Differences Between The Success Rate Of Drug Courts

Not only do the eligibility requirements of drug courts vary across the board, but the way the programs operate and their outcomes vary considerably, especially when it comes down to how they choose to operationalize the ten key components (Carey & Waller, 2011; Mackin et. al, 2009). In 1997, the National Association of Drug Court Professionals published these key components. The first key component is that drug courts integrate alcohol and other drug treatment services with justice system case processing (NADCP, 1997). Being that the mission of drug courts is to combat the abuse of drugs and alcohol it is imperative for them to promote recovery through coordinated responses. The second key component states that drug courts should use a

Drug court was first started in 1989 in Miami, Florida. Drug court came about due to the link between crime and drug abuse. This drug related crimes caused the jails to become over populated. Drug court became the solution to aid in the recovery of SUD as well as weed out petite drug related crimes and hard criminals. This is in intensive program with court supervision, case management for prosecution and/or incarceration. As well as a team of professional that assist the client in with the court, probation, treatment and police. These professional meet up with the client to discuss the program and how they are doing in it. This is a abstinence base program that help with rapid treatment entry, integrated treatment and court service, drug testing, and a sanctions and reward system (Miller,2015)

In 1994, Los Angeles County established its first Drug Court Program; within a few months, a second court was implemented. These two programs were the beginning of the Los Angeles County Drug Court system and represented a growing “movement to significantly alter the criminal justice system’s response to drug addiction and crime” (Fielding et al., 2002, p. 218). As of 2015, there are 12 adult drug courts in Los Angeles County that specialize in drug treatment services for drug involved and dependent offenders. According to the National Association of Drug Court Professionals (1997) the mission of “drug courts is to stop the abuse of alcohol and other drugs and related criminal activity” (p. 7). Drug courts utilize a team approach to promote

Drug courts were developed in response to a perceived need within society and the criminal justice system. This study collected data from 600 participants who successfully completed drug treatment court. The Drug Court Graduate Survey was developed by the court’s treatment program staff to serve as a measure of motivation for successful completion of the program as well as an evaluation of program functioning. The survey asked a variety of questions related to the clients experience in drug court and the client’s suggestions about way the court could change to improve effectiveness. Clients in this drug court provided interesting clues as to why drug addicted individuals enter drug court and what factors helped them successfully graduate.

The primary interest within the independent variable is to determine whether participation in drug courts decreases the probability of recidivism. To evaluate this concern, the current study will analyze whether receiving treatment in a drug court versus the comparison group of probationers will affect various outcomes. Finally, gender, race, age, and education will also be included in the analysis as control variables.

INTRODUCTION Drug courts have become an integral part of the criminal justice system. They offer a specialized approach for participants not offered in criminal courts. They have filled a void in the criminal justice system that was left by the war on drugs. Due to this specialized approach, judges must assume a controversial role in the participants lives.

Just as there are supporters of drug courts who will attest to their success, there are an equal amount of critics who believe that drug courts are ineffective. One of the main factors that has been noted as the reason for the program’s lack of success is that since each state regulates its own program, it’s hard to effectively

Drug addiction has increased drastically across America in the last fifty years. Non-violent drug offenders fill our jails and prisons. Taxpayer dollars are put into a prison system that is proving to be counter-productive. Recidivism rates are high. Drug Court is an alternative to incarceration that offers rehabilitation to criminal offenders. In drug court, the traditional functions of the U.S. justice system are profoundly altered. The judge is the leader of a treatment team. The judge makes all final decisions and holds a range of discretion unprecedented in the courtroom, including the type of treatment mandated and how to address

I believe that your topic about the effectiveness of drug courts is very interesting. It has been considered as a way that can be very cost effective and probably solve the issue of the overcrowding of prisons. Offenders who are non-violent are not placed in an environment where they probably will not be able to seek rehabilitation. Through the drug court program, the low level offenders will probably have a better opportunity in seeking real help and receive a second chance. They will be able to get support from their family and friends compared to just being placed in the prison system. However, are there enough drug court programs across the nation? How many people are not able to take advantage of this program? Looking forward in learning

