In Sweden, the social services are responsible for administering help interventions to substance abusers after discharge from coercive care. The general aim of the present study is to analyze how a sample of social workers describe case-management related to compulsory treatment aftercare and how they construct and assign meaning to concepts such as coercive care, treatment goals and aftercare. Results show that aftercare is theoretically praised as a buffer that may help clients maintain gains from initial treatment. However, as regards compulsory treatment case-management, aftercare is described less as a transitory phase of low-intensity assistance for recovering substance abusers, and more as a permanent process where interventions labeled aftercare improve the living conditions of clients who are believed unwilling and/or unable to quit substance abuse. As interpreted in this article, the social worker discourse shows how a discrepancy between aftercare theory and practice is constructed, explained and handled.
BergmarkA. (2004) Tvångsvårdens utfall—en uppföljning av missbrukare vårdade med stöd av LVM, In Forskningsrapporter, Bilagedel till LVM-utredningens betänkande Tvång och förändring (pp. 477–487). SOU 2004:3, Stockholm: Fritzes.
2.
BergmarkA. & KlingemannH. (2006) The legitimacy of addiction treatment in a world of smart people. Addiction, 101, 1230–1237.
3.
BlumeA.W. (2005) Treating drug problems. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
4.
BrownT.G.SeraganianP.TremblayJ. & AnnisH. (2002) Process and outcome changes with relapse prevention versus 12-step aftercare programs for substance abusers. Addiction, 97, 677–689.
5.
BurrV. (2003) Social constructionism (2nd ed.), London, UK: Routledge.
6.
CarrollK.M. (1997) Compliance and alcohol treatment: An overview. In CarrollK.M. (ed.), Improving compliance with alcoholism treatment (pp. 5–12). Bethesda, MD: National Institute of Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism.
7.
DonovanD.M. (1998) Continuing Care, Promoting the maintenance of change. In MillerW.R. & HeatherN. (eds.), Treating addictive behaviors (2nd ed.) (pp. 317–336). New York: Plenum.
8.
EdelmanM. (1988) Constructing the Political Spectacle. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
9.
FlorentineR. (1999) After drug treatment: Are 12-step programs effective in maintaining abstinence?The American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, 25, 93–116.
10.
GerdnerA. (1998) Compulsory treatment for alcohol use disorders—clinical and methodological studies of treatment outcome. Lund, Sweden: Lund University, Department of Clinical Alcohol Research.
11.
GerdnerA. (2004) LVM-vårdens genomförande, utfall och effekt—en kontrollerad registerstudie i Jämtland. In Forskningsrapporter, Bilagedel till LVM-utredningens betänkande Tvång och förändring (pp. 415–476). SOU 2004:3, Stockholm: Fritzes.
12.
GrichtingE.UchtenhagenA. & RehmJ. (2002) Modes and impact of coercive inpatient treatment for drug-related conditions in Switzerland. European Addiction Research, 8, 78–83.
HughesC.E. (2007) Evidence-based policy or policy-based evidence? The role of evidence in the development and implementation of the Illicit Drug Diversion Initiative. Drug and Alcohol Review, 26, 363–368.
15.
IrvinJ.E.BowersC.A.DunnM.E. & WangM.C. (1999) Efficacy of relapse prevention: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 67, 563–570.
16.
KinnunenA. (1994) Den bristande motivationen. En litteraturstudie över tvångsvård av rusmedelsmissbrukare i de nordiska länderna. In JärvinenM. & SkrettingA. (eds.), Missbruk och tvångsvård (Substance Abuse and Involuntary Treatment) (pp. 33–108). NAD-publikation 27, Helsingfors: Nordiska nämnden för alkohol-och drogforskning.
17.
LarssonH. & OllusM. (1999) Ett år efter utskrivning—vad hände sen? En uppföljning av 31 LVM-klienter och deras situation ett år efter utskrivning. SiS följer upp och utvärderar. SiS-rapport 5/99, Stockholm: Statens institutionsstyrelse.
18.
Larsson-KronbergM.ÖjehagenA. & BerglundM. (2005) Experiences of coercion during investigation and treatment. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 28, 613–621.
19.
LashS.J. & BlosserS.L. (1999) Increasing adherence to substance abuse aftercare group therapy. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 16, 55–60.
20.
LehtoJ. (1994) Involuntary treatment of people with substance related problems in the Nordic countries. In JärvinenM. & SkrettingA. (eds.), Missbruk och tvångsvård (Substance Abuse and Involuntary Treatment) (pp. 7–32). NAD-publikation 27, Helsingfors: Nordiska nämnden för alkohol- och drogforskning.
