DRUG COURT - AN ALTERNATIVE TO INCARCERATION OF SUBSTANCE ABUSE
- Law Mates
- Oct 30, 2020
- 7 min read
The past fifty years of war on drugs and the use of criminal law against that battle contribute significant prison populations around the world. Incarceration is the most common tool used against drug warfare which severely limits the rights of inmates and exposes them to greater violence and drug consumption. This situation led the human to understand that prison is neither the best nor an alternative for the prevention of drug abuse. In recent years, many international debates have focused on the implementation of appropriate alternatives to imprisoning drug addicts and out of all the alternatives the most widely accepted form is Drug court or Drug treatment court.
Introduction
The first drug court was established in the year 1989 in Florida, the court was designed to introduce drug treatment to the criminal justice system. Since 1989 the drug court has achieved its attention all over the world and the drug court programs have been quickly adopted by the communities across the world. Drug court follows a blended method of treatment and justice to reduce drug abuse and crimes related to drug addiction. While the general framework may be portable from program to program but specific selection criteria, adjudication protocol, means of supervision and sanctioning procedures have differed dramatically.
Though the drug court programs have tried to be individualized as much as possible by considering the differing needs of every participant and despite the popularity of drug court efficacy across the world, some challenges still need to be taken care of. Nevertheless, let us uphold the result that "drug court programs have produced far-reaching results among the participants than the non-participants ".
Drug court:
Drug courts are not traditional courts but it’s a docketing program aiming to help the non-violent abusers of alcohol and substance to recover from its use by providing a different kind of treatment and rehabilitation. These programs are managed by a multidisciplinary team including from a judge to a veteran. Generically the drug courts design a designated program to educate, counsel, and treat the abusers to build their skills that would develop their capacity to lead drug- and crime-free lives.
Depends on the issues unique to a specific population the drug courts are varied for example adult drug court, family drug court, juvenile drug court, etc. similarly, their programs for treatment and services are also different. Although unique programs are delineated for every group to have the variances they all have common comprehensive modelings such as screening of the offenders (vary between drug courts and depend on local policies) assessment of risk, drug testing, and supervision.
Despite all these, how can the offender is motivated to be treated, how much he/she is ready to receive treatment, or how much he should be motivated to do so is paramount?
Legal Framework of Drug courts:
Drug courts are following a criminal justice approach to social health problems based on the utilitarian theory of punishment because the ultimate purpose of establishing these drug courts is to stop crimes due to the abuse of substance and alcohol. Hence the courts promote coordinated teamwork from the prosecutor and defense counsel. Once the abuser of drugs accepted the drug courts program the focus of the team is the recovery of the abuser and law-abiding behavior rather than the pending merits of the case.
Generally, there are two types of drug court proceedings are existed, deferred prosecution programs and post-adjudication programs. In the deferred prosecution program the abusers who meet certain eligibility criteria are diverted to drug court programs before the pleading of charge. There onwards those abusers are not required to plead guilty and once they completed the drug court program they will not be prosecuted further but failure to complete the drug court program results in prosecution.
Whereas in post-adjudication programs the defendant abusers plead guilty to their charges but their sentences are deferred or suspended while they participate in the drug court program. Successful completion of the program results in a waived sentence and sometimes an expungement of the offense. However, failure to follow the drug court programs lead to sentencing on the guilty plea.
The functioning of drug courts:
We are already known that drug courts are drastically different from traditional courts. In traditional courts, the judges get used to being transferred from civil court to criminal court from time to time. Whereas in drug courts once the judge has appointed not been permitted to transfer over some time. The person appointed in drug court is required to be more a psychological counselor than a court officer and more a nurturer than a judicial officer. These appointed judges must get to know the offender and their circumstances that caused their addictions.
When a defendant is prosecuted in criminal courts he used to face different judges during the trial but in drug courts, the defendants face the same judge in every sitting. Gradually over the period, the appointed judge in drug court conduct an in-depth investigation of the history of the offender/abuser to find out the root problem and determine the type of required treatment. In fact, in this process, the judge can easily differentiate the intention of the defendant and can tell whether the defendant is sincerely seeking help or fraudulently dealing with the drug court program to keep himself to stay out of jail. Therefore studying the history of the defendant is necessary to weed out wrongful intentions of the abuser.
