Slow and Steady; aSubstance Abuse TreatmentProgram Proposal forJuvenile OffendersGolnaz FortuneAlliant International University
THE FACTS The state of California has the highest juvenile custody rates when compared to the rest of the nation (Davis, Tsukida, Marchionna, & Krisberg, 2008) Substance abuse as well as mental health is highly prevalent among juvenile offenders (Chapman et al., 2006).
The cost of detaining and rehabilitating juvenile offenders is costly (Baldwin et al., 2012) Family plays a large role in substance abuse among youth. Many begin using substances due to parental influence and also do so based on attachment. (Lopez et al., 2009)
THE PREDICTORS Predictors of substance abuse include (Goldstein et al., 2008): Conduct disorder Suicide attempts Age Sexual abuse Physical abuse PTSD Trouble with law enforcement Pregnancy/abortion Homelessness (Stagman et al., 2011) SES (Stagman et al., 2011) Gender (Stagman et al., 2011) Ethnicity (Stagman et al., 2011)
THE PROTECTORS Living at home with both parents (Goldstien et al., 2008)• Recent involvement with prevention programs (Stagman et al., 2011).• Positive Parental involvement and monitoring of behavior (Stagman et al., 2011).• Refraining from drug usage, by age 21 will be less likely to become a user (Stagman et al., 2011).
The Slow and SteadyProposalWho: Youth who have had a historywith law enforcementWhat: Adolescent drug treatmentmentoring programWhy: Mentoring is a major protectivefactor in juvenile delinquency andcan be utilized to create an effectivedrug treatment program andprevention program.How: youth involved with theprogram will be part of a mentoringprogram. Parental involvement willbe required
WHY MENTORING? A qualitative study conducted in London, England by Dallos and Comley-Ross (2005) evaluated the effects of mentoring among at- risk youth. The researchers questioned the positive effects of mentoring and explored the participant’s experience of being mentored. The participants: Six youth, 50% male and 50% female, between the ages of 13 and 17. All had experiences with serious family disruptions and separations and had been in foster care. During the time of the study, four youth had been in care, all had difficulties with their parents, and had little to no contact with one or both parents.
The Mentoring Program: PROMISE provided mentors for a period of 1 to 2 years. All mentors were volunteers from a variety of professional backgrounds, teaching, police officers, or counselors. Mentors were required to meet with mentees two hours or more per week and engaged in activities such as fieldtrips, quality time at home with the mentor, sports, gardening, and talking casually including disclosure of problems and feelings.
To obtain the data, the researchers conducted an experimental qualitative design and implemented Interpretive Phenomenological Analysis (IPA), a similar theoretical design to Grounded Theory. The researchers conducted cross sectional 45-minute individual interviews with mentees and conducted two group discussions with mentors and staff. All interviews and group discussions were recorded and transcribed. All six of the youth participants were interviewed and 40 mentors and staff were asked to participate in the group discussions.
THE RESULTS: Researchers identified five themes: Good Object (mentor was nice person, warmth, kindness, voluntary, hardworking). Good Relationship (confidentiality, on my side, different to professional relationships, different to family relationships) Attachment (care about me, acceptance, availability, reliance on the mentor, dependence, reciprocity). Building Trust (actions speak louder than words, being held in mind, putting themselves out for me, breaking the rules, going beyond the ‘normal’, having fun). Facilitating Change (giving advice, listening to me, talking things through, promoting areas of change, behavior, lifting mood-anger, changing thinking-better view of self and of others, get on better with others). The themes and clusters suggested that the mentees benefited from their mentoring experience and perceived it to be beneficial and positive. While the participants were provided an incentive, they still suggested to others to find a mentor, and reported to be surprised by their own positive personal experiences with their mentors.
BIG BROTHER BIG SISTER OFAMERICA(GROSSMAN, TIERNEY, & RESCH,2000). Big Sister of America is a non-profit that focuses on Big Brother providing opportunities for adults to collaborate with the youth and to affect them positively through mentorship. Many programs are offered: community based mentoring, school based mentoring, African American mentoring, Hispanic mentoring, Amachi Program, Native American mentoring, and Mentoring Military children.
