Drug Court for Young Offenders: A View from the Bench. Cedric Kerns

      Drug Court is fundamentally different from other kinds of courts. The best way to describe it would be that it’s primarily a problem-solving court. In criminal courts, justice is typically considered the appropriate penalty for the crime for which someone is convicted. Most courts take an approach of “This is the crime; this is your punishment. See you later.” Drug Courts have taken a turn away from that approach with regards to what constitutes justice. My belief is that when somebody is sentenced, there needs to be a reason for that form of sentencing in terms of rehabilitation, restitution, punishment, and protection. The “traditional” criminal courts aren’t focused so much on rehabilitation. Their priority is punishment and protection, though I think an effective argument can be made that when defendants are rehabilitated, public protection is increased.

      The Drug Court model was initiated about twenty years ago because an incredibly high percentage of criminal acts track back in some way to substance abuse and addiction. The defendants referred to Drug Courts are committing crimes because they have the disease of addiction. Drug Courts have taken the model used in many addiction treatment centers and added criminal justice-related structure and the leverage of potential sanctions. Most treatment programs say to the addicts they treat, “Here are the tools that will help you recover and learn how to live without using mind- and/or mood-altering substances,” and if clients don’t cooperate and use these tools, the program can say, “See you later. You are out of the facility.” But in the courts we say, “Here are the tools, and if you don’t use the tools, we take your freedom away because we not only have to protect you, but we have to protect the community from your actions.”

      I would estimate that around 80 percent of criminal offenders abuse alcohol and/or other drugs and perhaps as much as 50 percent of those individuals are addicted. Statistics generally indicate comparable rates of substance abuse and dependence among most groups of individuals involved with the justice system, including juveniles in delinquency proceedings. The vast majority of these individuals return to drug abuse soon after release from incarceration. The goal in Drug Court is to match individuals to specific programs and services that are most likely to improve their outcomes in the most cost-efficient and safety-conscious manner. Evidence of success in Drug Court programs is gauged by reducing recidivism, reducing substance abuse and related dysfunction, and doing so with a better cost-benefit ratio than alternative programs.

      The National Association of Drug Court Professionals (NADCP) has developed a set of principles to guide Drug Court philosophy and approach: Principles of Evidence-Based Sentencing and Other Court Dispositions for Substance Abusing Individuals (http://www.nadcp.org/learn/positions-policy-statements-and-resolutions/board-external-policy). As described by NADCP, “evidence-based sentencing relies on scientific data to balance the interests of public safety, cost, and the psychosocial impacts of various dispositions on individuals coming before the courts. Rather than over-apply any one policy, the goal is to match individuals to specific programs and services that are most likely to improve their outcomes in the most cost-efficient and safety-conscious manner.”

      In Drug Court we take somebody who is struggling with substance abuse that often rises to the level of addiction and happens to work his or her way into the criminal justice system and we try to give that person the tools that will help him or her get out of the system. A substantial amount of scientific research has demonstrated that Drug Courts are a cost-effective way to reduce both substance abuse and crime. A large amount of research-based information is available on the NADCP website, www.nadcp.org/learn/facts-and-figures. One recent study showed that 75 percent of the people who graduate from Drug Courts do not get rearrested. For every dollar invested in Drug Court, compared to traditional courts, the cost savings related to criminal justice, victimization, and healthcare utilization range from $6.00 to $15.00.

      Drug Court judges play a much more hands-on role. In regular court, let’s say it’s a felony court, assuming a plea deal or conviction, the judge sentences the defendant who then goes to the Probation and Parole Division and may never see that judge again. Drug Court defendants see the judge frequently because the judge is there to impose both potential negative and positive sanctions to make sure defendants stay in compliance and do what is being required of them. We say, “Here’s the opportunity. You take it or you don’t. If you don’t, then we take you out of society; and if you do take it, then you can have a much better life.” Drug Court defendants essentially get a choice as to what kind of future they want to have, at least for the near-term.

      It’s important to note that Drug Court is an option. We don’t take anyone into our Drug Court unless he or she asks for it. Generally, by the time a defendant gets to Drug Court he or she is saying, “I’ve got a problem. Please help me.” We want people in Drug Court who want help, because that’s the first step. Even if it’s just their way of trying to avoid prison time or jail time, they have to take the step of saying, “I want to be part of this.”

      That notwithstanding, we still conduct a formal assessment to identify the severity of a defendant’s substance abuse/addiction. The assessment is not rendered unnecessary by virtue of people saying, “I have a problem that I want help with, and I want to go to Drug Court as opposed to traditional criminal court.” There is a difference between someone who commits crimes to support his or her addiction and a criminal who uses drugs. Drug Courts must have a comprehensive assessment process to weed out the folks who are just trying to avoid incarceration.

      Drug Courts have undergone an evolution as far as their “criteria for admission.” Although different courts may have somewhat different parameters regarding what qualifies defendants for their Drug Court, the current model is that Drug Courts take high-need, high-risk defendants. In the early 1990s, Drug Courts tried to take the “sure thing,” basically defendants who were high need, but low risk, so they had very high rates of graduation and recidivism.

      The newer approach is based on allocating the resources according to where they can have the greatest impact. If someone is high risk, low need, then when the day is done he or she is much less likely to be in the community committing more