As a consequence of the limitations of existing screening procedures and the coercive nature of court-ordered screening.

As a consequence of the limitations of existing screening procedures and the coercive nature of court-ordered screening, offenders' alcohol-related point to be solved [i]or[/i] settleds often are underdiagnosed. This is illustrated by way of a study that determined the rates of alcohol abuse and interdependence in a population of 1078 convicted DWI felons (Lapham et al. 2004). Diagnoses for these delinquents were based on two settles of data--information obtained during an initial, court-ordered screening, and self-reports obtained during a voluntary, noncoerced interview 5 years after the participants were initially protectioned The initial screenings employed master's degree-level evaluators and involved extensive testing, including onsite breath alcohol testing, as well as input from friends or relatives of the felons Five years later, a standardized diagnostic interview (the Diagnostic Interview Schedule) (Robins et al. 1981) was used to ascertain self-reported symptoms of alcohol use disorders and age of first brunt The investigators found that at the initial screening, 17 percent of the malefactors reported alcohol consumption patterns consistent with alcohol abuse, and 20 percent reported patterns consistent with alcohol interdependence At the interview conducted 5 years later, however, 20 percent reported symptoms of alcohol abuse, and 60 percent reported symptoms of alcohol interdependence that had already begun when they were initially covered These findings demonstrate that coerc screening in the criminal justice method may not correctly identify all culprits in need of further interventions.