Senate Committee on Illegal Drugs
N.B. Since the original document was created in Microsoft PowerPoint Presentation format and it is a time-consuming task to convert it in its entirety, this html document represents the main idea. To see the full version, please read the original.
purpose of this brief is to afford an idea of the state of knowledge about
addiction trajectories. The idea here is not to conduct an exhaustive critical
survey of the scientific literature, but rather to offer a summary thereof based
on written English and French language sources. While the major features of
these trajectories will be the central focus, certain specific points will be
considered at length where they are of particular interest or seem to shed light
on current changes in the trajectories themselves or in ways of addressing them.
Lastly, wherever possible, differences in data on trajectories, depending
whether they concern men or women, will be highlighted.
on these general orientations, this brief begins with a short presentation of
the notion of trajectories and the methods used to describe them, then continues
with a description of each of the phases of those trajectories, from initiation
to rehabilitation, with emphasis on the transitions from one phase to the next
and on potential outcomes of substance abuse trajectories.
Notion of Trajectory
notion of trajectory refers to the idea that persons with a given condition will
develop through a series of phases, each of which has a certain number of
attributes distinguishing it from the next. These phases succeed each other in
time, but are not necessarily linear: individuals may "skip" a phase,
go back to a phase and get caught in loops. Etymologically speaking, however,
the notion of phase refers to a crossing, a journey, and the idea is to go, in
steps, from one state to the next. Addiction experts have also used the terms
"career", "life cycle of addiction" and "natural
history of addiction".
"path" most often studied in this field is as follows: consumption
starts, then evolves towards substance abuse or dependence, followed by
treatment, the expected effects of which are an end to or control of the abuse
and an attenuation or disappearance of its harmful consequences.
Lieberman and Brill (1967) identified three phases in the path to dependence:
experimentation, periodical recreational use and compulsive use. Frykholm (1979)
suggests three phases of disengagement: ambivalence (impulsive attempts followed
by relapses), treatment (serious efforts to abstain) and emancipation, when the
individual definitely wants to be free of drugs and therapists. Castel (1992)
speaks of a temporal, six-stage path: (1) initiation or experimentation,
(2) escalation, (3) maintenance, (4) a dysfunctional period, (5) cessation,
(6) the period of the former addict (Castel, 1992, p. 18).
retrospective study by Hser, Anglin, Booth and McGlothin (Anglin, Hser, Booth,
1987; Anglin, Hser, McGlothin, 1987; Hser, Anglin, Booth, 1987; Hser, Anglin,
Grella et al., 1997; Hser, Anglin and McGlothin, 1987) is organized on the basis
of four phases: initiation, start of dependence, dependence career and
question of addiction trajectories will be addressed here on the basis of these
four phases followed by that of reintegration. The work of Hser's team will
serve as a departure point since those authors conducted a survey of the
literature on each of the phases before reporting the findings of their own
analyses and because they have systematically observed the differences between
men and women. However, there are certain limits to this approach: the findings
are based on a relatively homogeneous sample of 546 opiate users enrolled
in methadone treatment programs in four counties in California. The data were
gathered from a retrospective longitudinal estimate (structured interviews), and
the study was conducted in the late 1980s. For this reason, using this basic
description, which provides the most widely validated data, we present more
recent or more focused studies in order to reveal more contemporary observations
it should be noted at the outset that these five phases merely refer to the
trajectory most often studied. This represents only one of the possible ways in
which the phases can be linked since it reflects only one of the possible
outcomes of each of the phases examined. For a fuller understanding of
trajectories, it must be understood that a number of outcomes are possible for
each phase, including cessation of consumption or avoiding the transition to
abuse or dependence. As Frykholm (1979) notes: "The concept of a drug
career does not imply that a drug abuser would have to go through all stages,
but rather that he may give up drugs at any stage." (p. 378)
example, after being introduced to a substance, some consumers will stop using
it, while others will continue using without experiencing any problems, and a
minority will be exposed to lethal consequences (accident under the influence of
drugs, suicide, infection with a terminal disease). Moderate drinkers, for
example, are also likely to know or experience the problems associated with
drinking. Recent studies on intoxication (five or more drinks on a single
occasion) show that intoxication episodes are mostly reported by moderate
drinkers (14 drinks or less per week) and that moderate drinkers may
represent as much as one-third of all drinkers who report having alcohol
problems (Demers and Quesnel Vallée, 1998). The purpose of primary and
secondary prevention is to influence the course of the trajectory toward
cessation or control of drinking and to avoid the transition to substance abuse.
certain number of users will become abusers or dependants. Once dependence has
started, treatment and rehabilitation are the outcomes most often studied.
