Drug Courts Can Reduce Substance Use and Crime, Five-Year Study Shows, But Effectiveness Hinges on the Judge

2011 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
2016 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 468-484 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Robert Gallagher ◽  
Anne Nordberg ◽  
Elyse Lefebvre

For nearly three decades, drug courts have provided a rehabilitative approach within the criminal justice system for individuals who have a substance use disorder. The goal of drug courts is to reduce criminal recidivism, and research has consistently suggested that participants that graduate drug court are less likely to recidivate than those who are terminated from the program. This qualitative study adds to the literature by asking drug court participants ( N = 42) their views on the most helpful aspects of the program that support them in graduating and how the program could be more helpful to support them in graduating. Two themes emerged from the data: (1) participants felt that interventions that are common to drug courts, such as drug testing and having frequent contact with the judge, were most helpful in supporting them in graduating the program; (2) participants felt that the agencies that offered treatment for their substance use disorders used punitive tactics and judgmental approaches that compromised the quality of treatment they received, and they felt that this was a barrier to them graduating the program. The findings are discussed in reference to drug court practice.


2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
John Robert Gallagher ◽  
Anne Nordberg ◽  
Raychel Minasian ◽  
Sydney Szymanowski ◽  
Jesse Carlton ◽  
...  

Drug courts are an alternative to incarceration for individuals who have substance use disorders and have been arrested for drug-related crimes (e.g. possession of a controlled substance). The first drug court began in 1989 in Florida and it is estimated that there are over 3,000 drug courts now operating throughout the United States.  This community-engaged research (CER) evaluated the St. Joseph County (Indiana) drug court by identifying who was most likely to graduate, who was most likely to recidivate, and whether drug court or probation was more effective at reducing criminal recidivism.  Furthermore, although drug courts are found in many communities, research rarely describes the process used to develop and implement CER.  Therefore, this article also highlights the collaborative process used in this drug court evaluation.   The findings from this study suggest that the St. Joseph County (Indiana) drug court is an effective program at reducing criminal recidivism and a valuable resource for individuals who have substance use disorders, the community, and other stakeholders. Drug court participants were less likely to recidivate than probationers, and a lower recidivism rate clearly equates to many benefits to the community.  The article concludes with community-based implications, such as starting recovery support groups that are welcoming to individuals who receive medication-assisted treatment (MAT), marketing drug court to racial and ethnic minorities to increase their representation in drug court, and disseminating research findings throughout the community via local news stories and public lectures.


Author(s):  
David DeMatteo ◽  
Kirk Heilbrun ◽  
Alice Thornewill ◽  
Shelby Arnold

This chapter first reviews the relationship between substance abuse and criminal justice involvement, followed by a discussion of the history and development of drug courts, with a specific focus on their features, operations, and key components. The authors then discuss the extensive research on the effectiveness of drug courts, focusing primarily on outcomes of recidivism and substance use. Given the large body of research on drug courts, there is a great deal of data on the correlates and predictors of success in drug courts; the authors provide a summary of the key factors related to drug court success. They also mention the limitations in the extant research and note how future studies can address these shortcomings. The authors then discuss a newer drug court model—juvenile drug courts—with a focus on their key features and effectiveness. Finally, after discussing best practices in the development and operation of drug courts, “next steps” are proposed.


2021 ◽  
Vol 90 ◽  
pp. 103050
Author(s):  
Paul J. Joudrey ◽  
Benjamin A. Howell ◽  
Kate Nyhan ◽  
Ali Moravej ◽  
Molly Doernberg ◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 247-264 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah M. Manchak ◽  
Carrie Coen Sullivan ◽  
Myrinda Schweitzer ◽  
Christopher J. Sullivan

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document