The first drug court started in Miami in 1989 as an effort to stop the cycle of drug addiction and crime. The program brought together judges, prosecuting and defense attorneys, addiction counselors, and social workers to collaboratively build an individualized treatment program. Rather than sending people to jail, the drug court program was designed to treat addiction while participants lived in the community. Drug courts have become an increasingly common way for communities to engage with low-level drug offenders.
Seeking to raise awareness and support for drug courts, the National Association of Drug Court Professionals has released a series of PSAs entitled, “All Rise.” Using a mix of celebrities and drug court judges, these commercials assert that 75% of drug court participants are never arrested again.
The promise is clear. Drug courts not only treat addiction, they also treat a number of social problems (“no more families torn apart… no more neglect… no more overdoses”).
Are drug courts really this successful?
The truth is, we still don’t know. The 75% success statistic comes from a study published in 2003. The authors report that only 27.5% of drug court participants had been re-arrested and charged with a serious crime within two years. So, we don’t know what re-arrest rates look like after that two-year period and the data doesn’t include arrests for minor crimes or arrests for serious crimes that did not result in a charge. This is a far cry from the claim made in the video: that 75% of drug court participants are never arrested again.
The claims asserted in the “All Rise” campaign, then, should be treated with caution. That said, drug courts are a significant move away from punitiveness for addicted offenders. Increasing the time to reoffending is a very positive step for the offender, for the community, and for the criminal justice system. Additionally, most recidivism occurs within three years of release, so if the drug court program is helping participants to make it past this milestone it may indeed lead to some graduates leaving criminality altogether.
But before we turn to drug courts as “the” solution, we need more research on the effectiveness of drug courts. Women and Caucasians fare better in the program than men and people of color. And large courts tend to be more effective than small courts. Nevertheless, since the 1990s drug courts have spread across the nation to all major cities and many medium and small-sized cities, some of which have limited resources and less dedication. All Rise’s enthusiasm should be tempered with a critical eye aimed at making these programs work well, and for as many people as possible.
————————
Kimberly Baker is an assistant professor of Sociology and Women’s Studies at Ithaca College. She teaches classes in crime, deviance, and law. Her research is on drugs, addiction, and U.S. drug policy, including drug courts.
Comments 5
Joe — May 4, 2012
"The promise is clear. Drug courts not only treat addiction, they also
treat a number of social problems..."
But, not all of those sent to drug courts are in fact addicted, or in need of treatment. So, drug courts can be "effective" at what? And if drug courts include more severe sanctions for subsequent offenses (as they often do), then people who commit non-violent drug crimes (simple possession) may end of facing even more severe penalties for "failing" the non-treatment than these courts provide.
Village Idiot — May 5, 2012
They are cash cows for the various companies profiting off the Drug War (especially drug testing labs). They also tend to dissuade people caught up in the justice system for drug use to not seek a fair trial but accept the plea and go the drug court route (if someone turns down the offer and fights their conviction in a jury trial and loses they are usually penalized more harshly, so even if one is innocent there is strong pressure to take the deal).
If simple possession wasn't a crime, these people wouldn't be criminals and so "recidivism" would be moot. And make no mistake: Our society can handle legalization of recreational drug use because if it can endure alcohol and tobacco being legal and mostly unregulated for adults then it can certainly handle any of the others.
Link Roundup! — The Good Men Project — May 28, 2012
[...] Images asks whether drug courts are the solution to the drug war. Although they appear to help, just like the rest of the justice system, they are systematically [...]
K8zimm — May 30, 2012
I understand that I am late to the party here, but I cannot pass on commenting. I am a professional in the chemical dependency field as well as a recovering alcoholic. People do not choose to be chemically dependent. They put a substance into their bodies, as do many of us. Some develop an addiction. Some do not. Sending people to prison for being dependent on drugs is ridiculous. Yes, people who are dependent on substances commit crimes that put the community at large in jeopardy. But to put a chemically dependent person in long-term custody rather than teach them how to live is criminal in and of itself. The possibility of someone perfecting their criminal thinking while in prison is much more dangerous than putting someone in the position to develop new skills that serve, rather than put the community in danger.