Ethical Issues of Drug Program Evaluation - Essay Example

? Exploring the Ethical issues regarding a Program Evaluation The problem of drug abuse and illegal use of hazardous substances has always been a menace to mankind, causing various sociological and psychological disorders. The percentage of drug trafficking and misuse has globally increased in recent times to an alarming rate. At first, drug offenders were treated under the common criminal judicial system, but the need of a specialized legal supervised docket arose from the very fact that, drug offenders were a different breed of criminals that posed different threats to society, and were a unique challenge to any jurisprudence. Drug practices require specialized treatment and focused undeterred attention; the traditional judicial systems only emphasized to the extent of guilt and determination of sanctions not the root cause of addiction and its ramifications, the judges needed specialized training to recognize special areas of supervision and monitoring of drug addicts. But most of all the traditional disposition process was unable to handle the caseload of the rapidly increasing drug cases and was getting more and more exhausted and overcrowded hence, unable to provide for permanent or long term solutions, in order to fill the gap for a strategic judicial system, purely dedicated to individual participants caught with charges for drug related felonies and misdemeanors, specialized drug courts came into being. The drug court’s main goal was not just punishment but to reform and rehabilitate drug offenders and, eventually make them drug-free. The Drug court is a problem-solving court or, a specialized system-based approach to eradicate crimes related to drug and substance abuse. The drug court system represents the correlated, homogenized and organized efforts of judicial experts and treatment professionals to interpose and break the cycle of substance misuse and all sorts of crimes related to drug abuse and addiction. These courts specialize in taking immediate measures through the quick identification of a drug offense and provide vigilant supervision and community monitoring along with due coercion, if and when required, to provide long term effective solutions, coupled with medical and psychological treatment to help the offenders become productive citizens. All this led to the urgent need and expansive growth of drug courts. Drug Court model in American judicial structure: Drug courts showed phenomenal growth, combining the hopes of re-habilitation and incentives coupled with the promise of punishment. The drug model requires individuals arrested on drug charges to attend training and regularly scheduled court hearings and undergo periodical drug tests. An expert system of graduated sanctions, rewards participants for compliance and punishes them for non-compliance. (Whiteacre, 2008) After completion the participants may have their charges reduced or dropped. Although models for various drug courts depend upon their target population, resources and evaluation techniques they involve a general criterion such as: Crime assessment and offender identification, judicial interaction and case management, monitoring procedures such as drug testing and supervision while on probation, courtroom procedures and eventually graduating sanctions, reward incentives or vice versa, providing ancillary treatment and services such as, mental health improvement, Stress and trauma related family therapy and vocational training, improved skills and over all enhancement of the quality of life. In 1989, the first adult drug treatment court opened in Dade County, Miami (Florida), in America. More than 800 adults, juvenile and tribal courts have been operating across the United States of America since then and the popularity and numbers keeps growing. (Nolan, 2003) between 1991 and 1993, around 20 jurisdictions across America implemented drug courts. The drug court model received great public acclaim and support, and large scale positive media coverage on local and national levels. The innovative adjudicative model takes thorough guidance from the American therapeutic idiom to give direction and meaning to its philosophy, form, structure and procedures. Drug courts have been implemented in Europe, Canada and Australia as well. (Whiteacre, 2008) American Drug Courts Evaluation and their Policies Participants and Impact: -The Drug court system, according to statistics provided by various case studies and research methods has been able to preserve the community safety by reducing offender recidivism tremendously (Carmen & Alarid, 2012). Drug courts save precious time as their cases reach initial disposition faster than any traditional or conventional court cases. The overall percentage of re-arrest has also decreased considerably as compared to the comparison groups (Carmen & Alarid, 2012), people who attended drug courts and were tried and tested by them were less- likely to get re-arrested hence crime rate and substance abuse dependency rate automatically reduced. Rehabilitation clinics and programs were welcomed rather than coerced participation by drug offenders and provided health benefits and significantly improved drug-abuse treatment outcomes. The main focus is to bring about societal and familial responsibility and accountability within offenders and enable them to gain self-consciousness, higher self esteem, creative skills employment opportunities, community services and safe, healthy family relationships and help them become productive citizens and perform their roles towards their families and towards society with new zeal and self-belief. With the combination of treatment and ongoing supervision Drug court attempts to break the cycle of addiction, crime and repeat incarceration. Achieve drug court participant compliance: Promote drug court graduation, as research studies prove that graduates or successful participants are far less likely to recidivate than non- graduates or failures. The drug courts proved economical benefits and greater cost to benefit ratio than any previous strategy. The Ethical issues concerning a program evaluation within the American judiciary: - An effective and ethically approved program evaluation is a strategically demanding task for the judiciary; the drug court team is comprised of Judge, Prosecutor, Defense Attorney, Drug court case manager, Treatment Provider, Probation officer, Law enforcement Officers and other members of the team for assistance in rehabilitation. (Higgins, Mackinem & Mitchell, 2008) Drug court system’s program evaluation is directly dependent upon the target population, culture and environment and resource obligations. The main objective of the program is the reformation of the individual convicted of illegal possession or use of a controlled substance, mostly to eradicate the crime and prevent re-engagement with drugs and in some