The Maryland drug court system has failed plenty of people since it was first introduced 1993, because of the goals and requirements are unrealistic and the offenders with an actual serious drug problem in the program are not getting the proper treatments they need to successfully stay clean once they graduate. In this essay elaborate on the practices that should be changed and if rehabilitation, detoxification and opioid treatments need to be available were to be implemented it would improve the program and keep people like my loved one on the right track and not headed to prison.

Tougher sentencing is not likely to reduce illegal drug use or serious crime associated with drugs (Alexander, 2010; Mauer, 2009; Whitford & Yates, 2009). Despite that, politicians and law enforcement personnel continue to advocate for stronger sentences for those who take or sell drugs of any kind. The jails and prisons across the United States are filling up with drug offenders, and some believe that there are better uses for those jail cells and that there are many crimes that are more severe and significant. These are the crimes that should be provided with tougher sentencing guidelines, but yet illegal drug use is still a serious crime and should not go unpunished. What should be done, and how should changes be made? Those are tough questions that have to be explored and that do not have any easy answers for those who make the laws and those who enforce them. Drug incarceration has been on the rise, with mixed results. According to King (2008), "overall, between 1980 and 2003, the number of drug offenders in prison or jail increased by 1100% from 41,100 in 1980 to 493,800 in 2003, with a remarkable rise in arrests concentrated in African American communities."

Women usually have the same type of story, on the reason they decided to get involved in drugs. Some women have the drugs introduced to them by their family or friends (Mallicoat, 2012). Others began this habit to cope with violence or abuse in their early childhood (Mallicoat, 2012). About half of the women who are incarcerated are in prison for some sort of drug offense; either for selling or for drug use. Introducing prevention programs, life skills training, mental health training, and other basic needs can help reduce the percentage of women going back to their habit and staying away from incarceration (Mcvay et. al, 2004). By just putting women in prison, instead of actually looking into the reason they are using drugs are not helping them and might even increase the risk of them returning to prison or the risk of further criminal activity. Treating drug use as a medical problem, with programs for drug addiction, can help the women from getting incarcerated. Viewing women as victims in scenarios like drug use being a medical problem or prostitution can ultimately help reduce the percentage of incarcerated women.

Currently, drug courts have been proven to be successful at reducing recidivism of offenders. In the United States there are about 120,000 people receiving help in order to rehabilitate them and to try to reduce the chances of recidivism (Office of National Drug Control Policy, 2011). These programs require individuals to participate in the programs for a minimum of one year. During this year the individuals are required to appear in court and be drug tested at

The drug court also provides powerful incentives and punishments for it participates. Some may be harsh and others are less harsh. At the state level the recidivism rate has lowered (Fulkerson et al., 2012; Rempel et. Al., 2003; Shaffer, 2011; Wilson, Mitchell, & MacKenzie, 2003). This is due to the defendant’s participation rate. There was a national study done showing a two-year recidivism rate of 28% (Roman, Townsend, & Bhati, 2003).

Drug abuse is shown to be connected to all different kinds of crime in the United States, and in many circumstances, crime is inspired by drug abuse and addiction. In fact, 80% of criminal offenders abuse drugs or alcohol (National Association of Drug Court Professionals). Also, 60% of those who are arrested test positive for illicit drugs when they are arrested, and 60-80% commit another crime, typically drug-related, after leaving prison (National Association of Drug Court Professionals). And, even after these individuals put in the time in prison that would allow them to go through the uncomfortable process of detoxing, 95% of them will chose to go back to drug abuse after prison (National Association of Drug Court Professionals). Given these overwhelming statistics, it is clear that drug abuse, and repeated or continued drug abuse, are a serious problem facing the criminal justice system.