Investigating Mental Health Implications for Drug Court Participants

Drug Court Treatment (DCT) Programs seek to integrate substance abuse treatment into the criminal justice system by providing a structured environment for offenders who engage in treatment in lieu of incarceration. DCT has shown successes in reducing drug/alcohol use, recidivism, and cost, but the impact of DCT on non-substance-related mental health outcomes is less clear. This study evaluated mental health correlates within a DCT sample through analyses of participants’ pre-entry and pre-graduation Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory—Second Edition (MMPI-2) profiles. When diagnostic information was available, mood disorders had the highest comorbidity with alcohol/substance use diagnoses. Comparisons across administrations of the MMPI-2 indicated significant differences among mean scores on 6 Clinical scales, and mean profile elevation scores significantly decreased. Results suggest a significant presence of mental health comorbidities in DCT programs, and significant mental health improvements were seen for graduates, suggesting the utility of DCT for treating mental health problems in addition to substance use.

The Experiences of Young Adult Offenders Who Completed a Drug Court Treatment Program

Although there has been a proliferation of studies on the effectiveness of drug court programs, these studies are largely quantitative in nature. Little is known about the experiences of persons who participate in drug court. In this study, we aimed to fill this knowledge gap by exploring experiences of young adults who completed an adult drug court treatment program. Nine semi-structured interviews were conducted, typed into a word-processing program, and then entered into a data analysis software program. Using grounded theory strategies, analysis revealed several emergent themes, which are presented chronologically to provide a narrative of study participants’ experiences before, during, and after the program. Findings provide insights on how participants perceive drug courts and experiences that might facilitate or impede completion of drug court programs. Our findings are particularly important for drug court professionals as they attempt to develop appropriate recommendations for best practices and new policy initiatives.

Decision Making in a Hybrid Organization: A Case Study of a Southwestern Drug Court Treatment Program

This article presents a case study of decision making in a drug court located the southwestern United States. This study seeks to fill a gap in research on decision making by attending to the ways that drug court officials navigate the demands of a court that is dedicated to both therapy and criminal justice. This analysis differs from previous research by viewing the drug court as a “hybrid organization” and asking how the staff members interact in the decision-making process. Additionally, this research provides an opportunity to investigate the concerns over collaborative decision making raised by critics. The data from this case study reveal that as a hybrid organization, the drug court staff often divides along institutional lines by allowing the counseling staff to manage treatment and the judge to manage punishment. When tensions arise, they are resolved by the structure of the court, which is hierarchical rather than collaborative.

Social Recovery, Social Capital, and Drug Courts

Drug courts were established for criminal offenders whose primary offense is related to drug use. As an alternative to incarceration, the drug court incorporates drug treatment with close judicial supervision. A team approach includes the judge, public defender, case workers and/or treatment providers, and a coordinator. Traditional drug court treatment programs offer therapeutic approaches that include mandatory counseling, 12-step (self-help) group meetings, attendance at regular court sessions, random drug testing, and, in some cases, life skills training (Nolan 2003). Some drug courts place particular emphasis on furthering participants' education and their job skills. In these examples, employment and education are seen as important treatment outcomes (Leukefield 2007; Deschenes 2009). Adding services to drug court programs such as employment and educational resources and increasing the number of residential treatment beds also improves retention rates for participation and helps contain recidivism rates (Deschenes 2009). Most studies find drug court participants to have substantially lower re-arrest rates than comparison samples, with recidivism as low as 27 percent compared to 70 percent for drug offenders who did not participate in a drug court program (Belenko 1998; May 2008).