Drug courts use sanctions as a form of behavior management and modification, and they are an important structural tool in the treatment of drug offenders by the criminal justice system. This research examined noncompliant behavior being sanctioned in a felony level drug court. The sample consisted of 66 high risk/high needs individuals who were enrolled in a drug court over a two-year period. Sanctionable behaviors were analyzed through a criminal-thinking framework in order to better understand noncompliant behavior in drug court. This study finds support for applying a criminal-thinking framework to noncompliant behavior sanctioned in drug court. The findings from this study illustrate the nuances of noncompliant behavior of a drug court population.

This descriptive study analyzes whether African-American males who are substance abusers fit full criteria for post traumatic stress disorder. A convenience sample of 50 African-American men from Fulton County Drug Court in Atlanta, Georgia completed a questionnaire to determine if they fit full criteria for post traumatic stress disorder. The questionnaire for the study was composed of criteria for post traumatic stress disorder obtained from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV). The hypothesis of the study stated that at least 60% of the convenience sample would fit full criteria for post traumatic stress disorder. The findings of the study reveal that there is no statistical relationship between African-American men who are substance abusers and fitting full criteria for post traumatic stress disorder. Only 6% of the convenience sample fit full criteria for the post traumatic stress disorder. Though the hypothesis was not confirmed, the study did yield that a majority of the participants in the study had experienced a traumatic event. The study provides a basis for further research regarding the connection between substance abuse and post traumatic stress disorder regarding African-American males.

The rise in cases of child abuse and neglect over the past two decades has overwhelmed the nation’s dependency court and child welfare agencies. While multiple factors are associated with child abuse and neglect, it is indisputable that substance abuse plays a significant role. The families that come into the dependency system with substance abuse issues are substantially more difficult and challenging to serve. Consequently, the families experience low levels of reunification and high levels of child welfare recidivism. In response to the increase in dependency cases involving substance abuse and the inability of the traditional dependency courts (TDC) to handle these cases, Family Dependency Drug Courts (FDDC) were created. The study utilized Therapeutic Jurisprudence Theory to examine differences in child welfare outcomes between substance abusing individuals served in a traditional dependency court system versus the therapeutic jurisprudence driven Family Dependency Drug Court system. Logistic regression, ANOVA and Chi-square were performed on a non-random sample derived from court systems in two Central Florida counties to examine two child welfare outcomes, specifically reunification rates and child welfare recidivism. The findings indicate that substance using participants in the FDDC have much higher rates of reunification than comparable substance using participants processed through the traditional dependency court. Also, of the individuals who attended FDDC, iv those who graduated were reunified at a significantly higher rate than those that didn’t graduate. In regards to child welfare recidivism within a one year time period, there was not a statistically significant difference when comparing the FDDC participants and the TDC participants. When comparing the FDDC participants who completed the program versus those that failed to complete the program, while the child welfare recidivism rates were not significantly different, there is some evidence that the participants that completed the FDDC program experience less child welfare recidivism than those that don’t have the full experience of therapeutic jurisprudence. This research lends some support for both the FDDC program and the explanatory power of Therapeutic Jurisprudence Theory. Theoretical and policy implications, as well as further research, are proposed and discussed

Thesis (M. P. A.)--Texas State University-San Marcos, 2009. / "Spring 2009." Includes bibliographical references (leaves 66-70).

abstract: Over the last few decades, specialized courts have received an increasing amount of research attention. The existing literature mostly supports drug courts and demonstrates their effectiveness in reducing recidivism and substance abuse, more generally (Belenko, 1998; Bouffard & Richardson, 2007; Gottfredson, Najaka, & Kearley, 2003). Whether the drug court model “works” across offender subgroups remains an open empirical question. The current study uses data originally collected by Rossman and colleagues (2003-2009) for the Multi-Site Adult Drug Court Evaluation (MADCE) to examine the effect of drug court participation on recidivism among unique offender subgroups. First, a context-specific risk score is used to examine recidivism outcomes. Second, offender subgroups are statistically created using latent class analysis (LCA). Recidivism outcomes are then assessed by subgroup, with these results compared to the initial measure of risk. Both analyses are performed using the full sample of drug court participants and the comparison groups. Finally, the third model uses a split sample analysis by court participation to explore the full effects of drug court. The findings of the present study contribute to the theoretical literature and help inform future policy regarding risk assessment and the treatment of offenders in drug courts. / Dissertation/Thesis / Masters Thesis Criminology and Criminal Justice 2018

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

Throughout the twentieth century, many behaviors previously considered criminal or immoral were instead defined as medical problems. This process is often referred to as the medicalization of deviance. Like many other behaviors once considered deviant, drug and alcohol abuse has been medicalizing, in a process that accelerated during the latter half of the twentieth century. Despite this movement along the path toward medicalization, drug use, and alcohol use to a lesser extent, are still also sanctioned and managed by the criminal justice system, resulting in a medical-legal-moral hybrid definition of these issues. Today we find instances where these two institutions overlap significantly. At the same time, their mutual involvement in defining and managing drug use is inconsistent. This research uses a qualitative research design to study how this medical-legal-moral hybrid definition of drug use and addiction is discussed and negotiated by various institutions that label and manage individuals who use drugs. I examined this issue by conducting interviews and observations in Philadelphia's Drug Treatment Court as well as in two outpatient drug treatment programs. Results indicate that individuals in both settings frame addiction as a "disease," although the definition is ambiguous and inconsistent. The court and the treatment programs use similar language and methods for assessing substance abuse and how to deal with it. Both also extend the definition of "addiction" to include aspects not directly related to the consumption of drugs or alcohol but to the "drug lifestyle" that includes selling drugs. Still, in neither location is a comprehensive, clear definition of "addiction" promoted and used consistently. This ambiguity results in an overlap of therapeutic and punitive methods to handle the individual's drug usage. In addition, both settings benefit from their interaction and cooperation in managing individuals with substance abuse problems, indicating that rather than moving toward a purely "medical" way of dealing with substance abuse, or placing the issue more firmly in the realm of the criminal justice system, the current mix of moral, criminal and medical methods of labeling and managing substance abuse problems may be more stagnant than the medicalization of deviance thesis suggests. / Sociology

According to the Colorado Judicial Branch, 78 problem-solving courts operate in the 20 judicial districts in Colorado. The Summit County and Eagle County drug court programs are located in Colorado's Fifth Judicial District and have not been previously studied. Evaluating treatment programs for effectiveness contributes to social change because it ensures individuals in need of treatment are receiving the proper services. The Eagle County drug court program had 117 participants and the Summit County drug court program had 33 participants. The Summit County Drug Court used 2 cognitive behavioral therapies: moral reconation therapy and strategies for self-improvement and change. The Eagle County Drug Court used the new Planting Seeds: A Client-Centered Approach to Addiction Treatment program in conjunction with mandatory 12-step support group participation as the basis for their treatment intervention. All participants in both groups completed a pre- and posttest Level of Service Inventory-Revised assessment, which measured the risk of recidivism, and the Adult Substance Use Survey-Revised to assess the severity of their substance use disorder. The data were analyzed using an analysis of covariance and a linear mixed-effects model; posttest Level of Service Inventory-Revised scores served as the dependent variable. Results indicated that successfully completing treatment significantly lowered the risk of recidivism, and that the Eagle County participants were more likely than the Summit County participants to successfully complete treatment. This study contributes to social change by advancing a new intervention that assists in keeping individuals who are in need of services in treatment longer, which in turn lowers their risk to reoffend.