International Journal of Drug Policy
Volume 21, Issue 1 , Pages 43-48 , January 2010

Drug treatment or alleviating the negative consequences of imprisonment? A critical view of prison-based drug treatment in Denmark

Received 6 October 2008 ,Revised 19 March 2009 ,Accepted 24 March 2009.

References 

  1. Anderson R. Kriminalpolitikens väsen [The nature of criminal policy]. Stockholm: Stockholm University; 2002;
  2. Asmussen V, Kolind T, Nielsen B. Selvevaluering af stofmisbrugsbehandling i fængsler og arresthuse [Self-evaluation of drug treatment programmes in prisons and remand prisons]. Aarhus: Centre for Alcohol and Drug Research; 2006;
  3. Bergeron H. Europeanization of drug policies. From objective convergence to mutual agreement. In:  Steffen M editors. Health governance in Europe. Issues, challenges and theories. London: Routledge; 2005;p. 174–187
  4. Brochu S. Evidence-based drug policies. Journal of Scandinavian Studies in Criminology and Crime Prevention. 2006;7(2):36–45
  5. Brochu S, Guyon L, Desjardins L. Comparative profiles of addicted adult populations in rehabilitation and correctional services. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment. 1999;16(2):173–182
  6. Bruce RD, Schleifer RA. Ethical and human rights imperatives to ensure medication-assisted treatment for opioid dependence in prisons and pre-trial detention. International Journal of Drug Policy. 2008;19(1):17–23
  7. Carlin T. An exploration of prisoners’ and prison staff's perception of the methadone maintenance programme in Mountjoy Male Prison, Dublin, Republic of Ireland. Drugs: Education, Prevention and Policy. 2005;12(5):405–416
  8. Christensen PB, Hammerby E, Bird S. Mortality among Danish drug users released from prison. International Journal of Prisoner Health. 2006;2(1):13–19
  9. Cohen S, Taylor L. Psychological survival: The experience of long-term imprisonment. Middlesex: Penguin Books; 1972;
  10. Craig SC. Rehabilitation versus control: An organizational theory of prison management. The Prison Journal. 2004;84(4):92–114
  11. Dahl H, Frank V, Kolind T. Cannabis treatment in Danish prisons: A product of new directions in national drug policy?. In:  Korf DJ editors. Cannabis in Europe: Dynamics in perception, policy and markets. Berlin: Pabst Science Publisher; 2008;p. 30–50
  12. Duke K. Prison drug policy since 1980: Shifting agendas and policy networks. Drugs: Education, Prevention and Policy. 2000;7(4):393–408
  13. Duke K. Drugs, prisons and policy-making. New York: Palgrave Macmillan; 2003;
  14. Dvoskin JA, Spiers EM. On the role of correctional officers in prison mental health. Psychiatric Quarterly. 2004;75(1):41–59
  15. Egg R, Pearson FS, Clealand CM, Lipton DS. Evaluations of correctional treatment programs in Germany: A review and meta-analysis. Substance Use & Misuse. 2000;35(12–14):1967–2009
  16. EMCDDA. (2003). Annual report 2003: The state of the drugs problem in the acceding and candidate countries to the European Union. Lisbon: EMCDDA, European Monitoring Centre on Drugs and Drug Addiction.
  17. EMCDDA. (2006). Annual report 2006: The state of the drugs problem in Europe. Lisbon: EMCDDA, European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction.
  18. Farrell M, Marsden J. Acute risk of drug-related death among newly released prisoners in England and Wales. Addiction. 2008;103:2251–2255
  19. Frank VA, Kolind T. Dilemmas experienced in prison based cannabis treatment – drug policy in Danish prisons. In:  Frank VA,  Bjerge B,  Pedersen EH editor. Drug policy – history, theory and consequences. Examples from Denmark and the USA. Aarhus: Aarhus University Press; 2008;p. 61–86
  20. Gjersing LR, Butler T, Caplehorn JRM, Belcher JM, Matthews R. Attitudes and beliefs towards methadone maintenance treatment among Australian prison health staff. Drug and Alcohol Review. 2007;6(5):501–508
  21. Glaser B, Strauss A. The discovery of grounded theory. Chicago: Aldine; 1967;
  22. Goffman E. Asylums. Essays on the social situation of mental patients and other inmates. London: Pelican Book; 1961;
  23. Inciardi JA, Martin SS, Butzin CA. Five-year outcomes of Therapeutic Community treatment of drug-involved offenders after release from prison. Crime and Delinquency. 2004;50(1):88–107
  24. In:  Jepsen J editors. Afvigerbehandling [Treatment of deviants]. Aalborg: Thaning & Appels Forlag; 1971;
  25. Keene J. Drug misuse in prison: views from inside: A qualitative study of prison staff and inmates. The Howard Journal of Criminal Justice. 1997;36(1):28–41
  26. Kerr T, Wood E, Betteridge G, Lines R, Jürgens R. Harm reduction in prisons: A ‘right based analysis’. Critical Public Health. 2004;14(4):345–360
  27. Kolind T. Form or content. The application of user perspectives in treatment research. Drugs: Education, Prevention and Policy. 2007;14(3):261–277
  28. Kolind, T., Vanderplasschen, W., & De Maeyer, J. (2009). Dilemmas when working with substance abusers with multiple and complex problems: The case manager's perspective. International Journal of Social Welfare, doi:10.1111/j.1468-2397.2008.00608.x.
