Dataset Information

Quantifying crime associated with drug use among a large cohort of sanctioned offenders in England and Wales.

ABSTRACT:

Aim

To assess the relationship between testing positive for opiates and/or cocaine and prior offending.

Methods

139,925 persons (107,573 men) identified from a saliva test for opiate and cocaine metabolites following arrest in England and Wales, 1 April 2005-31 March 2009, were case-linked with 2-year recorded offending history. The prior offending rate, accounting for estimated incarceration periods, was calculated by: drug-test outcome; gender; four main crime categories (acquisitive, non-acquisitive, serious acquisitive, and non-serious acquisitive) and 16 sub-categories. Rate ratio (RR) compared opiate and/or cocaine positive to dual-negative testers. Adjusted rate ratio (aRR) controlled for age at drug test.

Results

The relationship between testing positive for opiates and cocaine and prior 2-year offending was greater for women than men (aRR men 1.77; 95% CI: 1.75-1.79: women 3.51; 3.45-3.58). The association was weaker for those testing positive for opiates only (aRR: men: 1.66, 1.64-1.68; women 2.73, 2.66-2.80). Men testing positive for cocaine only had a lower rate of prior offending (aRR: 0.93, 0.92-0.94), women had a higher rate (aRR: 1.69, 1.64-1.74). The strongest associations were for non-serious acquisitive crimes (e.g. dually-positive: prostitution (women-only): aRR 24.9, 20.9-29.7; shoplifting: aRR men 4.05, 3.95-4.16; women 6.16, 5.92-6.41). Testing positive for opiates and cocaine was associated with violent offences among women (aRR: 1.54, 1.40-1.69) but not men (aRR: 0.98, 0.93-1.02).

Conclusions

Among drug-tested offenders, opiate use is associated with elevated prior offending and the association is stronger for women than men. Cocaine use is associated with prior offending only among women.

SUBMITTER: Pierce M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4768078 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background: The Mental Capacity Act (2005) of England and Wales described in statute a test to determine whether a person lacked the "mental capacity" to make a particular decision. No large-scale survey has explored experiences of capacity assessment across professional groups. Methods: We administered an opportunistic self-report questionnaire survey of professionals who undertake capacity assessments in England and Wales (n= 611). Topics of interest included; how often and where capacity assessment took place, self-ratings of competency and challenges experienced in assessment, use of psychological testing and concerns about undue influence. We analysed the quantitative responses using a mixed-methods approach using regression methods for the quantitative ratings and a thematic analysis for qualitative data. Results: Our sample included 307/611 (50.2%), social workers, 89/611 (14.6%) psychiatrists, 62/611 (10.1%) nurses, 46/611 (7.5%) clinical psychologists, 30/611 (4.9%) doctors from other medical specialties, 12/611 (2.0%) speech and language therapists and 8/611 (1.3%) solicitors. 53% of these professionals undertook more than 25 capacity assessments per year, with psychiatrists, social workers and nurses undertaking them the most frequently. Most professionals reported high self-ratings of confidence in their assessment skills, although non-psychiatrist doctors rated themselves significantly lower than other groups (p< .005). Most professionals (77.1%) were at least moderately concerned about undue influence, with people with dementia and learning disabilities and older adults considered to be the most at risk. Qualitative themes for challenges in capacity assessment included inter-disciplinary working, complicated presentations and relational issues such as interpersonal influence. Requests for support mainly focused on practical issues. Conclusions: Most professionals feel confident in their ability to assess capacity but note substantial challenges around practical and relational issues. Undue influence is a particularly common concern amongst professionals when working with service users with dementia and learning disabilities which public services and policy makers need to be mindful of.