Spontaneous remission and death are also two possible outcomes. The purpose of
the harm reduction approach (Brisson 1997 and Riley, 1994) is to offset the
negative consequences of excessive use. Lastly, observers currently note growing
interest in the future of rehabilitated addicts. Figure 1 shows the various
paths which the relationship between user, alcohol and drugs may take.
Drug and Alcohol Use Trajectories
Disease, trauma, death
Cessation, moderate use
Start of dependence
Disease, trauma, death
Period of dependence
Disease, trauma, death
Disease, trauma, death
Disease, trauma, death
Céline Mercier, Ph.D.
may also be viewed from the standpoint of transition from one substance to
another. Various substances may be tried in succession, ranging from the more
socially accepted or most accessible to those which present potentially higher
risks of all kinds, including the risk of criminalization. (For a review of
studies on developments in substance use, see Vitaro, Carbonneau, Gosselin,
Tremblay et al., 2000). Thus there is the passage from alcohol and
"recreational" substances (cannabis, hashish, hallucinogenics) to
harder drugs (cocaine and heroin). The reverse trajectory is also observed, the
transition from one substance to another being the object of a voluntary effort
(rehabilitation or harm reduction) or of a substitution mechanism (replacing
heroin, for example with cocaine or alcohol).
methods may be used to study trajectories: prospective, retrospective and
transversal. The prospective method consists in monitoring a cohort over a
number of years and gathering data on it at regular intervals. Under this
approach, the outcome of the phenomenon observed for each member of the cohort
is not known.
retrospective method is used to examine a group of persons who have reached a
given state or present a certain condition. It is based on recall. Under this
approach, the finish line is known and the idea is to reconstitute the journey.
transversal studies consist in comparing groups of persons who are at various
stages in a single problem.
three methods are mainly used in epidemiology and involve a quantitative
approach. The qualitative approach is also used, particularly through interviews
in which key informers are questioned retrospectively on various aspects of
their addiction careers.
studies and the developmental approach make it possible to begin studying
trajectories in early childhood. Examined using the psychopathological approach,
behavioural problems in childhood are a predictor of psychotropic substance
abuse in adolescence and constitute predictive factors of addiction (Vitaro,
Carbonneau, Gosselin, Tremblay et al., 2000). Socio-family factors and peer
influence are also considered factors in early substance abuse and initiation.
both sexes, substance use is generally initiated by a man, who is himself a user
or former user. However, this observation may be explained by the simple fact
that the number of male users is greater than that of female users. The sole
exception to this rule is that initiation to non-prescription medicine, which is
more frequent among women, is also generally done by a woman. However, among
men, the initiator is most often a friend and, among women, a spouse. Women more
often cite curiosity as a reason for first using a substance, or the need for
relief in a period of crisis, whereas men more often refer to the
"kick". For both men and women, peer influence is a significant
factor. Women more often receive drugs as a gift than men. Most men and women
first use cannabis, although some women begin their trajectory with prescription
medication obtained by falsifying prescriptions or from a family member. When
they begin to use heroin, both men and women have already used and sold a number
of drugs, although women have been less involved in criminal activities (Hser,
Anglin, McGlothin, 1987).
thought that the use of soft drugs and drugs in general is very much linked to
age. Use will peak in the early twenties, then decline and stop in the early
thirties. Thus only a minority of young people with drug experience will evolve
into substance abuse or develop dependence. Prospective and transversal studies
have also focused on predictive factors that distinguish between those who
continue to use in moderation or give it up and those who evolve toward
substance abuse behaviour (Kandel and Raveis, 1989).
