##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

Jennifer Smith Ramey https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6311-932X

Fred Volk https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6957-485X

Fred Milacci https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5062-3247

Thomas Gogolin https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2540-8961

Resumen

Introduction/Frame: Treatment courts (TCs) were developed in the 1980s to address challenges facing individuals with a substance use disorder (SUD) involved in the criminal justice (CJ) system. TCs are an alternative to the punitive nature of the CJ system by joining SUD treatment with the accountability of the judicial system. By design, treatment court (TC) implementations are highly varied. Each implementation adopts the National Association of Drug Court Professionals (NADCP) key components that are consistent with yet bound by their community resources, values, and political realities. Research Questions/Objective: Using qualitative community-based participatory research, two case studies and one phenomenological study were conducted with treatment courts in a mid-Atlantic state in the USA to examine successful TC operations. Methodology: Using purposive sampling, the analytic plan included individual semi-structured interviews with judges, TC team members, program graduates, and community stakeholders. Interviews were professionally transcribed and coded consistent with thematic analysis procedures. Results: Analysis revealed themes of judicial sovereignty juxtaposed with a lack of knowledge of SUDs, the importance of a fully dedicated coordinator to serve as an extension of the judge, and purposeful courtroom set-up and norms conducive to a therapeutic rather than punitive approach. Final Considerations: Transferable recommendations to other specialty docket evaluators and teams which can be adopted to fit a variety of dockets, including mental health court, veterans court, and juvenile court include mandatory judicial training, evolving operations norms, values alignment among the TC team, and a TC coordinator to oversee day-to-day operations. In addition, stakeholder engagement to drive an iterative evaluation process converges with the traditions of action research in community settings.


 

Descargas

Los datos de descarga aún no están disponibles.

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##

Sección
Estudios empíricos con reflexión metodológica

Cómo citar

Smith Ramey, J., Volk, F., Milacci, F., & Gogolin, T. (2024). Educating the "Gods": Operations, Outcomes, and Opportunities in Treatment Courts. New Trends in Qualitative Research, 20(2), e960. https://doi.org/10.36367/ntqr.20.2.2024.e960
Referencias

Bruns, E. J., Pullmann, M. D., Weathers, E. S., Wirschem, M. L., & Murphy, J. K. (2012). Effects of multidisciplinary family drug treatment court on child and family outcomes: Results of a quasi

experimental study. Child Maltreatment, 17(3), 218–230. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077559512454216

Bureau of Justice Assistance. (1997). Defining drug courts: The key components. Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles1/bja/205621.pdf

Cappa, C. (2006). The social, political and theoretical context of drug courts. Monash University Law Review 32, 145. https://doi.org/10.3316/apaft.086839462669077

Carey, S. M., Mackin, J. R., & Finigan, M. W. (2012). What works? The ten key components of drug court: Research-based best practices. Drug Court Review, 8(1), 6 42. https://ndcrc.org/wpcontent/uploads/2020/06/DCR_bestpractices1_What_Works_the_Ten_Key_Components_of_Drug_Court.pdf

Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Sage Publications.

Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (3rd ed.). Sage Publications.

Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Sage Publications.

Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.). (1994). Handbook of qualitative research. Sage Publications.

Gallagher, J., Nordberg, A., & Kennard, T. (2015). A qualitative study assessing the effectiveness of the key components of a drug court, Alcoholism Treatment Quarterly, 33(1), 64–81. https://doi.org/10.1080/07347324.2015.982453

Fessinger, M., Hazen, K., Bahm, J., Cole-Mossman, J., Heideman, R., & Brank, E. (2019). Mandatory, fast, and fair: Case outcomes and procedural justice in a family drug court. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 16(1), 49–77. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-019-09361-6

Frazer, M. S. (2006). The impact of the community court model on defendant perceptions of fairness: A case study at the Red Hook Community Justice Center. Center for Court Innovation. Giorgi, A. (1994). A phenomenological perspective on certain qualitative research methods. Journal of Phenomenological Psychology, 25, 190–220. https://brill.com/view/journals/jpp/jppoverview.xml?language=en