  29. Kothari G, Marsden J, Strang J. Opportunities and obstacles for effective treatment of drug misusers in the criminal justice system in England and Wales. British Journal of Criminology. 2002;42:412–432
  30. Kramp, P., Gabrielsen, G., Lund, A., Alette, R., & Sindballe, A. -M. (2003). Rusmiddelundersøgelsen. Misbrug blandt Kriminalforsorgens klientel [The drug survey. Drug misuse among the clients of the Prison Service]. Copenhagen: Kriminalforsorgen [The Prison Service].
  31. Kriminalforsorgen. (2006a). Statistik [Statistics]. Copenhagen: Kriminalforsorgen [The Prison Service.
  32. Kriminalforsorgen. (2006b). Evaluering af den skærpede urinprøvekontrol [Evaluation of the intensified urine control]. Copenhagen: Kriminalforsorgen [The Prison Service].
  33. Kristoffersen R. Bagatellenes tyranni – samhandlingsstrukturen i et norsk fengsel [The tyranny of trivial matters – interaction patterns in a Norwegian prison]. Oslo: University of Oslo; 1986;
  34. Lipsky M. Street-level bureaucracy. Dilemmas of the individual in public services. New York: Russell Sage Foundation; 1980;
  35. Longshore D, Teruya C. Treatment motivation in drug users: A theory-based analysis. Drug and Alcohol Dependence. 2006;81(2):179–188
  36. Martinson R. What works? Questions and answers about prison reform. Public Interest. 1974;35:22–45
  37. McIntosh J, Saville E. The challenges associated with drug treatment in prison. Probation Journal. 2006;53(3):230–247
  38. McKeganey N, Morris Z, Neale J, Robertson M. What are drug users looking for when they contact drug services: Abstinence or harm reduction. Drugs: Education, Prevention and Policy. 2004;11(5):423–435
  39. Mitchell O, Wilson DB, MacKenzie DL. The effectiveness of incarceration-based drug treatment on criminal behaviour. Cambell Collaboration; 2006;
  40. In:  Møller L,  Stöver H,  Jürgens R,  Gatherer A,  Nikogosian H editor. Health in prisons. A WHO guide to the essentials in prison health. Copenhagen: WHO; 2007;
  41. Neale J, Saville E. Comparing community and prison-based drug treatment. Drugs: Education, Prevention and Policy. 2004;11(3):213–228
  42. Newcomb M, Galaif E, Carmona J. The drug-crime nexus in a community sample of adults. Psychology of Addictive Behaviours. 2001;15(3):185–193
  43. Owen B. The reproduction of social control: A study of prison workers at San Quentin. New York: Praeger; 1988;
  44. Parker H. The new drug intervention industry: What outcomes can drug/criminal justice treatment programmes realistically deliver?. Probation Journal. 2004;51(4):379–386
  45. Pedersen MU. Evidence-based practice in “the real world”. Nordic Studies on Alcohol and Drugs. 2007;24(6):605–616
  46. Pelissier B, Motivans M, Sounds-Bryant JL. Substance abuse treatment outcomes: A multi-site study on male and female prison programs. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation. 2005;41(2):57–80
  47. Regeringen. (2003). Kampen mod narko – Handlingsplan mod narkotikamisbrug. [The fight against drugs. Action plan against drug misuse]. Copenhagen.
  48. Rhodes LA. Total confinement. Madness and reason in the maximum security prison. Berkeley: University of California Press; 2004;
  49. Rosen P, Hiller M, Webster J, Staton M, Leukefeld C. Treatment motivation and therapeutic engagement in prison-based substance use treatment. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs. 2004;36(3):287–396
  50. In:  Shewan D,  Davies J editor. Drug use and prisons. An international perspective. Amsterdam: Harwood Academic Publishers; 2000;
  51. Stallwitz A, Stöver H. The impact of substitution treatment in prisons – A literature review. International Journal of Drug Policy. 2007;18(6):464–474
  52. Storgaard LL. Trends in cannabis use and changes in cannabis policy in Denmark. In:  Kraus L,  Korf DJ editor. Research on drugs and drug policy from a European perspective. European Society for Social Drug Research (ESSD). Pabst Science Publishers; 2005;p. 35–47
  53. Stöver H, Casselman J, Hennebel L. Substitution treatment in European prisons: A study of policies and practices in 18 European countries. International Journal of Prisoner Health. 2006;2(1):3–12
  54. Straffuldbyrdelsesloven. (2006). Act no. 23 of 12 December 2006, revising sect. 45a of the Act on Execution of Sentences.
  55. Sung H-E, Belenko S, Feng L. Treatment compliance in the trajectory of treatment progress among offenders. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment. 2001;20(2):153–162
  56. Toch H. Mosaic of despair: Human breakdowns in prison. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; 1992;
  57. Vandevelde S, Palmans V, Broekaert E, Rousseau K, Vanderstraeten K. How do drug-involved incarcerated and recently released offenders and correctional treatment staff perceive treatment? A qualitative study on treatment needs and motivation in Belgian prisons. Psychology, Crime & Law. 2006;12(3):287–305
  58. What Works. (2001–2002). Third report from the Joint Prison/Probation Accreditation Panel. UK.

PII: S0955-3959(09)00058-9

doi: 10.1016/j.drugpo.2009.03.002

International Journal of Drug Policy
Volume 21, Issue 1 , Pages 43-48 , January 2010

Article Tools