politicians, clinical workers and researchers focus first of all on substance
abusers, there is a tendency to dichotomize the outcome of this period between
those who stop using and those who develop an abuse problem. This conceals a
third possibility, the extent of which is poorly known, that some may continue
using without reaching a critical threshold or without getting into trouble with
the law. This kind of controlled use is even observed in opiate users who
develop control strategies linked to frequency of use (no daily use), dose and
administration method (Blackwell, 1983; Strang, Heathcote and Watson, 1987;
Start of Dependence
For both alcohol and drugs, it is considered that dependence starts more quickly in women than in men (Wasilow-Miller and Erickson, 2001; Westermeyer and Boedicker, 2000). In the specific case of opiates, Anglin, Hser and McGlothlin (1987) report the finding that as much as twice as many women as men move on to daily use within a year. In their own study, women switch to daily use on average 16 months after their first time, men after 22 months. More women live with a partner who is a daily user, but women drink and use cannabis less, are less often involved in the sale of drugs and less frequently arrested and imprisoned. The reasons for continuing or increasing substance use for women are a partner's habits and liking the effects of the drug. The latter reason is the first reason for men, followed by the influence of friends.
Period of Dependence
observed samples, which were generally recruited at treatment centres, the
duration of the period of abuse and dependence in women seems shorter than for
men as a result of the fact that they enter treatment sooner and that the older
subjects began taking drugs later than men. Once again, women's substance abuse
appears to be more influenced by the user's partner, who is also a user and on
whom they depend for their support. However, increasing numbers of women consume
first because "they like it". Men and women use a variety of drugs,
although men more often take a number of drugs together (alcohol, cocaine and
heroin). Women use more sedatives and prescription drugs than men, but fewer
hallucinogenics and inhalants (Hser, Anglin, Booth, 1987).
DATOS survey (Drug Abuse Treatment Outcome Study) conducted of 7,652 persons,
upon entering treatment, more men said they drank daily, whereas more women said
they used cocaine (Grella and Joshi, 1999). The DATOS survey confirms the other
data on substance abuse, as does that by Westermeyer and Boedicker (2000), the
data from which concern 642 persons enrolled in treatment, 43% of whom were
abuse paths, number of attempts to stop, relapses and periods of abstinence are
similar between the two sexes. Among daily opiate users, 80% of the time,
periods of abstinence are brief and rare, often coinciding with periods spent in
detox or treatment units, prison or hospital. Women may be less exposed to
causes of involuntary cessation and thus may experience fewer periods of
abstinence. A return to substance abuse after a period of abstinence is the
result of both internal and external pressures: emotional problems (anxiety,
depression, anger), physical or psychological need, escape from personal
problems or relief from pain and availability of drugs.
both sexes, abuse and dependence result in increased criminal activity, but that
activity differs between men and women. Women commit more fraud, men B&E and
robbery and assault. Prostitution is more frequent among women, the sale of
drugs common to both men and women, although eventually more widespread among
men (Hser, Anglin and Booth, 1987). In the data gathered in the DATOS survey (Grella
and Joshi, 1999) and in Westermeyer and Boedicker (2000), men were more in
trouble with the law and more often had antisocial personalities.
have more contact with the mental health system and more often suffer from
depression and anxiety. They also develop physical health problems such as
cardiovascular, gastrointestinal and liver diseases more quickly than men
(studies reported by Wasilow-Miller and Erickson, 2001; Westermeyer and
Boedicker, 2000), and their substance abuse problems expose them to more
violence, high-risk sexual behaviour, sexually transmitted diseases, HIV
infection, unwanted or early pregnancy, the birth of underweight babies or
babies in withdrawal and abusive or negligent behaviour (Wasilow-Miller and
drug abuse or dependence may be attributed to the sole or combine effect of
detox, medical and/or psychosocial (rehabilitation) treatment, spontaneous
remission and maturing. The relative share of each of these ways of putting an
end to dependence is hard to evaluate and their interaction virtually impossible
remission refers to the achievement of positive results in populations untreated
by specialized organizations or recognized therapists. In this way, individuals
manage to control their substance abuse alone or with the support of informal
resources, friends, family members, natural helpers and volunteers (Oppenheimer,
Tobutt, Taylor and Andrew, 1994; Robins, Helzer and Davis, 1975; Stimson and
Oppenheimer, 1982; Vaillant, 1973). Thus it appears that most individuals who
solve their drinking problems do so without formal treatment. This spontaneous
remission is more common among women (Copeland, 1997).
connection with spontaneous remission and natural history of recovery, reference
is also made to the notions of maturing out and withdrawal (Adler, 1992; Anglin,
Brecht, Woodward and Bonett, 1986; Brecht and Anglin, 1990; Frykholm, 1979;
Jorquez, 1983). All these authors have observed that, for addicts with a lengthy
history of substance abuse, the main reason for wanting to stop is either being
fed up with the street lifestyle or a physical inability to continue, or both.