21.
MarlattG.A.TuckerJ.A.DonovanD.M. & VuchinichR.E. (1997) Help-seeking by substance abusers: The role of harm reduction and behavioral economic approaches to facilitate treatment entry and retention. In OnkenL.S.BlaineJ.D. & BorenJ.J. (eds.). Beyond the therapeutic alliance: Keeping the drug-dependent individual in treatment (pp. 44–84). NIDA Research Monograph 165, Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse.
22.
McKayJ.R. (2001) Effectiveness of continuing care interventions for substance abusers—implications for the study of long-term treatment effects. Evaluation Review, 25, 211–232.
23.
McKayJ.R.McLellanA.T.AltermanA.I.CacciolaJ.S.RutherfordM.J. & O'BrienC.P. (1998) Predictors of participation in aftercare sessions and self-help groups following completion of intensive outpatient treatment for substance abuse. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 59, 152–162.
24.
McLellanT.A.McKayJ.R.FormanR.CacciolaJ. & KempJ. (2005) Reconsidering the evaluation of addiction treatment: From retrospective follow-up to concurrent recovery monitoring. Addiction, 100, 447–458.
25.
National Institute on Drug Abuse (1993) Recovery training and self-help: Relapse prevention and aftercare for drug addicts. Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse.
26.
OuimetteP.C.MoosR.H. & FinneyJ.W. (1998) Influence of outpatient treatment and 12-step group involvement on one-year substance abuse treatment outcomes. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 59, 513–522.
PotterJ. & WetherellM. (1987) Discourse and social psychology: Beyond attitudes and behaviour. London: Sage Publications Ltd.
29.
Riksdagens Revisorer (2002) Med tvång och god vilja – vad gör Statens institutionsstyrelse? Rapport 2002/03:1. Stockholm: Riksdagens Revisorer. [With coercion and good will – what is The National Board of Institutions doing? The Audit Agency of the Parliament].
30.
RosenqvistP. & TakalaJ.-P. (1987) Two experiences with lay boards: The emergence of compulsory treatment of alcoholics in Sweden and Finland. Contemporary Drug Problems, 14:15–38.
31.
SallménB. (1999) Compulsory treatment of alcoholics. Psychiatric comorbidity, psychological characteristics, coercive experiences and outcome. Lund University: Department of Clinical Alcohol Research and Psychology.
32.
SannibaleC.HurkettP.Van den BosscheE.O'ConnorD.ZadorD.CapusC.GregoryK. & McKenzieM. (2003) Aftercare attendance and post-treatment functioning of severely substance dependent residential treatment clients. Drug and Alcohol Review, 22, 181–190.
33.
SimpsonD.D.JoeG.W.BroomeK.M.HillerM.L.KnightK. & Rowan-SzalG.A. (1997) Program diversity and treatment retention rates in the Drug Abuse Treatment Outcome Study. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 11, 279–293.
34.
SOU (1987:22) Missbrukarna, Socialtjänsten, Tvånget. Betänkande av socialberedningen. Statens Offentliga Utredningar. [The Substance Abusers, The Social Services, The Coercion. The social welfare working committee's consideration. The Government's Official Reports]. Stockholm: Socialdepartementet, p. 22.
35.
SOU (2004:3) Tvång och förändring, Rättssäkerhet, vårdens innehåll och eftervård. Betänkande av LVM-utredningen. Statens Offentliga Utredningar. [Coercion and change, Legal rights, the content of care and aftercare. The LVM working committee's consideration. The Government's Official Reports]. Stockholm: Fritzes, p. 3.
36.
SOU (2005:82) Personer med tungt missbruk – stimulans till bättre vård och behandling. Utredningen om en vårdöverenskommelse om missbrukarvården, Statens Offentliga Utredningar. [Persons with severe substance abuse—stimulation for better care and treatment. The investigation of a care agreement in substance abuse treatment. The Government's Official Reports]. Stockholm: Fritzes, p. 82.
37.
WildT.C. (2006) Social control and coercion in addiction treatment: Towards evidence-based policy and practice. Addiction, 101, 40–49.
38.
YohanisL.AngelinA.GiertzA. & SwärdH. (2002) “De kommer ut fräscha och fina.” Om tvång och hemlöshet. FoU-enheten, Rapport 2002:4. Stockholm: Statens institutionsstyrelse.