Their program has reduced the probability of delinquent behavior among the youth participants. Their findings indicate that among the Little Brothers and Little Sisters (mentees) 46% were less likely than others to use drugs during the period of the study, 27% were less likely than others to use alcohol, and 52% were less likely to skip school feeling more confident in their abilities when compared to the controls. 70% of minority youth were less likely to engage in drug use and were half as likely to engage in alcohol consumption during the time of the study. These findings concerning minority youth are extremely significant and indicate a decrease in two possibly three (ditching school) major risk factors determining delinquency, drug and alcohol use.
THE PROGRAM: Based on the findings it is proposed to have the drug treatment program with the following components: Mentoring/Incentive program Parenting Groups Integrated Family and Individual Treatment Online Support Group for Both Parent and Youth
MENTORING/INCENTIVEPROGRAM Based on the findings indicated, mentoring programs are highly successful in prevention and is a major protective factor in adolescent delinquent behavior The mentors will under go a three step process. All individuals will need to level up with regards to their progress in their treatment. Once they have succeeded, they will then be able to mentor. All of those who have leveled up will be paired with a newly admitted patient. They will be over seen by a counselor and will not only be provided supervision, but also additional support services if needed. Once their mentee has reached their level and provided that the mentors are moving forward in their treatment, the mentors will then continue on to the prevention program and will visit schools to spread knowledge on the effects of substance use. They themselves will create a 6 month curriculum for a 1 hour class each week to be implemented in a school. All mentors will be supervised and a supervisor will accompany them to the schools. The final step is graduation. Once graduated, if interested the mentors will have the opportunity to work within the facility and be provided with the opportunity to become a drug treatment counselor and will be provided with a grant to put towards his or her college fund.
PARENTING GROUPS Based on the findings that positive parental involvement is essential in drug prevention, it is imperative that they become involved with their teen. Here the parents will be provided: Group Support Individual Family Support if needed Parenting Group The space to venture off into their own personal family drug history.
INTEGRATED FAMILY AND INDIVIDUALTREATMENT All patients will be required to attend individual therapy. In addition, family will be required to attend weekly for family therapy. Family therapy will be based on one of the following treatment strategies (Lopez et al.,2012) : Brief Strategic Family Therapy Functional Family Therapy Multidimensional Family Therapy Multisystemic Therapy
ONLINE SUPPORT The online support will consist of the ability to have a live chat with others within the program. There are three separate groups: Chat For Parents Chat for Teens Chat with a counselor These support groups are offered for out patient and for those who are triggered and need additional support. This also assists in developing a community and a bond between others who are undergoing similar experiences.
CONCLUSION: It is concluded that this proposed program will be successful in not only treating substance abusers but also in the positive development of a drug prevention program. Youth will experience mentoring in every aspect and will be provided incentive opportunities to ensure their success. Parents will be asked to be involved and will be required to go through the process with their youth. This program will be also successful in developing community support for those that are undergoing similar experiences.
RESOURCES: Baldwin, S. A., Christian, S., Berkeljon, A., & Shadish, W. R. (2012). The Effects of Family Therapies for Adolescent Delinquency and Substance Abuse: A Meta-analysis. [Article]. Journal of Marital & Family Therapy, 38(1), 281-304. doi: 10.1111/j.1752- 0606.2011.00248.x Bovasso, G.B. (2001). Cannabis abuse as a risk factor for depressive symptoms. The American Journal of Psychiatry. 158(12), pg. 2033-2037 Dallos, R., & Comley-Ross, P. (2005). Young peoples experience of mentoring: Building trust and attachments. Clinical Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 10, 369-383. doi:10.1177/1359104505053755 Goldstein, B. I. & Levitt, A. J. (2008).The specific burden of comorbid anxiety disorders and of substance use disorders in bipolar I disorder. Bipolar Disorders,10(1), pp. 67-78. Grossman, J.B., Tierney, J.P., & Resch, N.L (2000). Making a difference: an impact study of big brothers big sisters. Publication Manual. Retrieved from http://www.ppv.org/ppv/publication.asp?search_id=20&publication_id=111§ion_id=0 Lopez, V., Katsulis, Y., & Robillard, A. (2009). Drug use with parents as a relational strategy for incarcerated female adolescents. Family Relations, 58(2), pp. 135-147. Stagman, S., Schwarz, S. W., Powers, D., & National Center for Children in, P. (2011). Adolescent Substance Use in the U.S.: Facts for Policymakers. Fact Sheet: National Center for Children in Poverty.