Stimson and Oppenheimer (1982) suggest that some individuals become abstinent as
a result of voluntary inner strength (motivation), while others respond to
circumstances or external pressures.
number of types of reasons are given for stopping substance abuse or altering
substance abuse patterns, and these are often related to lifestyle as a whole.
For example, "fatigue", the desire to change one's lifestyle, are
often cited, in particular by women and long-term substance abusers. Family or
health reasons are also frequently given, as well as the cost of drugs and their
secondary effects (the latter reason being more important for more recent users)
(Frykholm, 1979). In the survey by Adler (1992), the reasons why the persons
questioned had stopped using and trafficking in drugs were linked to age,
problems associated with illegal activities (exhaustion, stress, paranoia) and a
loss of interest in the gratification afforded by those activities (money,
the view of Castel (1992), post-addiction paths differ depending whether
individuals stop on their own or enter treatment. In the latter case, authors
cite work on dependence, in relation to professional assistance received, and
view change in lifestyle as a consequence of care received. Individuals who stop
on their own tend more to focus on changes in their lifestyle. Thus it would
appear that there are two separate paths, depending whether the person stops
using on his own or with the aid of treatment.
Hser and Booth (1987) observed few differences between men and women with
respect to treatment itself. Among the 116 variables studied by Westermeyer
and Boedicker (2000), only 28 (24%) revealed statistically significant
differences at a probability threshold of .01. Women tend to enter treatment
sooner, but remain for shorter periods of time and their attrituion rates are
higher (Arfen, Klein, di Menza, Schuster, 2001). For men as well as women, the
support of a partner has a positive influence on starting, remaining in and the
outcome of treatment. However, women apparently receive less support from their
families than men. This is consistent with the findings of Westermeyer and
Boedicker (2000). The authors also report that women experience fewer treatment
episodes (inpatient and outpatient).
Klein, di Menza and Schuster (2001) refer to a series of studies showing that
women enter treatment with more problems than men (physical and mental health,
limited employability, lower incomes), except in the legal area, and with more
serious substance abuse problems. Their own data are consistent with this
finding. Grella and Joshi (1999) have analyzed the differences between men and
women when they enter treatment and the use of treatment based on gender in the
Drug Abuse Treatment Otcome Study (DATOS). Their analyses confirm that women
receive less support from family members and friends and that they enter
treatment sooner. They also reveal that women enter treatment via different
paths. More men do so by referral from the legal system or under pressure from
spouses. Women are more frequently referred by social and health care workers or
enter on their own initiative. Men more willingly enter special services,
whereas women seek help from general practitioners, health services and peer
the above studies conclude that women are less exposed to treatment and are
under-represented. The study by Grella and Joshi (1999) suggests that women
encounter more barriers in access to treatment, particularly female heads of
single-parent families. They may deliberately avoid treatment out of fear of
losing their children. Copeland (1997) conducted a qualitative study of 32 women
who had broken out of their dependence without resorting to any type of
intervention, for the purpose of studying barriers in the search for formal
treatment. Based on testimonials of the women met, the main barriers appear to
be stigmatization and fear of social labelling, ignorance of the range of
treatment offered, child care obligations, cost of treatment perceived in terms
of time and money, fear of the confrontational approach and a stereotypical
representation of the clients of treatment services.
of gender, Frykholm hypothesizes that individuals who enter treatment may be
divided along the lines of a U curve between those who have been using for less
than two years and those who have been doing so for six or more years.
regards outcome of treatment, one realizes in standing back somewhat from the
specialized literature that significant progress has been made over the past 35 years.
