Effectiveness of the Drug Courts in Changing Criminal Behavior - Essay Example

Criminology One of the most important revolutions within the contemporary criminal justice system has been Drug Courts which has been perceived by many as an effective tool in changing criminal behavior at large. This paper undertakes an important and extensive research into the topic "are Drug Courts a successful tool in changing criminal behavior" and the investigation carried out in this study covers a careful and detailed analysis of the published literature on the topic which helps in determining the effectiveness of the Drug Courts in changing criminal behavior. The methodology undertaken in this research is a qualitative research method incorporating a major investigation through the several research materials available on the topic. The most important hypothesis of this research paper is that the Drug Courts have a vital role as an effective tool in changing criminal behavior at large. Hypothesis There have been several essential testimonials of the effectiveness of the Drug Courts in changing criminal behavior and the hypothesis of this study has an important function in determining the facts about this concept. Therefore, the major hypothesis of this research paper is that the Drug Courts have a vital role as an effective tool in changing criminal behavior. Methodology In this research incorporating an investigation of the utility and effectiveness of the Drug Courts as a successful tool in changing criminal behavior, a qualitative research methodology is used. Thus, the investigations will make use of the qualitative research methodology to make a qualitative analysis of the utility of the Drug Courts as a flourishing tool in changing criminal behavior. The study incorporates an extensive analysis of the literature on the topic and a qualitative analysis of the major findings will be carried out. Research Question The most essential research question or the problem undertaken in this qualitative research project is "Are Drug Courts a successful tool in changing criminal behavior" and the paper endeavors to come up with the most stimulating conclusion on this research question. Introduction One of the most quiet but important revolutions within the criminal justice system for more than a decade has been the introduction of the Drug Courts. The first drug court in the United States was established in the Dade County, Florida and there are about 1,183 drug courts across the country at present. The foundation of the Drug Courts was with a most illumining purpose and it is most relevant to undertake an analysis of the effectiveness of the program in reducing the criminal behavior at large. "All drug courts are part of an innovative judicial model whereby offenders are held accountable for their actions and afforded the tools they need to break the patterns of drug abuse that so damage their lives, as well as the lives of others. The major goals of drug courts have beento reduce drug use and associated criminal behavior by engaging and retaining drug-involved offenders in treatment and intensive supervision; to concentrate staff expertise about drug cases into a single courtroom; to address other defendant needs; and to remove drug cases from traditional courtrooms, freeing them to adjudicate non-drug cases." (Huddleston and Wosje, p 1). Therefore, the Drug Courts were set up with several major purposes and goals such as to reduce drug use and associated criminal behavior. In this qualitative research paper, a reflective analysis of the effectiveness of the Drug Courts in reducing drug use and associated criminal behavior is carried out. The effectiveness of the Drug Courts America is one of the most important nations, which has a long and fretful history of drug use and abuse. Significantly, the use and abuse of drugs in America is very common and there is an important popularity for the use of drugs in this nation. In the context of America, where drug consumption rises at an alarming pace, it was most essential to seek for the best alternative solution to deal with the issue. Thus, the Drug Courts were established as an alternative to the common jail or prison for drug abuse. There have been several important studies which suggest the effectiveness of the Drug Courts as the most useful tool to check criminal behavior in the nation. A Drug Court may be understood as a major establishment designated within a jurisdiction to administer cases referred for judicially supervised drug treatment and rehabilitation. Thus the drug courts have a jurisdiction to administer cases referred for judicially supervised drug treatment and rehabilitation and the present judicial policy supports a model of courtroom intervention, together with concentrated reporting and treatment through the over 200 'drug courts'. "A national survey of police chiefs found that over half believe they have been unsuccessful in reducing the drug problem. By two to one, the police chiefs favor treatment courts as more effective (59 percent) than jail or prisons (28 percent) for drug users The mission of drug courts is to stop the abuse of alcohol and other drugs and its related criminal activity. As a result, more than 28000 criminal defendants are participating in drug treatment courts in forty-four states." (White and Wright, 1998, p 117). Therefore, the drug courts were established with a major goal of checking or reducing the criminal behavior of individuals who are addicted to drugs consumption and there have been several instances of successful use of the system. There have been important testimonials of the utility of the drug courts as a successful tool in changing criminal behavior and the literature review confirms this view. Significantly, there are over 2,000 drug courts in existence or being planned in America today and there is a great deal of bi-partisan interest in drug courts across the nation. In the context of America, where two-thirds of all adult arrestees and over half of the juvenile arrestees test positive for illegal drugs at arrest, the utility of the drug courts cannot be questioned. "The national recidivism rate for drug offenses is nearly 67%.3 Up to eighty percent of child abuse and neglect cases and nearly fifty percent of domestic violence cases are substance-abuse related. Drug courts represent the combined efforts of justice and treatment professionals to actively intervene and break the cycle of substance abuse, addiction, crime, delinquency, and child maltreatment. These special dockets are given the responsibility to handle cases involving addicted citizens under the adult, juvenile, family, and tribal justice systems." (Facts on Drug Courts). Therefore, Drug Courts can be understood as a combination of justice, treatment, and social service systems and the participants of the drug courts go through a rigorous routine of substance abuse treatment, case management, drug testing, supervision and monitoring, and immediate sanctions and incentives. All through this process of correction, the participants report to frequently planned status hearings before a judge with specialists in the drug court