Juvenile Prevention Programs - Research Paper Example

 Juvenile Prevention Programs Introduction Juvenile crime has become a rampant issue in the world today, and key measures are supposed to be taken in order to prevent them. The intensity and severity of the juvenile crimes are determined by the cultural, economic and social community wel being in which the crimes take place. In communities with economic decline, cases of juvenile crimes have been reported to be frequent. The conditions and causes associated to juvenile crimes have been found to be at every level of the social structures (Rosenbaum, 2011). For instance, juvenile crimes can be occurring in the society as a whole, in social organizations, in social institutions, and in various social groups. Example of juvenile crimes that should be prevented in the society includes drug abuse, alcohol drinking, engaging in sexual activities, violent behavior at school and at home among other crimes. The essay below seeks to address juvenile prevention programs, and how they have been implemented in Washington D.C. The essay has also tackled the demographic and crime rate in Washington D.C. In Washington D.C, change in its demographic state has played a crucial role in dictating the rates of juvenile crimes among college students. Statistics have indicated that the increased number of people in Washington D.C has led to increased levels of juvenile crimes. There are a number of juvenile crimes that occur in Washington D.C, among them illegal sexual activities, heavy alcohol drinking among college and high school students, drug abuse cases, among other violent behavior in school and at home. Though the juvenile crimes in Washington D.C seem to be high, the rates have been decreasing over the years according to the statistics given out by the majority of studies on the same. The rate of juvenile crimes in Washington D.C can be compared to the rates in the whole country. A study done in 2003 indicated that the rate of juvenile violence lowered significantly in America as compared to a decade ago. Juvenile arrests reduced by 52% in parts of Washington D.C between 1995 and 2003 (Sewell, 2003). Heavy alcohol intake among college students in Washington D.C brings about negative consequences hence it is better relevant prevention programs to stop them from happening. The behavior results to poor academic performances, negative health well being of the students, negative social behavior, and also second hand consequences to students who associate with those who take alcohol heavily (Levy & Kremer, 2008). Negative social behavior of heavy alcohol drinking includes engaging in violent activities, and sexual assaults. Also as a result of heavy drinking among college students in Washington D.C, these students tend to miss their classes and most of them get in trouble with the security officials in their respective colleges. Teenagers in Washington D.C have recently been in the American headlines over various crimes they make (Harrison, 1996). According to the juvenile justice statistics, the index arrest rate for the juvenile violent crime increased between the year 2005 and 2006. In 2009, there was an indication that the rate of juvenile crimes reduced. The reduction of the juvenile crimes in Washington D.C shows that the juvenile prevention programs are effective (Rufus, 2010). The implementation of the BASICS prevention program in Washington D.C community was selected because of various reasons. One of the reasons is the high level of college students engaging in heavy alcohol drinking. Though the rates of juvenile crimes in Washington D.C have been indicated to reduce, the rates of alcohol drinking among college students are still rampant in the community. The community has over the years spent a lot of money for imprisoning the youth over the issue. This brings about a negative picture of the community and of the students arrested. Therefore, there was a need of initiating the BASICS prevention program and implementing it in Washington D.C in order to reduce the cases of heavy drinking among the college students in Washington D.C (Baer & Walters, 2006). Brief Alcohol Screening and Intervention  preventive program was developed by a group of researchers familiar with the field of alcohol and drug abuse. Dr. Alan Marlatt of the University of Washington was the main investigator of the program though he received support from the Human Services’ National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism as well as from the United States Department of Health in the form of research grants. John S. Baer, Ph.D., and Daniel R. Kivlahan, Ph.D. were the co-investigators of the program in the evaluation development study of the program (Marlatt, Baer, Dimeff, & Kivlahan, 1999). Washington D.C community was selected because of the high rates of heavy drinking habit among the college and university students. Most studies in Washington D.C have indicated that a majority of college students tend to engage in heavy drinking and end up driving in a careless manner. It is therefore important in the BASICS preventive program implementation in order to stop heavy alcohol drinking among college students in Washington D.C. Statistics have