In 1966, Vaillant concluded, after studying New York heroin addicts for 12 years,
that they were virtually incurable. Less than 10 years later, he observed
recovery rates in the order of 30% to 40% (Vaillant, 1973). In fact, the
situation appears to have changed with the wave of young heroin addicts in the
1970s, and researchers began to observe rates of prolonged abstinence (three to
seven years) of 19% to 40% in the United States and Europe (Haastrup and Jepsen,
1980, 1984; Maddux and Desmond, 1980; Stimson and Oppenheimer, 1972; Thorley,
1978). Vaillant (1974) suggests that, in a cohort of individuals who have been
using heroin for more than two years, approximately 3% will stop using each
year. An additional 2% will die.
rehabilitation process is uniformly considered as a constant struggle against
relapse. According to Frykholm (1979), in that struggle, more recent users can
rely more on a family network and on non-user friends, whereas long-term users
look more to services and peer counselling groups. Individuals who resort to
alcohol or tranquillizers to combat anxiety should take care to avoid becoming
also entails changes in life areas other than psychotropic substance abuse, in
particular for users most committed to marginal or criminalized lifestyles.
Certain studies reported by Mercier and Alarie (2000) have focused on the
relationship between progress in addressing substance abuse and improvements in
other areas. On this point, findings differ from study to study, in particular
as regards the complex relations between changes in living habits (in particular
contact with the drug world) and stabilization of substance use or maintaining
on a Quebec study of 15 men and 15 women who were "kicking the
habit", the following steps in the rehabilitation process were identified:
(1) awareness and deciding to stop, (2) reducing, controlling or
ceasing use, (3) stabilization and (4) long-term maintenance.
According to testimonials of the study subjects, stabilization of their
substance abuse first enabled them to regain control over other areas of their
lives and then to reorganize, first in the areas of housing, time management and
income, in order to sustain progress on their substance abuse problem (Mercier
and Alarie, 2000).
(1983) studied the life histories of 29 former heroin users, who associated the
cessation of their substance abuse with a decisive emotional or existential
experience which had occurred during a crisis. To achieve and maintain
abstinence over the long term, they had to get involved in two complementary
adaptational approaches, first putting the essential part of their energies into
getting out of the heroin world, then adapting to "ordinary" life.
purpose of most of the follow‑up studies was to evaluate rehabilitation
treatment and thus to focus mainly on substance use in relation to the effect of
treatment. It should not be forgotten, however, that the longer the
follow‑up period, the weaker the influence of treatment. Generally
speaking, treatment or intervention by professionals or specialized services are
only one of the factors that may promote the observed positive changes. Moos
(1994) even considers that treatment might have only a fleeting influence, as
informal resources and the social environment play a much more lasting role.
are few cohort studies on all possible outcomes following treatment. In 1980 and
1984, Haastrup and Jepsen (1988) managed to track down 90% of the 300 young
heroin addicts who had entered a Copenhagen treatment centre in 1973 (first
admission). The average age of the subjects at the time was 21, and they had a
history of heroin use ranging from one month to 12 years. Table 1
shows the status of the 300 respondents in 1984, as well as the status in
1980 of those (31) who died between 1980 and 1984, as well as subsequent lives,
in 1984, of those who had been ranked in the best results category in 1980.
years after being admitted to the centre, 26% of the subjects had died, 16% were
substance abusers (alcohol, tranquillizers, opiates), 11% were in treatment or
in prison and 36% considered themselves socially well adapted (11% were not
tracked down). Distribution of the respondents among the various categories was
not affected by gender, and deaths were distributed over all years, with an
average annual death rate of 2.4%.
for a cohort of 300 young opioid addicts 11 years (1984) after their first
admission for treatment. Outcome
classification 1980 of the 31 subjects who died during 1980-84. Status in 1984
of the 85 subjects classified in the best outcome class in 1980
Outcome class in 1984
from Haastrup and Jepsen, 1988, pp. 23-24.
study has been extensively presented here because it provides a clear
illustration of the complex nature of addiction trajectories. First of all, from
the observations made between 1980 and 1984, it may be observed that the
trajectory is always in motion. Some of the young subjects who died (10) were
ranked in the top two outcome classes at the time of the 1980 follow‑up.
