Specialty Courts

2017 ◽  
pp. 231-242
Author(s):  
Brittany Hood ◽  
Bradley Ray
Keyword(s):  
Specialty Courts

Therapeutically (Un)Just Interactions in Family Court Proceedings

2018 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 262-286
Author(s):  
Cindy Brooks Dollar
Keyword(s):  
Observational Data ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Family Members ◽  
Therapeutic Jurisprudence ◽  
Family Court ◽  
Family Courts ◽  
Specialty Courts ◽  
Current Operation ◽  
Court Proceedings

Court systems have a unique and powerful impact on the lives of persons who enter into them. In recognition of some of the deleterious effects of traditional court models, scholars and practitioners advocate for alternative court processes, especially through the implementation of specialty courts. Family court is a type of specialized court, which handles legal disputes among family members. The stated mission of family courts reflects notions of therapeutic jurisprudence; however, scarce research examines if therapeutic jurisprudence is actually practiced in family court settings. Using 12 months of observational data of over 100 hearings, the present study assesses the extent to which principles of therapeutic jurisprudence are apparent in court proceedings. I find that although therapeutically just interactions are common in family court, some encounters remain antitherapeutic or damaging. The implication of family court’s current operation within the broader “justice” system is discussed.

Therapeutic Jurisprudence in Swift and Certain Probation

2020 ◽  
Vol 64 (12) ◽  
pp. 1768-1785 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kelly Frailing ◽  
Brandi Alfonso ◽  
Rae Taylor
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Procedural Justice ◽  
Probation Officers ◽  
Therapeutic Jurisprudence ◽  
Drug Courts ◽  
Specialty Courts ◽  
Therapeutic Justice ◽  
And Function

While the manifestation of therapeutic jurisprudence in specialty courts such as mental health and drug courts has received attention in the literature, there is little scholarship on the manifestation and function of therapeutic jurisprudence in probation settings. This study examines therapeutic jurisprudence in the context of a HOPE-based probation program called Swift and Certain probation. We observed status hearings and surveyed participants on their perceptions of the program for over 2 years. We found that therapeutic jurisprudence was manifested in the judge’s liberal use of praise during status hearings, which appeared to be an important part of participants’ positive perceptions of him and of procedural justice more generally. It was also manifested, though less directly, in interactions and relationships participants have with their probation officers. We conclude with suggestions for the implementation of therapeutic justice practices in Swift and Certain and similar probation programs.

Specialty courts: Who’s in and are they working?

2016 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 246-253 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert D. Morgan ◽  
Sean M. Mitchell ◽  
Megan A. Thoen ◽  
Kelsey Campion ◽  
Angelea D. Bolaños ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Specialty Courts

North Carolina Specialty Courts, Treatment Access, and the Substance Use Crisis: A Promising but Underfunded Model

2021 ◽  
pp. appi.ps.2020008
Author(s):  
Michele M. Easter ◽  
Jeffrey W. Swanson ◽  
William E. Crozier ◽  
Allison G. Robertson ◽  
Brandon L. Garrett ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
North Carolina ◽  
Substance Use ◽  
Treatment Access ◽  
Specialty Courts

Reentry Courts

2019 ◽  
pp. 134-156
Author(s):  
David DeMatteo ◽  
Kirk Heilbrun ◽  
Alice Thornewill ◽  
Shelby Arnold
Keyword(s):  
Problem Solving ◽  
Behavioral Health ◽  
Additional Research ◽  
Health Needs ◽  
Unique Form ◽  
Relevant Research ◽  
Criminogenic Needs ◽  
Specialty Courts ◽  
Common Components

This chapter provides a discussion of reentry programming and specialty courts designed to assist offenders who are reintegrating into society after being released from incarceration. Reentry courts represent a unique form of problem-solving justice that addresses criminogenic needs (rather than behavioral health needs) related to recidivism. This chapter provides an overview of the history and development of reentry courts, followed by a discussion of common components of these courts and an overview of a few prototypically models of U.S. reentry courts. This chapter also summarizes the relevant research on these courts and highlights limitations in the literature. Finally, this chapter discusses how specialty reentry courts/programming can function most effectively to prevent recidivism, how these courts can expand their reach, and aspects of reentry courts that are in need of additional research.

scholarly journals A Criminological Fly in the Ointment: Specialty Courts and the Generality of Deviance

2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 375-386 ◽  
Author(s):  
Travis C. Pratt ◽  
Jillian J. Turanovic
Keyword(s):  
Specialty Courts

The Criminal/Legal Experiences of Individuals with Mental Illness along the Sequential Intercept Model: An Eight-Site Study

2020 ◽  
Vol 48 (1) ◽  
pp. 76-95 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erin B. Comartin ◽  
Victoria Nelson ◽  
Scott Smith ◽  
Sheryl Kubiak
Keyword(s):  
Mental Illness ◽  
Severe Mental Illness ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Exploratory Study ◽  
Treatment Engagement ◽  
Diversion Programs ◽  
Specialty Courts ◽  
Criminal Legal System ◽  
Using Data ◽  
Policies And Practices

Studies suggest that up to 44% of individuals in the criminal/legal system have a severe mental illness (SMI), and although diversion programs have been established, a significant portion still end up incarcerated. The Sequential Intercept Model is a framework designed to reduce the overrepresentation of individuals with SMI in the criminal/legal system by identifying points of interception to prevent individuals from entering or moving further into the system. Although studies assess programs in each intercept, none has evaluated how individuals process through all intercepts. Using data from eight counties ( N = 1,160), this exploratory study assesses criminal/legal involvement across each intercept between individuals identified with ( n = 880) or without ( n = 280) SMI. Findings indicate longer stays in jail, low rates of treatment engagement and enrollment in specialty courts, and poorer diversion outcomes for individuals with SMI. Recommendations for research, policies, and practices are proposed to advance Smart Decarceration efforts.

scholarly journals Do Specialty Courts Achieve Better Outcomes for Children in Foster Care than General Courts?

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frank A. Sloan ◽  
Elizabeth J. Gifford ◽  
Lindsey M. Eldred ◽  
Kofi Acquah ◽  
Claire Blevins
Keyword(s):  
Foster Care ◽  
Children In Foster Care ◽  
Specialty Courts ◽  
Outcomes For Children
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document