Featured New InvestigatorSystematic review of the impact of adult drug-treatment courts
Section snippets
Societal Costs of Punitive Drug Policy
The impact of substance misuse upon the commission of crime and upon public health and safety are critical concerns for policy makers and for law enforcement. The relentless and costly expansion of the U.S. penal system is, at least in great part, the result of punitive policies intended to reduce public drug demand but frequently result in the confinement of addicted individuals rather than high-level drug traffickers or manufacturers. One in 4, or 509,000 inmates, in the overall U.S. penal
Review Methodology
The following comprises a review of existing literature and, as such, was deemed exempt from formal review by the University of Wisconsin Health Sciences Human Subjects Committee.
Given the overlap of multiple academic fields in the study of drug court participants and their outcomes, a wide variety of sources were searched to ensure a comprehensive and representative literature review. Traditional databases that were searched included PubMed, Sociological Abstracts, and PsychINFO. Databases
Epidemiological Data on Drug Court Participants
The descriptive characteristics of representative drug court populations are presented in Table I. To summarize, nationally among DTCs, populations are predominantly men (74%); their typical age ranges from 28 to 40 years, with the most mean ages (where reported) ranging from 28 to 33 years. Ethnic makeup varies greatly by location, with a large number being predominantly (50%–95%) White. Urban locations typically involve a larger proportion of minority participants. California drug courts
DTC Program Characteristics
DTCs vary greatly in the number of annual participants, with 80–120 representing the typical annual participation.3, 20, 21, 26, 27, 30, 31, 37, 38 DTCs serving larger urban areas, however, frequently have much larger case loads (eg, 453 in New York in 1999, 884 in Los Angeles in 11 separate drug courts in 2001, and 300 in Travis County, Tex, in 2002).22, 26, 39
Drug courts most commonly work with multiple community agencies as providers of substance-abuse treatment19, 20, 26, 27, 40, 41 (3 of 9
Quasi-experimental recidivism studies
A summary of case-control studies examining recidivism among drug court participants versus comparison groups are shown in Table II, Table III.
Quasi-experimental designs most often involved the use of a comparison group with similar drug-related offenses who did not participate in DTC. Reasons for nonparticipation in the comparison group frequently involved a lack of capacity to accept the members of the comparison group,20 a group with similar charges who were not referred to DTC often for
Summary of Findings
The predominance of nonexperimental and quasi-experimental literature seems to point toward benefit for DTCs over traditional adjudication in terms of rates of and time to rearrest. The limited number of investigations examining the outcome also seem to indicate that drug court participants are less likely to engage in substance use during program participation than are traditionally adjudicated offenders. This latter outcome may suffer, however, from potential bias resulting from the
References (71)
- et al.
Drug abuse treatment process components that improve retention
J Subst Abuse Treat
(1997) - et al.
Los Angeles County drug court programs: initial results
J Subst Abuse Treat
(2002) - et al.
The fifth edition of the addiction severity index
J Subst Abuse Treat
(1992) - et al.
Painting the current picture: a national report card on drug courts and other problem-solving court programs in the United States
(2008) - et al.
The vortex: the concentrated racial impact of drug imprisonment and the characteristics of punitive counties
(2007) - et al.
To treat or not to treat: evidence on the prospects of expanding treatment to drug-involved offenders
(2008) - et al.
Distorted priorties: drug offenders in state prison
(2002) Drug Policy Information Clearinghouse
Drug Court Clearinghouse and Technical Assistance Project
(2003)- et al.