Others (7) who had been ranked in those two classes fell into the problem
classes, although they did not die. These findings contrast with those of
shorter-term studies in which success rates were higher than in the 1950s. If
the individuals are compared to themselves, only 20% of the cohort appears to
have remained abstinent during the 11‑year follow‑up period, while
the others experienced "ups and downs". The number of deaths by
overdose were also higher among individuals who were otherwise abstinent and who
were thus in a situation of relapse at the time of death. Based on their cohort,
the authors observed that, for 16 absent persons, 12 others will relapse
and that, among that number, nine relapses will result in death. The authors
conclude: "It follows that in the long run the number of active opioid
addicts declines mainly because they die, not because they achieve
abstinence." (p. 25)
and Long-Term Maintenance
are relatively few studies on the subsequent lives of former addicts. One of the
first was that of Frykholm (1979), who interviewed 58 addicts who had been
abstinent for three years. The author concluded from the interviews that a
number of respondents did not appear to be living a harmonious life. Most had
attempted to establish long-term romantic relationships, but fewer than half had
managed to do so. The interviewees were more satisfied with and proud of their
new material living conditions than their romantic lives.
(1983) also observed that abstinent opiate users had trouble adapting to their
new lives once they managed to leave the drug world. A number moreover
maintained ties with that world continued to engage in criminal activity and to
use substances other than opiates. Others however returned to being law-abiding
citizens and lived conventional lives.
example of this type of study is that by Adler (1992), who, 10 years later,
met eight of the key informers who had taken part in this anthropological study
on the world of drug sellers. Those traffickers, who at the time were heavy
alcohol, marijuana and cocaine users, had all given up trafficking and substance
abuse, most of their own free will, while the others had done so with the
assistance of detox programs or Narcotics Anonymous or as a result of being
arrested. Some had tried to return to a regular, predictable life, others to
maintain a marginal lifestyle, but in the context of legal activities. According
to the author's findings, the level of success in reintegration appears to be
related to intensity of involvement in the drug world. Those who began
frequenting that world very young, were involved in trafficking on a full-time
basis and took part in organized groups had fewer resources (education, work
habits, relations in the ordinary world, sources of satisfaction outside the
drug world) on which to rely in order to change their lifestyle.
follow‑up done by Bacchus, Strang and Watson (2000) of 60 opiate
users who had become abstinent revealed that success in this area did not always
spread to other areas. Progress was appreciable in relations with family and
friends and there was a sense of personal satisfaction. Efforts were less clear
with respect to employment, accommodation, financial situation and health care
needs. For many, the end of the period of addiction does not necessarily
coincide with an end to illegal activities. With respect to substance abuse,
substitution phenomena, mainly for alcohol, cocaine and psychotropic drugs, were
French and Quebec surveys (Castel, 1992; Mercier and Alarie, 2000), conducted
over much shorter follow‑up periods (three months and two years of
stabilization), both report the "uncertainty" of former addicts about
the success of their efforts. Similarly, after 11 years of follow‑up,
all possible outcomes, including relapse and death, remained open in the cohort
of Haastrup and Jepsen (1988). The fundamental lesson to be drawn from the
studies on trajectories thus appears to be that they are far from being linear
and that, at any time, most of the possible options for the next phase remain
Questions for Further
order to adhere to an accurate meaning of the notion of trajectory, its time
aspect should be studied in greater depth. For example, what is the average
period of use before the individual begins seeking treatment? How long is a
successful treatment? At what point can a person be considered as having finally
stabilized his or her use and as having reintegrated socially? These questions
may already have been answered in the specialized literature. A systematic study
could find common points.
question of the optimum treatment period is currently very much under
discussion. In relation to trajectories, this means determining how much time
has elapsed between the moment the person begins to take steps to control his or
her substance abuse (alone or with the help of a peer counselling group or
specialized program) and the moment he or she achieves his or her objectives. In
Frykholm's sample (1979, 58 former addicts), 40% had achieved their
objective after one year, 71% after three years.
