Drug Treatment Courts—a Viable Option for Canada? Sentencing Issues and Preliminary Findings From the Toronto Court

Prairie, Carol La; Gliksman, Louis; Erickson, Patricia G.; Wall, Ronald V.; Newton-Taylor, Brenda

doi:10.1081/ja-120014421

Cited by 16 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Bean, 2002;Jeffries, 2002;La Prairie et al, 2002). Proponents of the drug court model suggest that the emergence of problem-solving courts represented an 'innovative judicial experiment' which has resulted in a 'quiet revolution' within the US criminal justice system (Freeman-Wilson & Huddleston, 1999, p. 4).…”

Section: Drug Courts and 'Therapeutic Justice'mentioning

confidence: 97%

Therapeutic Justice in Drug Courts: Crime, Punishment and Societies of Control

Vrecko

2009

Science as Culture

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper I examine some of the legal and cultural implications of developments within the brain sciences, particularly in relation to changing conceptions of crime, criminality, punishment and justice. I describe how, within the United States, a brain-targeting medication has come to form a key element within emerging 'drug court' strategies for managing repeat offenders that shift from imprisonment and supervision toward more direct control over biological processes. This case study illustrates aspects of the changing logics of control that characterize contemporary industrialized societies of the West, in which new forms of 'postsocial control' are replacing or supplementing traditional forms of social control. I draw upon and develop Deleuze's notion of 'societies of control' to historically situate how drug courts are beginning to reformulate addiction, desire, behavior and justice along biological lines, and are yielding new technological and practical forms of governance that are transforming the ways that institutions understand and manage their subjects.

show abstract

Section: Drug Courts and 'Therapeutic Justice'mentioning

confidence: 97%

Therapeutic Justice in Drug Courts: Crime, Punishment and Societies of Control

Vrecko

2009

Science as Culture

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A total of 24 studies address the implementation, organisation, and process factors associated with substance use treatment in the criminal justice system. A large proportion of these articles consider issues associated with drug‐courts and court‐mandated treatment (Best, Wood, Sweeting, Morgan, & Day, 2010; Bouffard & Taxman, 2004; Cresswell & Deschenes, 2001; Evans, Anglin, Urada, & Yang, 2011; Finch et al., 2003; Fosados, Evans, & Hser, 2007; Frisman et al., 2006; La Prairie, Gliksman, Erickson, Wall, & Newton‐Taylor, 2002; Maeder & Wiener, 2008) while far fewer investigate their implications with regard to arrest‐referral schemes (Corlett, Skrzypiec, & Hunter, 2005; Sondhi & Huggins, 2005) and pre‐plea referral programs (Passey, Flaherty, & Didcott, 2006). A substantial number of studies investigate structural considerations within the broader context of treatment for substance‐using offenders both within contained settings and in the community (Friedmann, Taxman, & Henderson, 2007; Jessup, 2001; Kubiak, Arfken, & Gibson, 2009; Lehman, Fletcher, Wexler, & Melnick, 2009; Oser, Knudsen, Staton‐Tindall, & Leukefeld, 2009; Oser, Knudsen, Staton‐Tindall, Taxman, & Leukefeld, 2009; Stemen & Rengifo, 2009).…”

Section: Evaluations (N = 130)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Does Coerced Treatment of Substance‐Using Offenders Lead to Improvements in Substance Use and Recidivism? A Review of the Treatment Efficacy Literature

Bright

Martire

2013

Australian Psychologist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of legally coerced treatment for substance-using offenders is now widespread internationally. To justify the continued use of coerced treatment, policy-makers, practitioners, and researchers are obliged to demonstrate the effectiveness and limitations of such programs. This article aims to provide a broad overview of scholarship on the efficacy of coerced treatment including an examination of factors that may limit or augment any benefits. A literature review was undertaken in which articles were classified as general topic reviews, critical reviews, and evaluations. Evaluation articles were further categorised into those examining implementation or process factors, delivery factors, participation/ retention, and the impact of coerced treatment on the outcome measures of substance use and recidivism. In the case of critical reviews and evaluation studies, we present a brief review of the literature in each area. For articles on efficacy, we adopt a hypothesis-testing approach to examine substance use and criminal justice outcomes of coerced treatment in each stage of the criminal justice system. We identify specific gaps in the research literature and recommend that new programs incorporate research agendas (e.g., appropriate comparison groups) prior to implementation.

show abstract

“…This has represented a substantial challenge to the drug court; however, punishment is usually seen as the predominant normative framework [38,39]. The fact that many offenders have to plead guilty to their charge in order to enter the drug treatment court may represent a threat to offenders' due process rights [39].…”

Section: Contemporary Compulsory Treatment: the Drug Treatment Courtmentioning

confidence: 99%

Compulsory Drug Treatment in Canada: Historical Origins and Recent Developments

2002

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In Canada, illicit drug use and addiction have traditionally been considered as a criminal justice problem and have been addressed from a legal perspective. Over the past century, a medical approach to drug addiction has slowly crept into the criminal justice processing of drug offenders. This has happened through the combination of principles of punishment with principles of addiction treatment in the sentencing of drug offenders to create a distinct application of ‘compulsory drug treatment’ in Canada. However, this evolution has occurred sporadically over time, with punishment and coercion as predominantly the main approach to dealing with this population. This evolution has recently culminated in Canada with the development of two criminal justice approaches to dealing with the substance use problems of drug offenders that incorporate concepts of punishment and treatment more equally than ever before – conditional sentencing and drug courts. This paper outlines the historical evolution of concepts of ‘compulsory treatment’, discusses such examples of contemporary ‘compulsory treatment’ as conditional sentencing and drug courts, and analyses the implications, concerns and challenges associated with these tools currently used in the sentencing of drug offenders in the Canadian context.

show abstract

Drug Treatment Courts—a Viable Option for Canada? Sentencing Issues and Preliminary Findings From the Toronto Court

Cited by 16 publications

References 10 publications

Therapeutic Justice in Drug Courts: Crime, Punishment and Societies of Control

Therapeutic Justice in Drug Courts: Crime, Punishment and Societies of Control

Does Coerced Treatment of Substance‐Using Offenders Lead to Improvements in Substance Use and Recidivism? A Review of the Treatment Efficacy Literature

Compulsory Drug Treatment in Canada: Historical Origins and Recent Developments

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About