey, D. W. Young, and H. Wexler
SCREENING, ASSESSMENT, AND REFERRAL PRACTICES IN ADULT CORRECTIONAL SETTINGS : A National Perspective.
Criminal Justice and Behavior,
September 1, 2007;
34(9):
1216 - 1234.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|
|
|