DWI Court Model Compliance Checklist
Making Your Community a Safer Place
Guiding Principle #3 Develop the Treatment Plan
Substance dependence is a chronic, relapsing condion that can be eecvely treated with the right type and length of
treatment regimen. In addion to having a substance abuse problem, a signicant proporon of the DWI populaon
also suers from a variety of co-occurring mental health disorders. Therefore, DWI Courts must carefully select and
implement treatment pracces demonstrated through research to be eecve with the hard-core impaired driver to
ensure long-term success.
The DWI Court incorporates treatment programs that are constructed with a variety of validated approaches
and that are individualized based on idened clinical needs.
Treatment services in the DWI Court may include:
Movaonal enhancement therapies which assess the parcipant’s “stage of
change” for alcohol and or other drug use and impaired driving issues and which
match intervenons to the assessed stage of change.
Evidence-based pharmacological treatments
Connuing care / aercare
Relapse prevenon training
Specied parcipant competencies to be achieved at each phase of treatment
An organized recovery support program (e.g., 12-step self help), accompanied
by a “12-Step Facilitaon Curriculum”, or other mutual aid approaches, allowing
parcipant choice (NOTE: Courts should be aware of the mixed eecveness
ndings of mandated 12-step aendance versus coerced or voluntary parcipaon
DWI Court team monitors treatment quality and adherence to agreed upon treatment approaches. Each team
member understands the treatment elements being delivered to parcipants.
Treatment includes eecve use of drug and alcohol use tesng results, whether obtained within the program
or through other components of the DWI Court.
Treatment adheres to the appropriate and legal requirements of individual condenality imposed by HIPAA
and 42CFR, Part 2 Revised, including the use of wrien signed consents to permit sharing of informaon among
1 Coerced AA aendance has not demonstrated eecveness. Most of the AA-related studies analyzed in the Mesa Grande Project (Miller, W. R., & Wilbourne, P.
L. (2002). Mesa grande: A methodological analysis of clinical trials for alcohol use disorders. Addicon, 97(3), 265-277) included primarily individuals who were
mandated to aend AA by court order. In these studies, the AA component was found to be ineecve. It is hypothesized that coercion may have robbed AA of
its eecveness. Eecveness may have also been impeded by mandang alcohol abusers to aend AA, who are not appropriate for a fellowship designed for
those who are alcohol dependent. DWI Courts are encouraged to review the evidence involving the ineecveness of mandang AA. Alternaves to mandang
AA aendance may need to be adopted, such as providing incenves for parcipaon in AA, as opposed to mandang it; determining which parcipants are
most amenable to and/or suitable for AA (e.g. those with alcohol dependence); and oering choices that include other types of mutual support programming in
addion to AA or other 12-step groups.