Goldkamp, J. (1994). Miami's drug treatment court for felony defendants: Some implications of assessment findings. The Prison Journal, 74(2), 110–166. https://doi.org/10.1177/0032855594074002002

Gottfredson, D. C., Kearley, B. W., Najaka, S. S., & Rocha, C. M. (2007). How drug treatment courts work: An analysis of mediators. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 44(1), 3–35. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022427806291271

Heideman, R. J., Cole-Mossman, J., Hoetger, L., & Hazen, K. (2016). Giving parents a voice: A case study of a family treatment drug court track in Lancaster County, Nebraska. Court Review, 52, 36–42. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1539&context=ajacourtreview

Kaiser, K. A., & Holtfreter, K. (2016). An integrated theory of specialized court programs: Using procedural justice and therapeutic jurisprudence to promote offender compliance and rehabilitation. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 43(1), 45–62. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854815609642

Logsdon, A. R., Antle, B. F., Katz, R. S., Barbee, A. P., Kamer, C., & Spriggs, A. (2021). The impact of engagement on child welfare families involved with family treatment drug courts. Juvenile and Family Court Journal, 72, 43–56. https://doi.org/10.1111/jfcj.12210 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/17556988

Lowenkamp, C. T., Holsinger, A. M., & Latessa, E. J. (2005). Are drug courts effective: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Community Corrections, 15(1), 5–11.

MacKenzie, B. (2016). The judge is the key component: the importance of procedural fairness in drug treatment courts. Court Review., 52(1).

Marlowe, D. B., Festinger, D. S., Lee, P. A., Dugosh, K. L., & Benasutti, K. M. (2006). Matching judicial supervision to clients' risk status in drug court. Crime & Delinquency, 52(1), 52–76. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011128705281746

Marlowe, D. B., & Carey, S. M. (2012). Research update on family drug courts. National Association of Drug Court Professionals.

Maxwell, J. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.

Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Sage

Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research methods and evaluation methods (4th ed.). Sage Publications.

Ponterotto, J. G. (2005). Qualitative research in counseling psychology: A primer on research paradigms and philosophy of science. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52(2), 126–136. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.52.2.126

Rapp RC, Xu J, Carr CA, Lane DT, Wang J, Carlson R. (2006) Treatment barriers identified by substance abusers assessed at a centralized intake unit. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, (3) 227-35. https:.//doi:10.1016/j.jsat.2006.01.002.

Smith Ramey, J., Volk, F., Milacci, F., & Kelley, B. (2023). "If not you, then who?": A qualitative case study of a drug treatment court. Journal of Social Work Practice in the Addictions. https://doi.org/10.1080/1533256X.2023.2243494

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. (2018). Key substance use and mental health indicators in the United States: Results from the 2017 national survey on drug use and health (HHS

Publication No. SMA 18-5068, NSDUH Series H-53). U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. https://www.samhsa.gov/data/sites/default/files/cbhsq-reports/NSDUHFFR2017/NSDUHFFR2017.pdf

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. (2022, September 13). Recovery and recovery support. https://www.samhsa.gov/find-help/recovery https://www.samhsa.gov/findhelp/recovery

Tyler, T. R. (2006). Why people obey the law. Princeton University Press.

Von Hirsch, A. (1998). Law in a therapeutic key: Developments in therapeutic jurisprudence. Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health, 8(4), 330–331. https://doi.org/10.1002/cbm.276

Yatsco AJ, Garza RD, Champagne-Langabeer T, Langabeer JR. (2020). Alternatives to arrest for illicit opioid use: A joint criminal justice and healthcare treatment collaboration. Substance Abuse: Research and Treatment. 14. https://doi:10.1177/1178221820953390

Yin, R. K. (2014). Case study research design and methods (5th ed.). Sage

Yin, R. (1984). Case study research. Sage

Zabloski, J., & Milacci, F. (2012). Gifted dropouts: Phenomenological case studies of rural gifted students. Journal of Ethnographic & Qualitative Research, 6(3). https://www.jeqr.org