China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
The “Drug Court Strengthening Families” Program
Published in James J. Hennessy, Nathaniel J. Pallone, Drug Courts in Operation: Current Research, 2019
TK Logan, Carl Leukefeld, Lisa Minton, Joanie Abrahmson, Rebecca Hughes
Drug Court programs are treatment-oriented and target clients whose major problems stem from substance abuse. There are three phases in the Kentucky Administrative Office of the Courts Drug Court program, which take an average of 18 months (see Logan et al., 2000 for a more complete description of a Kentucky Drug Court program). Phase I can be completed in one month. During the first phase clients are oriented to the program, begin treatment, are required to obtain court approved housing and employment, and begin sessions with the Judge. Phase II can be completed in eight months. Requirements in Phase II include continuing treatment, random urine screens, maintaining stable housing and employment, and performing other program requirements in a satisfactory manner. Phase III can be completed in three months and is typically referred to as the transitioning out phase. Requirements such as group attendance and random urine screens are decreased in this phase. Throughout the program, clients appear in Court regularly. Drug Court staff provide case notes for each client at court sessions. Although the Judge reviews written reports from the Drug Court staff, clients report directly to the Drug Court Judge in Court. The Drug Court Judge rewards success and sanctions noncompliance.
Criminal Law and Addiction
Published in Hanna Pickard, Serge H. Ahmed, The Routledge Handbook of Philosophy and Science of Addiction, 2019
Drug courts are an increasingly common phenomenon in the United States. The substantive and procedural details vary across jurisdictions, but these courts aim to divert from criminal prosecution to the drug courts addicted criminal defendants charged with non-violent crimes whose addiction played a role in their criminal conduct. If diverted defendants successfully complete the drug-court-imposed regimen of staying clean and in treatment, they are discharged and the criminal charges are dropped. This approach seems eminently sensible and these courts have fervent supporters, but they also have critics on the grounds that they do not afford proper due process and genuinely solid evidence for their cost–benefit-justified efficacy is lacking. Whatever the merits of the debate may be, drug courts are now an entrenched feature of criminal justice in a majority of United States’ jurisdictions and they do permit some number of addicts to avoid criminal conviction and punishment.
An Agenda for Action I: Diminishing Supply
Published in Barry Stimmel, Drug Abuse and Social Policy in America, 2014
Drug courts remove low-level offenders from the usual crimina justice system and establish nonadversarial proceedings focused or treatment and rehabilitation. Agreements between prosecutors, public defenders, and judges establish criteria of eligibility for cases as well as requirements for participation. These courts function through postadjudication and deferred prosecution. Post adjudication addresses a course of treatment after guilt is determined but before sentencing. Deferred prosecution usually targets first offenders arrested for possession. Most programs involve 30 to 60 days of intensive treatment followed by supervision for one year. Minimum retention rates of 65 percent have been reported as compared to usual retention in treatment of 10 to 15 percent. Some areas have reported decreases in crime rates as well.”6 From a cost-benefit analysis, drug courts are also extremely effective, saving costs associated with bringing cases to trial as well as savings from not being incarcerated.
Emerging adults in drug treatment court: program behavior, program completion, & recidivism
Published in Journal of Social Work Practice in the Addictions, 2023
Michael Fendrich, Thomas P LeBel
Drug treatment courts developed in 1989, primarily in response to the explosion of drug-related arrests. There are a variety of drug court types, but all typically involve a process whereby the potential participant is initially screened for drug use and then assigned to the drug treatment program as an alternative to incarceration. The DTC participant typically advances through a series of phases involving progressively less supervision and lower intensity of substance use treatment, until the final phase culminating with completion or ‘graduation,’ depending on their behavior during the course of program involvement. Advancement is accompanied by positive and negative sanctions that are applied by the DTC judge in response to the participant’s behavior. The substance use treatment and other behaviors are typically monitored by a ‘team’ that is led by a drug court judge and consists of representatives from the prosecutor’s office, the defense attorney (public defender), a coordinator, and possibly other court services representatives, law enforcement or probation officers, and treatment providers. It is estimated that there are nearly 3000 DTCs in the United States at the present time, with the majority operating as adult drug treatment courts (Zanis et al., 2009).
A Qualitative Interpretive Meta-Synthesis (QIMS) of women’s experiences in drug court: Promoting recovery in the criminal justice system
Published in Journal of Social Work Practice in the Addictions, 2022
John R. Gallagher, Anne Nordberg, Douglas B. Marlowe, Courtney Zongrone, Sydney Szymanowski
Drug court participants are required to attend and complete substance use disorder treatment. This requirement is not surprising, as all drug court participants have a substance use disorder and the model logically assumes that there is a relationship between drug use and criminal behavior (e.g., buying illicit drugs for personal use). Women often reported histories of trauma, current trauma symptoms (e.g., hyper-vigilance, depression, anxiety), and mental illnesses that co-occurred with substance use disorders. Therefore, it is essential that drug courts refer female participants to treatment providers who have expertise in treating co-occurring disorders and agencies that offer individual counseling. Moore et al. (2017) highlighted the importance of providing women with the option of individual counseling. All of the women in their study, except one, discussed the benefits they received by participating in this modality of treatment. One woman, for instance, stated, ‘In the individuals, I got one-on-one attention and I can focus on little things in my life that need help the most.’ (Moore et al., 2017, p. 755). Additionally, Fischer et al. (2007) shared an example from a female drug court participant who was dissatisfied with the quality of substance use disorder treatment she received. Specifically, she stated, ‘It’s always in a group. No one-on-one. They really don’t work with you on an individual basis. They work with you in a group, and then they judge you individually.’ (Fischer et al., 2007, p. 715).
A Focus Group Analysis with a Drug Court Team: Opioid Use Disorders and the Role of Medication-Assisted Treatment (MAT) in Programming
Published in Journal of Social Work Practice in the Addictions, 2021
John R. Gallagher, Anne Nordberg, Zephi Francis, Preeti Menon, Meredith Canada, Raychel M. Minasian
A significant proportion of individuals with opioid use disorders interface with the criminal justice system. One study estimated that from 2015 to 2016, at least 20% of people with opioid use disorders were involved with the criminal justice system in the previous year (Winkelman et al., 2018). Drug courts are a commonly used intervention in the criminal justice system to treat individuals who have substance use disorders including opioid use disorders, and according to the National Drug Court Resource Center (2019), over 3,000 drug courts operate in the U.S. Drug courts, also referred to as problem-solving courts or drug treatment courts, work with individuals who have substance use disorders and drug-related crimes (e.g., possession of a controlled substance). The first drug court began in 1989, and over the last three decades, research on drug courts has demonstrated that they reduce participant criminal recidivism and arrests for nonviolent offenses, in comparison to other criminal justice programs, such as probation (Mitchell et al., 2012).