indicated that heavy alcohol drinking and driving is highly prevalent among most college students though the rate at which they consume the alcohol differs considerably among various subgroups of students (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 2009). Majority of college and university students in Washington D.C are highly susceptible to reckless driving due to heavy alcohol drinking. Heavy alcohol drinking among college students is common in the United States of America though the youth who are not in college also engage in heavy drinking because of peer pressure. Studies have shown that more than half of the college students in Washington D.C involved in heavy drinking of alcohol find themselves having problems related to alcohol over their school year. One of the problems they incur is getting involved in fatal road accidents when they drive after heavy drinking (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 2009). This shuns them away from attending school on a regular basis due to nursing of wounds. Therefore, it would be of considerable importance if the BASICS preventive program is implemented in Washington D.C. Juvenile crimes in Washington D.C affect every person in different ways. The crimes tend to affect parents, teachers, neighbors of the perpetrators, friends of the perpetrators, and the perpetrators themselves. Due to the high levels of the juvenile crimes in Washington D.C, there are a number of prevention programs which have been initiated. The implementation of the juvenile prevention programs seeks to reduce the cases of juvenile crimes in Washington D.C. the prevention programs can be successful only when they are fully implemented. Juvenile preventive programs that are more effective are those that intervene before a certain juvenile crime is committed. Such prevention programs tend to impact the public in a positive way because they stop the crimes from taking place (Marlatt, Baer, Dimeff, & Kivlahan, 1999). Juvenile prevention programs include the Adolescent Community Reinforcement Approach, Behavioral Couples Therapy, Cognitive Behavioral Intervention for Trauma in Schools, and Brief Alcohol Screening and Intervention  among other relevant programs (Randall, 1998). As a behavioral intervention, the adolescent community reinforcement approach is a prevention program that aims at replacing structures that support drugs and alcohol intake among the youth with structures that promote a healthy lifestyle. The overall goal of this particular prevention program is to increase social stability by reducing drug and substance use (Randall, 1998). The Behavioral Couples Therapy Abuse is a juvenile prevention program that focuses on dealing with juvenile crimes in a family setting. It is a family based treatment approach that deals with abuse of substance and alcohol. For the effectiveness of this program, patients are supposed to keep away from alcohol and drugs through a sobriety contract (Stewart & O'Farrell, 2006). Cognitive behavioral intervention for trauma in schools is another type of preventive program for juvenile crimes. This kind of preventive program was designed specifically for children who are highly exposed to cases of traumatic events such as violence. The program is aimed to build resilience among victims, reduce the symptoms that are related to traumatic events, and increase parent and peer support to the victims (Jaycox, 2004). Brief Alcohol Screening and Intervention, BASICS, is another type of juvenile prevention program that should be implemented effectively. BASICS is a juvenile prevention program which seeks to address the issue of heavy alcohol drinking among college students, and also deals with the college students who are at a risk of problems related to alcohol. This kind of program is aimed at giving the college students under the influence of heavy alcohol drinking motivation for them to reduce the intake of alcohol so that the consequences related to alcohol may reduce (Baer & Walters, 2006). The background information of the BASICS program indicates that the program was developed on the basis of two crucial research areas. The areas include brief interventions in addiction treatment and cognitive behavioral group treatment. Close to 15 years were spent by the developers of the program trying to test the efficacy of the preventive program among college students. During the testing, majority of college students met the alcohol abuse diagnostic criteria (Marlatt, Baer, Dimeff, & Kivlahan, 1999). Based on the cognitive behavioral group treatment, the program was designed to deal with the myths about alcohol effects and alcohol risk reduction awareness. Based on the brief interventions in addiction, the program was set to deal with the drinking patterns, and risks of heavy drinking among college students through a careful assessment. This was designed to be followed by an empathetic advice to make changes in the drinking patterns of college students. In the program, the brief interventions in addiction treatment were also found to be effective in changing the heavy drinking behavior among adults (Marlatt, Baer, Dimeff, & Kivlahan, 1999). In the efforts of implementing the program, two sessions are ought