Moreover, the drug court is not following the adversarial system but a therapeutic team system that helps the abuser to get his mental health back through counseling, education programs, employment, and treatment. These programs aiming from recovery to wellness of the person and hence it requires consistent treatment, support from family, and ultimately the cooperation of the abuser towards the program.
Eligibility criteria to admit drug court program:
Eligibility requirement differs from court to court, generally, those arrested for the charge of possession of drugs or nonviolent offenses must have tested to be positive for substance abuse and have a history of substance abuse. Those who have a previous history of drug addiction or substance use or violent offense will not be admitted to this program. While the exclusion of those persons with a previous history by the rules and regulations are premised on public health safety grounds. Another reason for the exclusion is that the person may have arrested for the charge of substance use but his past may wholly unrelated to the offense.
Practical challenges that encountered by the countries that can provide drug prevention and treatment but limited resources are identified as follows
Relevance vs Effectiveness:
The drug courts if focusing only on those who likely to succeed in the treatment they would win on effectiveness but lose in relevance. To implement both relevance and effectiveness, the drug court should focus on alternative policies for intensive drug abusers and take steps to ensure that must not jeopardizing the community treatment. If the challenge of exclusion and discrimination criteria is resolved, then the drug courts can reduce the risk of the recurring patterns of characteristics of the substance addict.
Appropriateness of treatment:
Treatment should be arranged in an orderly manner provide to all the beneficiaries within a time frame with a full cycle treatment and must also take into account the cultural and gender differences because this is the key factor that has been deciding the success or failure of the program. If not taken into account the differentiating factors such as gender and culture the program becomes irrelevant. Without quality programs, the drug courts are doomed to fail since its effectiveness depends on timely and permanent access to appropriate treatment.
Sustainability:
Drug courts require adequate experienced staff resources, their interventions are crucial for long term sustainability of the court and improvement of the treatment. Continuity in the same drug court staff helps to improve relationships with drug offenders which increases their accountability and commitment to treatment.
Specialization and judicial capacity:
The lack of training of judges in the field of drug court programs needs to be addressed, unless they are not being trained to offer a therapeutic method policy that is needed in cases of substance addict, the expected desired outcome in cases of substance abuse cannot be yielded.
Programming and sanctions:
Programs usually run between six months to one year, but many of those admitted for the program stays longer. The scale of successful completion of the drug court program has been evaluating based on the remaining drug-free life without arrest for a specified period. To evaluate the success of individual progress, each participant shall be monitored by a judge along with clinical staff in those frequent hearings.
A non-compliant participant of drug protocol can be sanctioned through increased status hearings, drug tests, or jail time. If the participant refuses to continue or still non-compliant with the program will result in termination and likely being taken into custody. The Judge of drug court has the discretionary power to decide how to proceed with the person in case of violation of terms of drug court proceedings. This discretionary power of drug court judge may include modification of treatment or impose some types of sanction including incarceration for a brief period.
The drug court system is a viable diversion for individuals who have a history of substance abuse so that the court must have flexible judicial responses in its design. In shaping the outcomes of the participants both the discretionary power of the judiciary and program design has a demonstrable impact.
Benefits of drug courts:
Reducing recidivism is the most important benefit of drug courts, the research studies show that the participants of the full-cycle drug court program can overcome their addiction. The participant's rearrest for the same offenses is comparatively less than abstainers who are failed to receive the treatment they needed and committed a crime upon their release. Altogether Drug court mitigates the rearrests of persons for the same offense by blending the treatment and justice and preventing the participants of the program to drop out early.
Conclusions and Recommendations:
Research to date shows that drug court has achieved a beneficial role in society. But still, questions regarding the admission of persons having a previous history of substance abuse needs to be answered. Continuing research is required to monitor the rearrests and reconvictions of the participants and dropouts. Such continuing research for the above will help to know the demography of the participants along with the rate of recidivism in the following years of their graduation.
Author-
Treasa Deepa NJ
References:
4. Drug-courts-A-Review-of –the-Evidence.pdf.
5. Drug Courts: Background, Effectiveness, and Policy Issues for Congress, October 12, 2010.
Comments