Clinical Interventions in Problem-Solving Courts

This chapter focuses on the clinical interventions most commonly delivered in problem-solving courts. The chapter begins with a discussion of the Risk-Needs-Responsivity Model, which provides a foundational context for the interventions used in problem-solving courts and highlights the importance of targeting offender needs—criminogenic needs—related to key outcomes (e.g., reduced recidivism, reduced relapse to drug use). The authors then discuss the various screening and risk assessment procedures used to admit offenders to problem-solving courts, the clinical interventions used in problem-solving courts (e.g., cognitive-behavioral interventions, 12-step programs, therapeutic communities, case management, trauma-informed care), and the use of evidence-based practices in problem-solving courts. The authors note the role of problem-solving courts as a watchdog for service provision and conclude with a section discussing “next steps” for expanding evidence-based interventions in problem-solving courts.

Current Issues in the Criminal Justice System

This chapter provides an introduction to the scope of the problems facing the criminal justice system, with a specific focus on the overrepresentation of mental illness and substance abuse among justice-involved individuals. After discussing the “revolving door” and increased incarceration and recidivism rates among mentally ill and drug-involved offenders, the authors introduce therapeutic jurisprudence and the other foundational principles and common themes of problem-solving courts. This discussion illustrates the paradigm shift away from punishment and toward rehabilitation and increased collaboration among different entities within the criminal justice system. The chapter concludes with a brief review of the contents of the volume.

Problem-Solving Courts

This chapter summarizes problem-solving court principles and concepts, provides an overview of the limited reach of problem-solving courts, describes alternatives to problem-solving courts (e.g., diversion, smart sentencing, probation/parole), discusses strategies for incorporating a problem-solving approach in other aspects of the justice system, and examines current innovations for expanding problem-solving justice. This chapter discusses a “big picture” approach that includes a discussion of how reformation of certain aspects of the criminal justice system could effectively address the behavioral health needs of offenders and reduce recidivism. This chapter also discusses future directions within problem-solving justice in terms of research, practice, and policy.

Reentry Courts

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.

Mental Health Courts

This chapter focuses on mental health courts, a problem-solving court that developed in the wake of drug courts to address the needs of offenders with mental health diagnoses or co-occurring mental health and substance abuse concerns. In this chapter, the authors first review the overrepresentation of individuals with mental illness in the criminal justice system. They then describe the history and current state of mental health courts in the United States. The chapter then provides a detailed summary of the research on mental health courts. Although there is considerably less research on mental health courts than on drug courts, the available research provides reason to be cautiously optimistic. Within this discussion, the authors also note the limitations in mental health court research. Finally, the authors conclude the chapter with a discussion of innovative mental health court practices and the future of mental health courts.

Drug Courts

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.

Methodological Challenges in Researching Problem-Solving Courts

This chapter discusses the methodological challenges faced by researchers attempting to study the operations and effectiveness of problem-solving courts. Although researchers have conducted a great deal of research on drug courts, and research on mental health courts is continuing to grow, there is relatively little research on all other types of problem-solving courts. This chapter discusses the current research landscape and describes how research on these courts can be challenging for a variety of ethical and logistical reasons. Specifically, this chapter highlights the difficulties associated with conducting valid empirical research on problem-solving courts, including an overview of difficulties with random assignment, skewed samples, outcome measures, and jurisdictional differences. The authors also discuss the disconnect between indicators of progress used in some problem-solving courts and reductions in criminal recidivism.

Other Specialty Courts

The development and success of drug courts resulted in the development of many other types of problem-solving courts. This chapter provides an overview of these other types of problem-solving courts in the United States, including (but not limited to) domestic violence courts, family dependency treatment courts, homelessness courts, truancy courts, veterans courts, DUI/DWI courts, and community courts. This chapter summarizes the sparse research that has been conducted on these courts and considers the future of these types of problem-solving courts. Specifically, this chapter considers whether there is a need for so many highly specific problem-solving courts, how these courts can expand their reach (and whether they should), aspects of these courts that are in need of additional research, and how these courts can function most effectively in today’s economic and political climate.

Ethical and Legal Considerations in Problem-Solving Courts

This chapter focuses on the legal and ethical considerations that are relevant to problem-solving courts. The chapter begins with a review of the constitutional considerations relevant to problem-solving courts and how they impact pleadings, consent, and competence. Next, this chapter provides an overview of the ethical issues associated with consent and confidentiality in specialty courts. Part of the discussion of legal considerations compares legal aspects of problem-solving courts to legal aspects of standard prosecution. This chapter also covers ethical implications regarding the role of the judge in specialty courts. A key topic in this area is the role of coercion/leverage, both in terms of how offenders are admitted to problem-solving courts and what actions courts take when a client is not compliant. We also examine the important role of defense counsel in problem-solving courts, focusing on how defense counsel can effectively and ethically represent defendants within a problem-solving justice framework. Finally, this chapter discusses clinical implications of the ethical challenges that are most relevant to problem-solving courts.

Alternatives to Standard Prosecution

This chapter begins with an introduction to the Sequential Intercept Model, which is a theoretical framework used to identify points of intervention and community alternatives for individuals with behavioral health treatment needs in the justice system. The authors outline each intercept and provide examples of interventions at each stage, including more detailed information about Intercept 3, which is the intercept at which problem-solving courts are found. The authors then review the history and development of problem-solving courts, highlighting important political events that influenced their growth. This chapter also includes a discussion about inclusion/exclusion criteria in problem-solving courts to better detail the populations they serve. The chapter concludes with a review of the strengths, limitations, and stakeholders’ (e.g., judges, attorneys, consumers) perceptions of problem-solving courts.