to be attended by the college students. The students are given a self report questionnaire which they fill either before or after the two interview sessions. The first session of the BASICS program mainly deals with obtaining information on the recent alcohol consumption of the student being interviewed, their family drinking history, and their personal beliefs on the intake of alcohol (Marlatt, Baer, Dimeff, & Kivlahan, 1999). The second interview session is normally conducted close to two weeks after the first interview session. It mainly seeks to provide the college students information related to their personalized drinking patterns, myths about the effects of alcohol consumption, ways of reducing any future risks that are associated with the use of alcohol, level of their respective family drinking patterns, and a list of options that enable students to make reasonable choices regarding the drinking of alcohol (Baer & Walters, 2006). Still in the second interview session, the interviewer is expected to provide the student interviewed with accurate information regarding alcohol drinking. Apart from the two interview sessions, the program also deals with the screening and referral of college students with the problem of alcohol intake for stepped care treatment (Marlatt, Baer, Dimeff, & Kivlahan, 1999). With the aim of implementing the BASICS program, the personnel involved in interviewing the students do not interview the students in a judgmental and confrontational way. As indicated in the paragraph above, the program a motivational kind of interviews that encourage students to shun away from alcoholic behavior (Larimer, Cronce, Lee, & Kilmer, 2004/2005). The program is effective in addressing the issue of juvenile crime based on heavy alcohol drinking because it helps students be able to make better decisions on alcohol use. Once the program is fully implemented, it reduces the rate of alcohol drinking among college students, it decreases the adverse consequences of alcohol consumption, it gives the college students crucial information on how to reduce the risks associated to alcohol, and it tends to provide healthier choices for the college students under the influence of alcohol and problems related to alcohol consumption (Larimer, Cronce, Lee, & Kilmer, 2004/2005). The BASICS program can be implemented in various settings including mental health centers, university health centers, administrative offices, and residential units. Through the implementation of this program, students with problems of heavy alcohol drinking are able to be identified through a series of screening or through referral from housing, medical, or disciplinary services. In Washington D.C, this program is more effective in dealing with the issue of heavy alcohol drinking among college students (Policy, Brief Alcohol Screening and Intervention for College Students (BASICS), 2012). Statistics have shown that the implementation of the BASICS program in leading universities and colleges based in Washington D.C contributed to the reduced levels of alcohol drinking among college students who are aged between 18 and 24 years. Previous researches had indicated that students under the influence of heavy drinking registered low levels of alcohol intake when they were subjected to BASICS program (Marlatt, Baer, Dimeff, & Kivlahan, 1999). Successful implementation of the BASICS program in the Washington D.C’s colleges relied heavily on how well the program was implemented and on the quality of the program itself. Lack of efficient resources to carry out the implementation of the program can be a significant hindrance to the fulfillment of its goals . Resources that are needed for the implementation of the program include adequately trained personnel to carry out the program, and the presence of the support team in the community where the program is to be implemented (Carey & Borsari, 2001). In Washington D.C, the success of BASICS program implementation was boosted by the fact that the resources that support the implementation of the program were readily available. The training and material to carry out the program in colleges in Washington D.C are usually available. Normally before carrying out the program, the trainees usually undergo an intensive training by fully trained personnel for one or two days (Larimer, Cronce, Lee, & Kilmer, 2004/2005). The trainees are trained on interview skills, and basic information related to alcohol drinking among college students as well as non-confrontational interviewing which is an example of clinical techniques. Apart from the training and material requirements available in Washington for the implementation of the BASICS program, there is the technical and evaluation assistance (Sole, Murrett, & Schaus, 2009). This is a very important requirement that contributes to effective implementation of the program in Washington D.C. Towards the implementation efforts of the BASICS program in Washington D.C, majority of studies tend to recruit volunteer students from various colleges and universities. The students then undergo some form of assessment, and then based on their drinking patterns, they are selected. College students who were fond of heavy alcohol drinking