101576: Drug Treatment for Drug-Abusing Criminal Offenders

About the Course:

A number of states have considered laws or ballot initiatives intended to divert drug-abusing criminal offenders into treatment programs instead of prison or jail. Most of the research on these initiatives focuses on California’s Proposition 36 and Arizona’s Proposition 200. Proposition 36 refers to the Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act, which increased state funding for treatment and allowed eligible non-violent drug offenders who plead guilty to enter drug treatment instead of receiving a traditional sentence. Proposition 200 refers to the Drug Medicalization, Prevention and Control Act, which requires a court to sentence first- and second-time non-violent offenders who are convicted of personal possession or use of a controlled substance to probation and drug treatment. This publication looks at available data from those initiatives.

This course is from our series “Substance Abuse and Societal Issues”. The series is based on Knowledge Assets, published by the Substance Abuse Policy Research Program.

Our other courses in the series include:

101568-Alcohol Retail Policy

101569-DUI Policy

101564-Increasing the Use of Smoking Cessation Treatments

101570-Substance Abuse and Welfare Reform

101563-Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Substance Abuse Treatment

101574-Syringe Access Interventions

101575-Minimum Legal Drinking Age Policy

101577-Buprenorphine Treatment for Opioid Addiction

101576-Drug Treatment for Drug Abusing Criminal Offenders

Publication Date:

Feb. 2009

Authors

Beau Kilmer, Ph.D; Martin Y. Iguchi, Ph.D

About the Authors:

Beau Kilmer is Co-Director of the RAND Drug Policy Research Center.

Martin Y. Iguchi is a professor at the UCLA School of Public Health, Department of Community Health Sciences.

Recommended For:

This course is recommended for health care professionals, especially addiction counselors, psychologists, mental health counselors, social workers, and nurses who seek knowledge about drug treatment for drug-abusing criminal offenders. It is appropriate for all levels of participants’ knowledge.

Course Objectives:

1. Discuss taxpayer cost savings, limitations on usage of Proposition 36 funds, likelihood of referrals entering residential care, impacts of drug testing, and factors related to criminal histories and prison sentences.

2. Explain the arguments behind the enactment of Propositions 36 and 200 and whether data analysis corroborates the suppositions.

3. Describe the impact of Proposition 36 on treatment referrals and completions, possible displacement of clients entering treatment voluntarily, and likelihood of arrest for drug and property offenses among eligible offenders.