for the final question, as to when a person has finally stopped, one may well
wonder whether it can be answered since epidemiological and ethnogrpahic
research tends to show that the question itself is ambiguous. Haastrup and
Jepsen (1988) cited above, shows that, even after long periods of abstinence,
relapses are still possible, including death by overdose. It appears that
addicts are reluctant to consider themselves "drug free" (Mercier and
experience of rehabilitated addicts should also be put to use in an effort to
gain a clear understanding of the supports of the rehabilitation process other
than formal services and informal assistance. Castel (1992) has cited the
"absence of healing models" (p. 217) and the need for the person
to reconstruct a personal and social identity. In 1979, Waldorf and Biernacki
described the rehabilitation process as the replacement of an addict identity
with that of an "ordinary" person. Recently, McIntosh and McKeganey
(2000) studied the rehabilitation accounts of addicts from the standpoint of
constructing a "non-addict" identity. This work seems promising for
the purpose of studying the reintegration phase from a perspective that is
dynamic and comprehensive, broader and more integrated than that of the program
evaluation based on follow‑up indicators.
trajectories are in no way like "a long quiet river". They are marked
by tragic events which are difficult to reflect in the notion of trajectory. As
though the notion of phases and the idea of a succession of states poorly
represented actual experience in which crises are frequent, apparently dead-end
situations common and doubts always ready to resurface. What is experienced in
alternate states of tension and escape, discouragement and hope may be stripped
of its emotional content and thus of its vital energy if new concepts which also
take into account the critical events that mark them are introduced into the
study of trajectories.
In fact the most recent studies on trajectories tend to focus on a given phase and to study that phase as a process, referring to the "transition to injection", breaking out of substance abuse, terms which reflect the dynamic characters which authors now wish to confer on the study of trajectories. These more focused studies thus reveal the diversity of trajectories rather than their common traits. As Bacchus et coll. (2000), "The most striking feature of the journeys travelled by these opiate addicts is perhaps the diversity of their journeys." (p. 145)
Adler, P. A. (1992). Carrières de trafiquants et réintégration sociale
aux États-Unis, Drogues politiques et société. Paris: Éditions
H., Lieberman, L., & Brill, L. (1967). A conceptual model of the life cycle
of addiction. International Journal of the Addictions, 2, 221-241.
M. D., Brecht, M. L., Woodward, J. A., & Bonett, D. G. (1986). An empirical
study of maturing out: conditional factors. International Journal of the
Addictions, 21, 233-246.
M. D., Hser, Y.-I., & Booth, M. W. (1987). Sex differences in addict
careers. 4. Treatment. American Journal of Drug & Alcohol Abuse, 13(3),
M. D., Hser, Y.-I., & McGlothlin, W. H. (1987). Sex differences in addict
careers. 2. Becoming addicted. American Journal of Drug & Alcohol Abuse,
C. L., Klein, C., di Menza, S., & Schuster, C. R. (2001). Gender differences
in problem severity at assessment and treatment retention. Journal of
Substance Abuse Treatment, 20, 53-57.
L., Strang, J., & Watson, P. (2000). Pathways to abstinence: Two-year
follow-up data on 60 abstinent former opiate addicts who had been turned away
from treatment. European Addiction Research, 6, 141-147.
J. S. (1983). Drifting, controlling and overcoming: opiate users who avoid
becoming clinically dependent. Journal of Drug Issues, 13, 219-235.
M. L., & Anglin, M. D. (1990). Conditional factors of maturing out: legal
supervision and treatment. International Journal of the Addictions, 25,
P. (1987). L'approche de réduction des méfaits: sources, situations,
pratiques. Montréal: Comité permanent de lutte à la toxicomanie.
R. (1992). Les sorties de la toxicomanie. Paris: GRASS-MIRE.
R. (1994). Les sorties de la toxicomanie. In A. Ogian & P. Mignon (Eds.), La
demande sociale de drogue (pp. 23-30). Paris: La Documentation française.
J. (1997). A Qualitative study of barriers to formal treatment among women who
self-managed change in addictive behaviours. Journal of Substance Abuse
Treatment, 14(2), 183-190.
A., & Quesnel Vallée, A. (1998). L'intoxication à l'alcool. Montréal:
Comité permanent de lutte à la toxicomanie (CPLT). Gouvernement du Québec.
B. (1979). Termination of the drug career.
An interview study of 58 ex-addicts. Acta Psychiatria Scandinavia, 59,
C. E., & Joshi, V. (1999). Gender differences in drug treatment careers
among clients in the National Drug Abuse Treatment Outcome Study. American
Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, 25(3), 385-406.