The visibility of illicit drugs: implications for community-based drug control strategies
Am J Publ Health
(2001) Results from the 2006 National Survey on Drug Use and Health: National Findings (Office of Applied Studies)
(2007)
Race & sentencing in Wisconsin: sentence and offender characteristics across five criminal offense areas
United States Bureau of P
Recidivism among federal prison releases in 1987: a preliminary report
National Institute of Justice. Miami's “Drug Court”: a different approach
Overview of 1-year follow-up outcomes in the Drug Abuse Treatment Outcome Study (DATOS)
Psychol Addict Behav
Effectiveness of treatment for drug abuse: an overview of the DARP research program
Adv Alcohol Subst Abuse
Program diversity and treatment retention rates in the Drug Abuse Treatment Outcome Study (DATOS)
Psychol Addict Behav
The influence of the therapeutic relationship in treatment for alcohol dependency
Drug Alcohol Rev
Treatment “dosage” effects in drug court programs
J Offender Rehabil
A sober assessment of drug courts
Federal Sentencing Reporter
Wicomico County adult drug treatment court (circuit court) process evaluation
Barry County adult drug court outcome and cost evaluation
Baltimore city drug treatment court: process evaluation
Supervised treatment in the criminal court: a process evaluation of the Manhattan Misdemeanor Drug Court
Effectiveness of drug courts: evidence from a randomized trial
Criminol Publ Pol
The Baltimore City Drug Treatment Court: one-year results from a randomized study
J Res Crime Delinquen
Long-term effects of participation in the Baltimore City Drug Treatment Court: results from an experimental study
J Exp Criminol
Initial process and outcome evaluation of drug courts in Texas
Kalamazoo County adult drug treatment court: outcome and cost evaluation
The effect of drug court programming on recidivism: the Cincinnati Experience
Crime Delinquen
Drug courts and recidivism: the results of an evaluation using two comparison groups and multiple indicators of recidivism
J Drug Issues
An evaluation of the Chester County (PA) Drug Court Program
J Drug Issues
California Drug Courts: a methodology for determining costs and benefits
Drug Court Survey Report: Executive Summary
Mental health, gender, and drug court completion
Am J Crim Justice
Cited by (60)
Client attitudes toward virtual treatment court
2022, Journal of Substance Abuse TreatmentCitation Excerpt :Also, while 33 % of our respondents were from a rural/suburban county and 63 % were from an adult drug court, only 24 % of treatment courts are in a rural county and only 44 % of treatment courts are adult drug courts (Strong, 2012). However, our respondents were similar in age to typical drug court participants (Brown, 2010). Despite these limitations, the survey results give voice to treatment court clients experiencing this new virtual modality.
Diverting people who use drugs from the criminal justice system: A systematic review of police-based diversion measures
2022, International Journal of Drug PolicyCitation Excerpt :Their Sequential Intercept Model shows the importance of conducting a systematic review of diversion alternatives offered by law enforcement agencies. Previous systematic reviews not only provide mixed evidence about the effects of diversion programs, but they have mainly focused on post-conviction or post-sentence measures (Brown, 2010; Hayhurst et al., 2015; Wittouck et al., 2013). One exception is the work of Stevens et al. (2022) who have conducted a realist review of alternatives to criminalization for simple drug possession.
Predicting drug court graduation: Examining the role of individual and programmatic characteristics
2022, Journal of Substance Abuse TreatmentEmploying the Risk-Need-Responsivity (RNR) model and predicting successful completion in an alternative drug court program: Preliminary findings from the Orleans Parish Drug Court
2021, Journal of Substance Abuse TreatmentCitation Excerpt :Results of the present study showed that compared to those who terminated, those who successfully completed drug court were significantly older at intake, had more years of education, were more likely to be employed, had higher income, and were more likely to have stable housing at program entry. These findings were highly consistent with findings reported in the literature by other researchers (e.g., Brown, 2010; Evans et al., 2009; Gallagher et al., 2019; Hickert et al., 2009; Shah et al., 2015) and indicated that individuals who were more stable and engaged in the community, as evidenced by employment and housing support, are more likely to remain engaged in treatment. As demonstrated in other work (NADCP, 2018), findings did not show differences in demographic variables related to race/ethnicity, although this has been reported by other researchers (e.g., Shah et al., 2015).
Gender-specific participation and outcomes among jail diversion clients with co-occurring substance use and mental health disorders
2020, Journal of Substance Abuse TreatmentAssessing Individual Level Predictors of Intermediate Outcomes in a Misdemeanor Diversion Drug Court
2024, American Journal of Criminal Justice
- ∗
Randall T. Brown, MD is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Family Medicine at the University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health. His article is based on a presentation given at the Combined Annual Meeting of the Central Society for Clinical Research and Midwestern Section American Federation for Medical Research held in Chicago, III, April 2009.