Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 29, 2024 Mon
Time: 11:16 pm
Time: 11:16 pm
Results for alcoholism (u.k.)
3 results foundAuthor: Baldwin, Helen Title: Evaluation of the Alcohol Treatment Requirement in Five Sites Across the Lancashire Probation Area Summary: An Alcohol Treatment Requirement can be mandated by Courts as part of a community sentence. It requires offenders to attend structured alcohol treatment for a set number of hours a week over a fixed period of time (in this case 6 months). This paper outlines the findings from an evaluation of the delivery and effectiveness of the Alcohol Treatment Requirement in Lancashire. Delivery of the partnership working between Probation and alcohol treatment services was generally excellent and was underpinned by good quality communication. There were positive outcomes for offenders including reductions in alcohol consumption and improved health and relationships Details: Liverpool: Centre for Public Health, Liverpool John Moores University, 2010. 52p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 8, 2011 at: http://www.cph.org.uk/showPublication.aspx?pubid=712 Year: 2010 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.cph.org.uk/showPublication.aspx?pubid=712 Shelf Number: 123265 Keywords: Alcohol Treatment ProgramsAlcoholism (U.K.)Probationers |
Author: Robinson, Emma Title: The Alcohol Treatment Requirement: A more responsive way of working with alcohol-misusing offenders Summary: The overarching aim of the evaluation was to give some early indications of the success of the Alcohol Treatment Requirement in West Yorkshire, in terms of offender compliance and completion levels, changes in alcohol dependency and whether the ATR better meets the needs of alcohol misusing offenders. With this in mind there were three main research strands: a case file-read of offenders on the ATR to investigate levels of compliance; a pre and post programme offender questionnaire designed to capture feedback on levels of alcohol consumption; and interviews with offenders and treatment provider staff to ascertain feedback on the ATR in terms of meeting offender needs and partnership working. The file-read analysis revealed that compliance to ATR appointments was lower than the compliance rate of the comparison group (of offenders with an alcohol need in OASys prior to the introduction of the ATR). However, the ATR group did not have a high level if ‘unacceptable’ (and therefore enforceable) absences for appointments with the treatment provider. Indeed the number of ‘unacceptable’ absences for actual ATR appointments (n=29) was lower than that for probation appointments in both the ATR group (n=43) and the comparison group (n=41). The comparison group also had a much higher number of acceptable absences which may reflect the chaotic nature of offenders with alcohol misuse problems and therefore confirms the need for a dedicated programme of treatment and support for this group. The file-read analysis appears to suggest that it is compliance to probation appointments, and in particular a high number of ‘acceptable’ absences for these appointments, that is bringing the compliance level down amongst the ATR sample. It may be that the ATR appointments are afforded some priority amongst this group, since they are specifically ‘aimed at ‘treating’ their alcohol misuse. Greater efforts might be made to attend these appointments over other probation appointments which are perhaps less likely to meet offender’s immediate needs in terms of addressing entrenched patterns of alcohol abuse. The number of successful completions for the ATR sample was 8 (27%), compared to a total of 19 (63%) in the comparison group. However, this was not a straightforward like-for-like comparison as within the ATR group, there were 7 cases that still had an order ongoing at the time of data analysis. A total of 12 offenders (40%) completed their ATR requirement and went on to successfully complete their order. Therefore the conversion rate from ATR completion to order completion is actually 8 from 12 (67%) for this sample. Details: Wakefield, UK: West Yorkshire Probation Services, 2010. 54p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 5, 2013 at: http://www.westyorksprobation.org.uk/documentlist.php?type=1&year=2010 Year: 2010 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.westyorksprobation.org.uk/documentlist.php?type=1&year=2010 Shelf Number: 128269 Keywords: Alcohol Misusing OffendersAlcohol Treatment ProgramsAlcoholism (U.K.)Probationers |
Author: Centre for Social Justice Title: No Quick Fix: Exposing the depth of Britain's drugs and alcohol problem Summary: This report lays bare the reality of substance abuse and addiction in Britain today. This ongoing challenge affects millions of people and has huge costs. Alcohol abuse costs taxpayers $21 billion a year and drugs $15 billion. While costs matter, it is the human consequences that present the real tragedy. The abuse of substances is a pathway to poverty and can lead to family breakdown and child neglect, homelessness, crime, debt, and long-term worklessness. From its impact on children to its consequences for those in later life, addiction destroys lives, wrecks families and blights communities. The scale of the problem is shocking. 1.6 million people are dependent on alcohol in England alone. One in seven children under the age of one live with a substance-abusing parent, and more than one in five (2.6 million) live with a parent who drinks hazardously. 335,000 (one in 37) children live with a parent who is addicted to drugs. The Centre for Social Justice (CSJ) has been encouraged by some of the commitments contained within the Drug Strategy 2010 and by the efforts of some reformers within government. The move to a recovery-oriented system is an important step to ensuring that harm reduction is only the first step along a path to abstinence and full recovery. Challenges persist, however, as many vested interests remain entrenched within the treatment system. Supporters of substitute treatment remain unconvinced by the possibilities of full- and long-term recovery, and are resistant to reform. Alarmingly, some commissioners are withdrawing support for effective services. The CSJ has learned that 55 per cent of local authorities have cut funding to residential rehabilitation centres whilst harm reduction services that maintain people in their addiction have been preserved under the NHS ring-fence. These rehabilitation centres, which the Prime Minister has rightly backed in the past, have proved time and again to be an effective way of breaking the cycle of addiction and must be supported. In this report, we also highlight the system's lack of ambition to tackle alcohol abuse, despite its rising cost. While two-thirds of the 300,000 drug addicts in England get treatment, only a small minority (approximately seven per cent) alcohol dependants get similar help. Furthermore, by withdrawing its plans for a minimum unit price, the Government has missed an opportunity to tackle the increased availability of super cheap, strong alcohol. Parents and children, together with addicts and taxpayers, are calling for action. In this report we outline the challenges; in the coming year the CSJ will publish policy recommendations to help solve Britain's drug and alcohol crisis. Details: London: Centre for Social Justice, 2013. 107p. Source: Internet Resource: Breakthrough Britain II: Accessed August 23, 2014 at: http://www.centreforsocialjustice.org.uk/UserStorage/pdf/Pdf%20reports/addict.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.centreforsocialjustice.org.uk/UserStorage/pdf/Pdf%20reports/addict.pdf Shelf Number: 129896 Keywords: Alcohol AbuseAlcohol Related Crime, DisorderAlcoholism (U.K.)Drug Abuse and AddictionDrug PolicySubstance Abuse |