Drug courts - a rare success story in the criminal justice system - are generally credited with reducing recidivism and providing a lower-cost alternative to incarceration. They have also spawned the development of other specialty courts. The authors of Drug Courts and the Criminal Justice System provide a comprehensive analysis of just how drug courts work, systematically examining the model and exploring its broader significance.
Drug courts offer offenders an intensive court-based treatment program as an alternative to the normal adjudication process. Begun in 1989, they have since spread dramatically throughout the United States. In this interdisciplinary examination of the expanding movement, a distinguished panel of legal practitioners and academics offers theoretical assessments and on-site empirical analyses of the workings of various courts in the United States, along with detailed comparisons and contrasts with related developments in Britain. Practitioners, politicians, and academics alike acknowledge the profound impact drug courts have had on the American criminal justice system. From a range of disciplinary perspectives, contributors to this volume seek to make sense of this important judicial innovation. While addressing a range of questions, Drug Courts also aims to achieve a careful balance between focused empirical studies and broader theoretical analyses of the same phenomenon. The volume maintains an analytical concentration on drug courts and on the important practical, philosophical, and jurisprudential consequences of this unique form of therapeutic jurisprudence. Drug courts depart from the practices and procedures of typical criminal courts. Prosecutors and defense counsel play much-reduced roles. Often lawyers are not even present during regular drug court sessions. Instead, the main courtroom drama is between the judge and client, both of whom speak openly and freely in the drug court setting. Often accompanying the client is a treatment provider who advises the judge and reviews the client's progress in treatment. Court sessions are characterized by expressive and sometimes tearful testimonies about the recovery process, and are often punctuated with applause from those in attendance. Taken together, the chapters provide a variety of perspectives on drug courts, and extend our knowledge of the birth and evolution of a new movement. Drug Courts is an essential reference for courses in criminology, the sociology of drugs and deviance, and the philosophy of law and punishment.
Problem-solving courts provide judicially supervised treatment for behavioral health needs commonly found among criminal offenders, including substance abuse and mental health disorders, and they treat a variety of offender populations. These courts employ a team-based approach consisting of a judge, defense attorney, prosecutor, and treatment providers, representing a significant paradigm shift in how the justice system treats offenders with special needs. Despite the proliferation of problem-solving courts, there remains some uncertainty about how they function, how effective they are, and the most promising ways to implement problem-solving justice. Problem-Solving Courts and the Criminal Justice System provides a comprehensive foundation of knowledge related to problem-solving courts and the role they play in the United States criminal justice system. The book begins with an overview that explores precipitating factors in these courts' development, relevant political influence, and their history, purposes, benefits, and drawbacks, followed by a detailed discussion of specific types of problem solving courts, including drug courts, mental health courts, and veterans courts, among many others. Next a review of the legal and ethical considerations of alternative methods to standard prosecution is complemented by an examination of the methodological challenges faced by researchers when attempting to study the effectiveness of problem-solving courts. The book concludes with a discussion of future directions in terms of research, practice, and policy relating to these courts in the United States. Problem-Solving Courts and the Criminal Justice System is appropriate for professionals, researchers, and students in the fields of mental health, criminal justice, and law.
In 1989, the first drug-treatment court was established in Florida, inaugurating an era of state-supervised rehabilitation. Such courts have frequently been seen as a humane alternative to incarceration and the war on drugs. Enforcing Freedom offers an ethnographic account of drug courts and mandatory treatment centers as a system of coercion, demonstrating how the state uses notions of rehabilitation as a means of social regulation. Situating drug courts in a long line of state projects of race and class control, Kerwin Kaye details the ways in which the violence of the state is framed as beneficial for those subjected to it. He explores how courts decide whether to release or incarcerate participants using nominally colorblind criteria that draw on racialized imagery. Rehabilitation is defined as preparation for low-wage labor and the destruction of community ties with “bad influences,” a process that turns participants against one another. At the same time, Kaye points toward the complex ways in which participants negotiate state control in relation to other forms of constraint in their lives, sometimes embracing the state’s salutary violence as a means of countering their impoverishment. Simultaneously sensitive to ethnographic detail and theoretical implications, Enforcing Freedom offers a critical perspective on the punitive side of criminal-justice reform and points toward alternative paths forward.
The number of people incarcerated in the U.S. now exceeds 2.3 million, due in part to the increasing criminalization of drug use: over 25% of people incarcerated in jails and prisons are there for drug offenses. Judging Addicts examines this increased criminalization of drugs and the medicalization of addiction in the U.S. by focusing on drug courts, where defendants are sent to drug treatment instead of prison. Rebecca Tiger explores how advocates of these courts make their case for what they call “enlightened coercion,” detailing how they use medical theories of addiction to justify increased criminal justice oversight of defendants who, through this process, are defined as both “sick” and “bad.” Tiger shows how these courts fuse punitive and therapeutic approaches to drug use in the name of a “progressive” and “enlightened” approach to addiction. She critiques the medicalization of drug users, showing how the disease designation can complement, rather than contradict, punitive approaches, demonstrating that these courts are neither unprecedented nor unique, and that they contain great potential to expand punitive control over drug users. Tiger argues that the medicalization of addiction has done little to stem the punishment of drug users because of a key conceptual overlap in the medical and punitive approaches—that habitual drug use is a problem that needs to be fixed through sobriety. Judging Addicts presses policymakers to implement humane responses to persistent substance use that remove its control entirely from the criminal justice system and ultimately explores the nature of crime and punishment in the U.S. today.
Is drug addiction a disease that can be treated, or is it a crime that should be punished? In her probing study, Illness or Deviance?, Jennifer Murphy investigates the various perspectives on addiction, and how society has myriad ways of handling it—incarcerating some drug users while putting others in treatment. Illness or Deviance? highlights the confusion and contradictions about labeling addiction. Murphy’s fieldwork in a drug court and an outpatient drug treatment facility yields fascinating insights, such as how courts and treatment centers both enforce the “disease” label of addiction, yet their management tactics overlap treatment with “therapeutic punishment.” The “addict" label is a result not just of using drugs, but also of being a part of the drug lifestyle, by selling drugs. In addition, Murphy observes that drug courts and treatment facilities benefit economically from their cooperation, creating a very powerful institutional arrangement. Murphy contextualizes her findings within theories of medical sociology as well as criminology to identify the policy implications of a medicalized view of addiction.
What are drug courts? Do they work? Why are they so popular? Should countries be expanding them or rolling them back? These are some of the questions this volume attempts to answer. Simultaneously popular and problematic, loved and loathed, drug courts have proven an enduring topic for discussion in international drug policy debates. Starting in Miami in the 1980s and being exported enthusiastically across the world, we now have a range of international case studies to re-examine their effectiveness. Whereas traditional debates tended towards binaries like “do they work?”, this volume attempts to unpick their export and implementation, contextualising their efficacy. Instead of a simple yes or no answer, the book provides key insights into the operation of drug courts in various parts of the world. The case studies range from a relatively successful small-scale model in Australia, to the large and unwieldy business of drug courts in the US, to their failed scale-up in Brazil and the small and institutionally adrift models that have been tried in England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland. The book concludes that although drug courts can be made to work in very specific niche contexts, the singular focus on them as being close to a “silver bullet” obscures the real issues that societies must address, including (but not limited to) a more comprehensive and full-spectrum focus on diverting drug-involved individuals away from the criminal justice system.
