Since 1987, the Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring Program (ADAM—formerly known as the Drug Use Forecasting Program) has documented the prevalence and type of arrestee drug use across the nation. Unfortunately, this research is limited to urban or metropolitan areas, possibly because of presumed low levels of both crime and drugs in rural areas. The purpose of this paper is to present the importance of researching arrestee drug use in rural areas using data collected from the Rural ADAM Pilot Program. Specifically, this study examines the prevalence and type of arrestee drug use in four rural Nebraska counties and compares these results to those found in Omaha, Nebraska, which is a current ADAM site. Results indicated that arrestee drug use is similar to that in urban areas and the type of arrestee drug use varies across rural counties as well as between rural and urban areas. Most importantly, rural arrestee methamphetamine use appeared to exceed Omaha arrestee use in one rural area. These findings have substantial implications for planning at the local, state, and federal levels.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AdamsJ.BowmanK.BurkeB.CassonL.CavinessL.CoffeyL.E.DevoreJ.DurhamJ.EllisC.HewittD.HinsdaleM.JohnsonI.MyersS.PenneM.ZelonH.20011999 National Household Survey on Drug Abuse Data Collection Final Report. Rockville, MD: Department of Health and Human Services, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.
2.
BelenkoS.PeughJ.1998Fighting crime by treating substance abuse. Issues in Science & Technology, 15, 53–61.
3.
BrookeD.TaylorC.GunnJ.MadenA.1993Substance misusers remanded to prison: A treatment opportunity?Addiction, 93, 1851–1857.
4.
Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University (CASA)2000No place to hide: Substance abuse in midsize cities and rural America. Columbia, NY: The National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University.
5.
ChaikenJ.ChaikenM.1990Drugs and predatory crime. In TonryM.WilsonJ.Q. (Eds.) Drugs and crime. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.
6.
CongerR.1997The special nature of rural America. In RobertsonZ. S. E.BoydG.BeattyL.KozelN. (Ed.), Rural substance abuse: State of knowledge and issues (Vol. Monograph #168). Rockville, MD: National Institute of Drug Abuse.
7.
Department of Justice19971996 Drug Use Forecasting (DUF) annual report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.
8.
Department of Justice20001999 Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) annual report (NCJ 181426). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.
9.
DonnermeyerJ. F.1992The use of alcohol, marijuana, and hard drugs by rural adolescents: A review of recent research. Drugs and Society, 7(1/2), 31–75.
10.
DonnermeyerJ. F.1994Crime and violence in rural communities. In BlamerJ. (Ed.), Perspectives on violence and substance use in rural America (pp. 27–63). Oak Brook, IL: North Central Regional Educational Laboratory.
11.
EdwardsR. W.1997Drug and alcohol use among youth in rural communities. In RobertsonZ. S. E.BoydG.BeattyL.KozelN. (Ed.), Rural substance abuse: State of knowledge and issues (Vol. Monograph #168). Rockville, MD: National Institute of Drug Abuse.
12.
Federal Bureau of Investigation1996Crime in the United States, 1995. Washington, DC: Federal Bureau of Investigation.
13.
Federal Bureau of Investigation1997Crime in the United States, 1996. Washington, DC: Federal Bureau of Investigation.
14.
Federal Bureau of Investigation1998Crime in the United States, 1997. Washington, DC: Federal Bureau of Investigation.
15.
Federal Bureau of Investigation1999Crime in the United States, 1998. Washington, DC: Federal Bureau of Investigation.
16.
HarrellA. V.CisinI. H.1981Drug abuse in rural America. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
17.
HerzD.2000Drugs in the heartland. Washington, D.C.: National Institute of Justice.
18.
HobbsD.1994aThe context of rising rates of rural violence and substance abuse: The problems and potential of rural communities. In BlamerJ. (Ed.), Perspectives on violence and substance use in rural America (pp. 115–123). Oak Brook, IL: North Central Regional Educational Laboratory.
19.
HobbsD.1994bThe rural context for education: Adjusting the images. In BlamerJ. (Ed.), Perspectives on violence and substance use in rural America (pp. 5–25). Oakbrook, IL: North Central Regional Educational Laboratory.
20.
LeukefeldC. G.ClaytonR.MyersJ.1992Rural drug and alcohol treatment. Drugs and Society, 7(1/2), 95–116.
21.
LiaoT. F.1994Interpreting probability models: Logit, probit, and other generalized linear models (Vol. 101). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
ModlinH. C.PorterL.BensonR. E.1976Mental health centers and the criminal justice system. Hospital and Community Psychiatry, 27(10), 716–719.
24.
MoxleyR. L.1992U.S. rural drug abuse research needs and research policy. Drugs and Society, 7(1/2), 117–139.
25.
PetersR.H.GreenbaumP.E.EdensJ.F.CarterC.R.OrtizM.M.1998Prevalence of DSM-IV substance abuse and dependence disorders among prison inmates. American Journal of Drug & Alcohol Abuse, 24, 573–588.
26.
SmartR. G.AllisonK. R.CheungY.EricksonR.G.ShainM.SingleE.1990Future research needs in policy, prevention, and treatment for drug abuse problems. International Journal of the Addictions, 25(214), 117–126.
27.
TravisJ.VereenD.R.Jr.2000Final report, Methamphetamine Interagency Task Force. Washington, D.C.: National Institute of Justice.
28.
United States Census Bureau2001United States Census 2000. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Census Bureau.
29.
WargoM. J.SolomanJ.OppenheimJ.SharmaS.RomM.1990Rural Drug Abuse: Prevalence, Relation to Crime and Programs. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.
30.
WarnerBarbara D.LeukefeldC.G.2001Rural-urban differences in substance use and treatment utilization among prisoners. American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, 27, 265–281.
