Multisystem Therapy Pros And Cons

511 Words3 Pages

Multisystem Therapy is offering new hope to young people with serious behavioral disorders and their families. Too often, traditional mental health violent approaches, severe and chronic immature offenders and programs for treating adolescent substance abusers have failed to substantiate their effectiveness to reduce or eliminate problematic behaviors. Evidence based treatments for illegal behaviors have demonstrated clear and usual advantages. In contrast with a variety of conventional services, the evidence-based models have reduced scandalous behavior, improved youth and family running, and done so at considerable expenditure savings. On the either side, implementation of the evidence-based treatments requires considerable change in prevailing …show more content…

According to Henggeler and Sheidow (2002), multisyastemic therapy is successful at improving family relations, increasing school attendance, decreasing substance use, and decreasing youth psychiatric symptomatology. In addition to decreased crime and improved functioning at reduced cost, the evidence-based treatments of adolescent criminal activity have several other important advantages in comparison with usual mental health and juvenile justice interventions. Multisystmic therapy intervention models incorporate behavioral strategies into their intervention protocols. Behavior therapies emphasize the clear operationalization of treatment goals, and these are articulated in ways that are clear to consumers and stakeholders. Evidence-based practices for juvenile justice populations have demonstrated and it also helps to reduce criminal activities also. Any of the evidence-based models contribute considerable funds to increasing and maintain program reliability. Such is generally accomplished through the implementation of rigorous quality assurance systems aimed at optimizing youth outcomes. Each of the evidence-based interventions views the development of more functional and adaptive family relations as critical to achieving youth outcomes. Logically, but in contrast with most juvenile justice and mental health interventions, the evidence-based practices explicitly target the key risk