S., & Jepsen, P. W. (1988). Eleven year follow-up of 300 young opioid
addicts. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 77, 22-26.
S., & Jepson, P. (1980). A survey of Scandinavian follow-up studies of young
drug abusers. Journal of Drugs Issues, 10, 477-489.
S., & Jepson, P. (1984). Seven year follow-up of 300 young drug abusers. Acta
Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 70, 503-509.
Y.-I., Anglin, M. D., & Booth, M. W. (1987). Sex differences in addict
careers. 3. Addiction. American Journal of Drug & Alcohol Abuse, 13(3),
Y. I., Anglin, M. D., & Grella, C. E., et al. (1997). Drug treatment
careers: a conceptual framework and existing research findings. Journal of
Substance Abuse and Treatment, 14, 1-16.
Y.-I., Anglin, M. D., & McGlothlin, W. (1987). Sex differences in addict
careers. 1. Initiation of use. American Journal of Drug & Alcohol Abuse,
J. S. (1983). The retirement phase of heroin using careers. Journal of Drug
Issues, 13, 343-365.
D. B., & Raveis, V. H. (1989). Cessation of illicit drug use in young
adulthood. Archives of General Psychiatry, 46(2), 109-116.
A. I. (1997). Addiction is a brain disease. Science, 278, 45-47.
J. F., & Desmond, D. P. (1980). New light on the maturing out hypothesis in
opioid dependence. Bulletin on Narcotics, 32, 15-25.
J., & McKeganey, N. (2000). Addicts' narratives of recovery from drug use:
constructing a non-addict identity. Social Science & Medicine, 50,
C., & Alarie, S. (2000). Le processus de rétablissement chez les personnes
alcooliques et toxicomanes. In P. Brisson (Ed.), L'Usage des drogues et la
toxicomanie (Vol. volume III, pp. 335-350). Montréal: Gaëtan Morin.
R. H. (1994). Treated or untreated, an addiction is not an island unto itself. Addiction,
E., Tobutt, C., Taylor, C., & Andrew, T. (1994). Death and survival in a
cohort of heroin addicts from London clinics: a 22 year follow-up study. Addiction,
D. (1994). La réduction des méfaits liés aux drogues: politique et pratiques.
In P. Brisson (Ed.), L'usage de la drogue et la toxicomanie (Vol. II, pp.
130-145). Montréal: Gaëtan Morin.
L. H., Helzer, J. E., & Davis, D. H. (1975). Narcotics in South East Asia
and afterwards. Archives of General Psychiatry, 39, 955-961.
G. V., & Oppenheimer, E. (1982). Heroin addiction: treatment and control
in Britain. London: Tavistock.
J., Heathcote, S., & Watson, P. (1987). Habit-moderation in injecting drug
addicts. Health Trends, 19, 16-18.
A. (1978). How natural is the natural history of opiate drug dependence? British
Journal of Addiction to Alcohol & Other Drugs, 73(3), 229-232.
G. E. (1966). Twelve-year follow-up of New York narcotic addicts: II. The
natural history of a chronic disease. New England Journal of Medicine, 275,
G. E. (1973). A twenty year follow-up of New York narcotics. Archives of
General Psychiatry, 29, 237-241.
G. E. (1974). Outcome research in narcotic addiction--problems and perspectives.
American Journal of Drug & Alcohol Abuse, 1(1), 25-36.
F., Carbonneau, R., Gosselin, C., Tremblay, R. E., & Zoccolillo, M. (2000).
L'approche développementale et les problèmes de consommation chez les jeunes:
prévalence, facteurs de prédiction, prévention et dépistage. In P. Brisson
(Ed.), L'usage des drogues et la toxicomanie (pp. 279-313). Montréal: Gaétan
S., & Erickson, C., K. (2001). Drug abuse and dependency: understanding
gender difference in etiology and management. Journal of the American
Pharmaceutical Association, 41(1), 78-90.
J., & Boedicker, A. E. (2000). Course, severity, and treatment of substance
abuse among women versus men. American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, 26(4),
Zinberg, N. (1984). Drug, set and setting: the basis for controlled
intoxicant use. New Haven: Yale University Press.