Discovering the Real Problem: Effective Assessment In DUI/DWI Courts Terrence D. Walton, MSW, CSAS Director of Treatment District of Columbia Pretrial Services Agency Alcohol-impaired driving kills 17,000 people annually 40% of all traffic fatalities Social drinking drivers decreased over last 25 years Hard core drinking drivers constitute a larger percentage of drunk drivers Despite repeated sanctions, continues to drive at least once a month with a blood alcohol content (BAC) of.15 or greater 3% of total licensed drivers meet criteria Responsible for 80% of total impaired driving trips Frequency of impaired driving and the level of impairment pose significant risk to the public
1. Does this offender have a problem in his/her relationship with alcohol and/or other drugs? 2. What is the duration and severity of this problem? 3. What combination of educational and treatment services has the greatest probability of resolving these problems? The percentage of offenders diagnosed as alcohol dependent triples when the same drivers are re-evaluated five years after 1 st arrest! 1. What degree of risk does this offender pose to the safety of the public? 2. What community strategies can best be combined to lower the threat to public safety posed by this offender?
Risk defined as DUI recidivism and future involvement in alcoholrelated crashes involving damage to property, personal injury, and death 1.Non-Judgmental 2.Openness2 3.Warmth 1. Listen 2. Understand 3. Accept
1. Expressive 2. Truthful 3. Connect 1.Smile 2.Genuine 3.Courtesy Illinois Risk Reduction Task Force
1. Literature review of DUI evaluation processes and instruments 2. Created scientific advisory panel 3. Conducted a 2001 national survey of DUI/evaluation processes and instruments 47 states 4. Focus groups with Illinois judges, prosecutors, probation officers, evaluators, treatment specialists, and administrative hearing officers 23 of 47 states mandated some tool 33 different evaluation tools in use 50% satisfied with evaluation tool Driver Di Risk Rik Inventory-II II (DRI-II) II) & Mortimer-Filkens Test most commonly mandated tools 1. Reliability of self-report 2. Inconsistent access to criminal history, driving, & insurance records 3. Instruments failing to collect critical information AOD history 4. Private assessment agencies that do the most rigorous evals not getting the business 5. Failure to identify those who pose the greatest threat to public safety
No single tool met all the criteria adequately addressed both clinical and public safety questions Adult Substance Use & Drinking Survey (ASUDS) ASUDS-RI (Revised for Illinois) 113 questions 15 scales and subscales Self-administered Raw score for each scale and percentile rank showing where respondent falls in relation to other DUI offenders Composite score with cut off points indicating the level of service needed Differentiate first-time DUI offenders who are unlikely to be involved in future DUI offenses from first-time time DUI offenders whose problems are likely to escalate into increased risk of DUI recidivism and alcohol/drug-related crashes
Piloted in 2004 486 offenders 10 Illinois evaluation sites Utilized the ASUDS-RI Compared the non-recidivists to the recidivists to create a profile Male 25 to 45 years old Single, separated or divorced Caucasian or Hispanic Less than 12 years of education Transiently employed in blue collar work
Recidivism risk declines with age. In Illinois, repeat offending peaked between ages 31 and 35. 1. Social group: heavy drinkers and drinking drivers 2. Believes he can drive safely after drinking 3. Sees arrest as bad luck or police harassment 4. Diminished capacity for empathy 5. Marked absence of guilt or remorse 6. Failure to take responsibility for decisions and outcomes 7. Pattern of impulsivity and risk taking 1. Nearly 50% were more likely to have two or more non-dui arrests, compared to 20% of first time offenders 2. Had twice the rate of crimes against person (30% versus 15%) 3. More likely to be DV-related (56%) 4. Almost three times more likely to have a collateral charge of marijuana possession 5. Twice as likely to have on prior collision, as well as more likely to have moving violations 6. More likely to have collateral charges
1. More likely to have early onset & exposure 2. More heavy smokers (2 pack a day) 3. Greater number of episodes of past illicit drug use 4. Much more likely to have previous AOD treatment ; more likely to have dropped out 5. More likely to have prior mental health treatment 6. More likely to have prior medical treatment for self injury resulting from risk taking
More likely to be arrested during non-weekend hours Monday, Wednesday, and Thursday Addiction Professional January-February 2008 www.addictionpro.com Search: Evaluating the hard core drunk driver The Behaviors & Attitudes Drinking & Driving Scale (BADDS) is an evidence-based pre and posttest t psychological l questionnaire that measures attitudes, behaviors, and intervention effectiveness related to impaired driving.
The BADDS can identify: risk of future impaired driving and riding behaviors intervention effectiveness behavioral and attitudinal change after intervention rationalizations for drinking and driving history of impaired driving Discovering the Real Problem: Effective Assessment In DUI/DWI Courts Terrence D. Walton, MSW, CSAS Terrencewalton@aol.com