model. Additionally, drug courts have been vital in the system as they enlarge the possibility of participants' accomplishment by providing supplementary services including mental health treatment, trauma and family therapy, and job skills training. In short, all these elements contribute to the success of the drug courts. The effectiveness of drug courts in reducing the criminal behavior of the individuals at large has been acknowledged widely and the drug courts have a great acceptance even at the national level. Significantly, the Drug courts put together alcohol and other drug treatment services with justice system processing which has an important role in reducing criminal behavior. The system also offers the services of the drug treatment and rehabilitation programs and the coordinated strategy of the program helps in achieving its successes. According to 'California Drug Court Project', the Drug court programs are significantly more effective than traditional criminal prosecution methods and it is evident from the survey of the U.S. Department of Justice's Bureau of Justice Assistance Drug Court Clearinghouse, which surveyed 20 drug court programs in effect for at least one year. The most essential findings and the results of this survey, which are contained in the two-volume report 'Drug Courts: An Overview of Operational Characteristics and Implementation Issues', prove how effective this strategy is. Accordingly, "Recidivism has been significantly reduced among drug court program participants, Drug use has significantly decreased among drug court participants while they are involved in the program, An unanticipated beneficial effect has been the birth of a significant number of drug-free babies to women enrolled in drug court programs, Many programs are now expanding their targeted population based on the success of their initial implementation experience, Prosecutors and law enforcement officials have demonstrated significant support for drug court programs and in a number of jurisdictions have contributed asset-forfeiture funds to augment available treatment resources. Drug court programs are extremely cost-effective, with the average treatment component ranging from $900 to $1,600 per participant, compared with an average cost of $5,000 per defendant for a minimal period of incarceration." (California Drug Court Project, 2000, p 3). The role of the drug courts in reducing recidivism has been clearly suggested by several important studies in the field. That is to say, there are indisputable evidences today which point out that drug courts are greatly achieving what they set out to do and the popularity of this strategy is also gives clarification to the claims. The National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University, based on a series of critical reviews published from 1998 to 2001 of over 120 evaluations of drug courts located throughout the nation, concluded the effectiveness of the strategy in reducing recidivism. According to S.R Belenko, "drug courts provide the most comprehensive and effective control of drug-using offenders' criminality and drug usage while under the court's supervision. Drug courts provide closer, more comprehensive supervision and much more frequent drug testing and monitoring during the program than other forms of community supervision. More importantly, drug use and criminal behavior are substantially reduced while offenders are participating in drug court" (Belenko, 1998). Thus, there have been stimulating research evidences to suggest that the drug courts have a vital role in reducing recidivism. One of the most important findings of the National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University, in its critical review of the published researches, has been that the offenders who become part of a drug court program are succeeding upon completion. The comparative analysis of the results suggest that there is a higher retention rate as well as lower recidivism and drug-use rates for drug court participants in comparison with other groups. "The most substantial and compelling national study to date was commissioned by the National Institute of Justice and released in 2002 whereby a sample of 2,020 graduates from 95 drug courts in 1999 and 2000 were tracked to establish a benchmark national aggregate recidivism rate. The study estimates that after graduation, only 16.4 percent of drug court graduates had been arrested and charged with a serious offense after one year and 27.5 percent at the two year mark. These estimates represent the expected outcomes for those who succeed in drug court: one year after graduation, only one out of six drug court graduates would be expected to be re-arrested and charged with a serious offense." (DWI Courts and DWI/Drug Courts: Reducing Recidivism, Saving Lives). Therefore, the utility of the drug courts as a successful tool in changing criminal behavior has been significantly substantiated by several research findings in the area. According to a 2000 Vera Institute of Justice report by Fluellen and Trone, "the body of literature on recidivism is now strong enough to conclude that completing a drug court program reduces the likelihood of future arrest." (Fluellen and Trone, 2000). Therefore, the major portion of the researches in the area of drug courts relating to recidivism seem to suggest the high potential of the drug courts in reducing criminal behavior. Conclusion In a profound analysis of the effectiveness of the drug courts as a successful tool in changing criminal behavior among the participants, it becomes lucid that the strategies adopted by the drug courts have a great impact on checking the amount of recidivism and criminal behavior among the participants. There have been stimulating findings in several researches which point out that drug courts are a successful tool in changing criminal behavior. Therefore, it is important to enhance the strategies to reduce criminal behavior and the role of drug courts as an effective tool in changing criminal behavior cannot be questioned. References Belenko, S.R. (1998). Research on drug courts: A critical review. The National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse, Columbia University. "California Drug Court Project." (2000). p 3. Retrieved May 15, 2009, from http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/reference/documents/cadrugct.pdf "DWI Courts and DWI/Drug Courts: Reducing Recidivism, Saving Lives." National Drug Court institute. Retrieved May 15, 2009, from http://www.ndci.org/dwi_drug_court.htm "Facts on Drug Courts." What is a Drug Court Retrieved May 15, 2009, from http://www.nadcp.org/whatis/ Fluellen, R., and Trone, J. (2000, May). Issues in brief: Do drug courts save jail and prison beds New York, NY: Vera Institute of Justice. Huddleston, C. West and Wosje, Robin. DWI/Drug Courts: Reducing Recidivism, Saving Lives. The National Drug Court Institute. p 1. Retrieved May 15, 2009, from http://nasje.org/resources/HCDrunk/SUP5--NDCIDWI-DrugCourt.pdf White, Robert Kenneth and Wright, Deborah George. (1998). Addiction Intervention: Strategies To Motivate Treatment-Seeking Behavior. Haworth Press. p 117. Read More