RE: Evidence-based Practice and client choice

["Mark J. Chaffin" <Mark-Chaffin@xxxxxxxxx>]

Michelle,

One of the larger bodies of data on this question is in the substance abuse
treatment outcome literature.  The main finding is that coerced clients
often do as well as or better than voluntary clients in terms of outcomes.
There also is some evidence to support this for sex abusers coerced into
treatment.  

Mark Chaffin, Ph.D.
Center on Child Abuse and Neglect
University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center
P.O. Box 26901; CHO 3406
Oklahoma City, OK  73190
(405) 271-8858; fax 271-2931
mark-chaffin@xxxxxxxxx

Message-ID: <B6C1A00D.2BE%kessler1@xxxxxxxx>
From: Michelle Kessler <kessler1@xxxxxxxx>
To: Child Maltreatment Researchers
	 <CHILD-MALTREATMENT-RESEARCH-L@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Evidence-based Practice and client choice
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 18:18:54 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21)
Content-Type: text/plain

The emerging Evidence-based practice literature emphasizes "client choice"
as it relates to deciding which interventions to use to help the client
address their specific problem area/situation.   I am wondering if this is
controversial among any practice areas?  For example, if the involuntary
client would choose NOT to participate in services - how is this resolved in
light of EBP?  Is this an issue at all?  If so, could you point me to some
literature, resources that addresses this conflict.

Thank you,

Michelle