were mainly selected though those who stayed in heavy drinking environments were also recruited (Marlatt, Baer, Kavlahan, & McKnight, 2001). After the recruitment of volunteer students, they are then subjected to the program or not in order to differentiate the outcomes of those subjected and of those not subjected to the program. In some studies, an additional preventive program is added in order to point out the effectiveness of BASICS program with and without the interference of another preventive program. The outcomes of the results indicated that the students who were subjected to BASICS program reduce their alcohol intake as compared to students who were not subjected to the BASICS program (Marlatt, Baer, Dimeff, & Kivlahan, 1999). The implementation of the BASICS preventive program in Washington D.C has been beneficial in various ways. The BASICS program has improved the awareness of the majority of college students on the risks that are associated to heavy use of alcohol. The program has helped college and university students in the community obtain crucial information on the alcohol impaired choices that can bring them negative health consequences as well as legal and social hardships. Apart from the above benefits of the program to the Washington D.C community, the program has also fostered safer choices for alcohol drinking among college students such as how much they should drink, where they should drink and when they should drink. This has improved academic performance as well as attendance of the students back at their respective colleges and universities (Carey & Borsari, 2001). Conclusion In conclusion, for a successful implementation of the BASICS program, there are two major areas of focus that should not be ignored. The first area of concern should be the identification of the critical elements of the BASICS program itself. These elements that are important to the success of the BASICS program. The second area of concern for the successful implementation of the BASICS program is the proper utilization of all the core implementation components of the program itself. The core implementation components of the program include preservice and in-service training of the trainees, selection of the staff, evaluation of the staff members, evaluation of the program, and the intervention of systems (Marlatt, Baer, Dimeff, & Kivlahan, 1999). The developers of BASICS preventive program designed the design specifically for college students who are between the ages of 18 and 24 years who have experienced negative consequences from heavy alcohol drinking. As discussed in the essay above, the program does not cater for students who are alcohol dependent though it can be applied to give advice and specialty care these students (Sole, Murrett, &Schaus, 2009). References Baer, J., & Walters, S. (2006). Talking With College Students About Alcohol: Motivational Strategies for Reducing Abuse. New York: Taylor & Francis Group. Carey, K., & Borsari, B. (2001). Effects of a brief motivational intervention with college student drinkers. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology , 728-733. Harrison, L. (1996). Alcohol Problems in the Community. New York: Routledge. Jaycox, L. (2004). Cognitive Behavioral Intervention for Trauma in Schools. Wilton: Sopris West. Larimer, ,. M., Cronce, J., Lee, ,. C., & Kilmer, J. (2004/2005). Brief Intervention in. Alcohol Research & Health , 94-104. Levy, D., & Kremer, M. (2008). Peer Effects and Alcohol Use Among College Students. Economic Perspectives , 189-206. Marlatt, A., Baer, J., Dimeff, L., & Kivlahan, D. (1999). Brief Alcohol Screening and Intervention for College Students (BASICS): A Harm Reduction Approach . New York: Guilford Press. Marlatt, A., Baer, J., Kavlahan, D., & McKnight, P. (2001). Brief intervention for heavy- drinking college students: 4-year follow-up and natural history. American Journal of Public Health , 1310-1316. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. (2009). Traffic Safety Facts 2009 Data: Alcohol Impaired. Retrieved November 13th, 2012, from Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Transportation: http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf. Policy, W. S. (2012). Brief Alcohol Screening and Intervention for College Students (BASICS). Washington D.C: Crystal Press. Randall, P. (1998). Art Works! Prevention Programs for Youth and Communities. New York: DIANE Publishing. Rosenbaum, Y. G. (2011). College Student Alcohol Use in Response to Threats-To-Self Stress. South Carolina: BiblioBazaar. Rufus, A. (2010, December 29). Who Drinks the Most Alcohol? Retrieved November 13, 2012, from The Daily Beast: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2010/12/29/drinking-stats-who-drinks-the-most-alcohol.html Sewell, C. (2003). Shooting Highlights Crime Debate—Mayor Pushes Tougher Rules on Trying Teens as Adults. The Washington Post , 11-13. Sole, L., Murrett, M., & Schaus, J. (2009). Alcohol screening and brief intervention in a college student health center: A randomized controlled trial. Studies on Alcohol and Drugs , 131- 141. Stewart, W., & O'Farrell, T. (2006). Behavioral Couples Therapy for Alcoholism And Drug Abuse. New York: Guilford Press. Read More