cases to decriminalize the possession of certain substances, also to promote abstinence and pro-social behavior. While designing such an evaluation program, certain ethical issues need to be given due consideration to ensure a productive outcome. The legal practitioners’ judges and policy makers have a dual role to play. They need to have heightened ethical sensitivity in order to understand an individual’s ethical boundaries and restrictions and work in accordance with them to not hurt them, at the same time their authoritative duties and judicial control should never be overshadowed or compromised by their legal obligations. The roles of a legal head either a judge or attorney should be performed to its very essence (Cole, Smith & Dejong, 2012). There should never be a conflict of interests between the policy makers and their main target and focus should be the achievement of pre-set objectives within efficient yet effective means such as to reduce-post arrest and post-program recidivism. The judges’ ethics play a major role in this scenario; the judges themselves should practice propriety and righteousness in their courtrooms as well as their daily lives. Their own conduct should be exemplary, they should abide by the moral code of conduct to serve as a role model for the criminal offenders, to become a shining example themselves of what they preach and implement. They should perform their duties impartially and diligently at all times. All the lawmakers, in all circumstances should uphold the integrity and sanctity of the legal system or the judiciary and refrain from controversial and politically motivated acts and behavior. Another concern in reviewing ethical considerations is that the lawyers of a drug court that includes defense counsel attorneys and public prosecutors should perform their duties willingly as a team. They should avoid conflict and if there is friction it should be removed mutually and focus should be upon drug abusers and how their present condition could be improvised within available means, rather than their own rivalries and personal interests. (Pollock, 2011) Their own integrity is preserved by the passion they show towards achieving a common goal, such as, prevent or minimize the criminal’s further engagement with criminal and drug courts , to reduce substance abuse dependency and violence and through a partial and diligent case representation, they can further provide competence along with integrity, honesty and truthfulness. Unbiased and thorough representation of their clients should be their top priority and should the clients have any disability, the legal representatives should maximize the benefit to the core and achieve the tactfully best outcome that they can. Basically, they should exhibit a disposition that is, just, unbiased and free from favoritism and ask for a fair trial even for the opposing party and must not allow any fraud to perpetuate within the court. Every measure should be taken to maintain decorum of the tribunal. Drug court procedures vary within American States, but there is a clear routine procedure, addicts and/or offenders are provided with treatment(s), their progress and compliance is monitored by drug court team officials, headed by the judge, composed of attorneys and program staff, drug court participants engage in direct interactive communication with the judge, who, in result of a successful series of hearings and monitoring, responds with rewards and sanctions. Eventually, successful participants, based on their performance generally have their charges dropped or reduced and may as well deserve rewards, and in case of failure, they face charges and receive a jail sentence. Ethical values and characteristics of all the drug court officials as well as of its participants matter a lot as they shape the face of events, which lead to the fate of the offender and are also responsible for successful drug court outcomes. (Leukefeld, Gregrich & Gullotta, 2011) Conclusion: The drug courts throughout America are designed to follow the holistic method approach, which is dealing with not just physiologically but spiritual and emotional well being of an individual who wants to change. Their main aim is to get rid of the harmful addiction through modern techniques of therapeutic treatment, followed by proper screening methods and monitoring and finally help developing their skills and provide counseling services about vocational training, health care facilities and family and societal values. All this could be achieved if there is unanimity of purpose amongst team members, and a common goal to follow as well as maintaining and even escalating their distinctive responsibilities. A better communication, secrecy and confidentiality of information, trial publicity and proper channelizing of information may prove to be the key ingredients towards laying the ethical foundation of the drug court rehabilitation program of the American government. References Cole, G. F. Smith, C. E. and Dejong, C. (2012). The american system of criminal justice. Cengage Learning. Retrieved from http://books.google.com/books?id=0PnbRXHqEHsC&pg=PA393&dq=american drug court ethics&hl=en&sa=X&ei=C73AT8O9GsTKrAenzqnYCQ&sqi=2&ved=0CGQQuwUwCA Leukefeld, C. Gregrich, J. and Gullotta, T. P. (2011). Handbook of evidence-based substance abuse treatment in criminal justice settings. Springer. Retrieved from http://books.google.com/books?id=5oAV8XS5NnMC&pg=PA129&dq=drug court participants have to be ethicAL&hl=en&sa=X&ei=KrTAT9OXMtHLrQesn4TTCQ&sqi=2&ved=0CDoQuwUwAA Nolan, J. L. (2003). Reinventing justice: The american drug court movement. Princeton University Press. Retrieved from http://books.google.com/books?id=zXvA_253qzkC&printsec=frontcover&dq=drug court system in america&hl=en&sa=X&ei=ldm_T5CHN43JrAfl94noCQ&ved=0CDYQuwUwAA Higgins, P. Mackinem. and Mitchell, B. (2008). Drug court: Constructing the moral identity of drug offenders. Charles C Thomas. Retrieved from http://books.google.com/books?id=qhx2oCsmAvsC&pg=PA52&dq=the drug court team is comprised&hl=en&sa=X&ei=nOPAT7afK8HNrQforbi5CQ&sqi=2&ved=0CDwQuwUwAQ Pollock, J. (2011). Ethical dilemmas and decisions in criminal justice. Cengage Learning. Retrieved from http://books.google.com/books?id=RYjpRz9FOJoC&pg=PA250&dq=ethical values of lawyers defense counsel and prosecutors in a drug court&hl=en&sa=X&ei=fbbAT5zRHsTmrAeI34zACQ&ved=0CEsQuwUwBA Carmen, R. V. and Alarid, L. F. (2012). Community-based corrections. Cengage Learning Retrieved from http://books.google.com/books?id=vZzElTnFPo8C&pg=PA136&dq=recidivism has reduced due to drug courts&hl=en&sa=X&ei=nLDAT7TpNsLmrAei8K3ZCQ&sqi=2&ved=0CFQQuwUwBQ Whiteacre, K. W. (2008). Drug court justice: Experiences in a juvenile drug court. Drug Court Justice. Retrieved from http://books.google.com/books?id=s8XSVxtxLXAC&pg=PA6&dq=specialized drug court&hl=en&sa=X&ei=H9-9T7bGBoa4rAf7n9HBDQ&sqi=2&ved=0CEIQ6AEwAw Read More