Perceptions of Discriminatory Treatment

Ask a probing question, substantiated with additional background information, and evidence.

One of the articles that were used in the second half of the the Portfolio Project was, Perceptions of discriminatory treatment by staff as predictors of drug treatment completion: Utility of a mixed methods approach. In this article a mixed method approach was used to acquire the needed data to form the conclusive evidence that there is indeed a bias from drug rehabilitation staff against those who were taking the rehabilitation for heroin addiction. The study was both quantitative and qualitative giving the study a unique patient view and a statistical point of view. Results were characterized by gender, age, level of education, and main income source at first use of heroin. (Brener, Von Hippel, Von Hippel, Resnick, & Treloar, 2010) The qualitative portion used a survey to assess each participants informative perception on whether on not they felt that staff were biased toward their addiction throughout treatment. The quantitative portion used face-to-face interviews which had a qualified and trained interviewer to question participants for over an hour each on whether or not they understood the meaning of discrimination or prejudice, whether they had experienced discrimination when accessing treatment and their experience with staff in their current facilities. (Brener, Von Hippel, Von Hippel, Resnick, & Treloar, 2010)

Data Collected

The mixed method study presented information in the form of a survey and interview. The survey was used to aid in assessing if treatment completion was in direct correlation with a negative bias towards participants whereas the quantitative section calculated the statistics of the findings from age, gender, perceived discrimination, treatment motivation, frequency of drug use, treatment completion, length in treatment, and education. Thirteen participants were involved with 10 male and 3 females, ages ranged from 19-53. The age of fist heroin use mean was 19, perceived discrimination mean 1.68 range was 1-4, frequency of drug use mean was 5.94 with a range of 2-7. The conclusion was that all clients reported previous discrimination either in treatment or other facilities. (Brener, Von Hippel, Von Hippel, Resnick, & Treloar, 2010)

Analysis and Critique

A weakness in this particular study was the quantitative results were small and could not be generalized outside of rehabilitation facilities. The qualitative portion assessed only the patient aspect of discrimination and did not include the staffs’ perception of discrimination. Had the study added the staffs perception in the study the information collected would have given more than one side of the issue and would have been more complete. (Brener, Von Hippel, Von Hippel, Resnick, & Treloar, 2010)

Further Research Study

One further research study that could have been performed that would have further investigated this subject was the fact of heroin use and its biological and mental effects on the patients perception of care. When under the influence of an addiction perceptions are distorted by the effects of the illegal drug and could thus distort the perception of discrimination.

References:

Brener, L., Von Hippel, W., Von Hippel, C., Resnick, I., & Treloar, C. (2010). Perceptions of discriminatory treatment by staff as predictors of drug treatment completion: Utility of a mixed methods approach. Drug And Alcohol Review , 29.