首页> 外文期刊>Contemporary drug problems >For the marginalized or for the integrated? A comparative study of addiction treatment systems in Sweden and the United States
【24h】

For the marginalized or for the integrated? A comparative study of addiction treatment systems in Sweden and the United States

机译:对于边缘化还是对于整合?瑞典和美国的成瘾治疗系统比较研究

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

This article compares the roles of two different addiction treatment systems, one in Stockholm county, surrounding the Swedish capital, and the other in a county in Northern California, in relation to marginalized and socially integrated misusers. It investigates: (a) whether the Swedish treatment system, as suspected, treats more marginalized clients than the American system, (b) where in the two systems those with stronger or weaker social ties show up, and (c) what kind of formal and informal pressures the socially marginalized and more integrated groups experience. The analyses are based on structured interviews with two representative samples of clients/patients entering different parts of the treatment systems (926 persons in the Californian county in 1995, 1,865 persons in Stockholm county 2000-2001). The Stockholm county treatment system has a much higher share of marginalized persons than the Californian, and a large proportion in California, almost one third, has both a job and a stable housing (15% in Stockholm). The Stockholm clients were considerably older. Drug use was connected with a marginalized position in both countries, and particularly so in Stockholm. The socially integrated in Stockholm stood out as the group with the highest share of alcohol-dependent persons, the highest Addiction Severity Index (ASI) alcohol scores, and the highest amount of heavy drinking. In both sites, the marginalized had more treatment experience and were more often found in inpatient treatment. There was a somewhat clearer social division in the U.S. system than in the Swedish. Some reasons for this are discussed, including the relation of the treatment system to other handling systems.
机译:本文比较了两种不同的成瘾治疗系统在边缘化和社会融合的滥用者方面的作用,一种在瑞典首都斯德哥尔摩附近的郡,另一种在北加利福尼亚郡中的郡。它调查:(a)怀疑的瑞典待遇制度是否比美国制度对待更多的边缘化客户;(b)在两个制度中,社会关系强弱的人出现在何处;以及(c)什么样的正式人以及社会边缘化和整合程度更高的群体所经历的非正式压力。分析是基于对进入治疗系统不同部分的两个具有代表性的客户/患者样本进行的结构性访谈(1995年,加利福尼亚州县有926人,2000-2001年斯德哥尔摩县有1,865人)。斯德哥尔摩县待遇系统的边缘化人群所占比例比加利福尼亚州高得多,在加利福尼亚州,很大一部分比例(近三分之一)既有工作又有稳定的住房(斯德哥尔摩为15%)。斯德哥尔摩的客户年龄较大。吸毒与这两个国家的边缘化地位有关,尤其是在斯德哥尔摩。在斯德哥尔摩,融入社会的人是酒精依赖者比例最高,成瘾严重程度指数(ASI)酒精评分最高,重度饮酒量最高的人群。在这两个地方,边缘化人群都有更多的治疗经验,并且在住院治疗中更常见。与瑞典人相比,美国制度中的社会分工更加清晰。讨论了一些原因,包括处理系统与其他处理系统的关系。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号