Managing and Sustaining Your Juvenile Drug Court

Since the introduction and subsequent growth of the juvenile drug court movement in the mid‐1990s, practitioners have struggled to fully implement the Juvenile Drug Courts: Strategies in Practice. This struggle may lead to weaker outcomes for youth and a dysfunctional team atmosphere. Originally written as a two‐part technical assistance brief, this article will guide readers through the Juvenile Drug Court Development Cycle in order to help re‐direct practitioners to a more “back‐to‐basics” approach that focuses on collaboration, team dynamics, and decision making.     

Evaluating the Effectiveness of a Juvenile Drug Court: Comparisons to Traditional Probation

Juvenile Drug Courts have been in operation in the United States for over 20 years, yet their effectiveness and design have been challenged throughout the literature. Using data collected from a Juvenile Drug Court (JDC) in Southeast Texas, this project sought to determine if the JDC intervention reduced recidivism compared to a comparison sample of juvenile offenders. Results indicate that the recidivism rates of participants in the JDC were lower than the comparison group, suggesting that the Drug Court intervention was successful. The program completion rates for JDC youths were also higher for those with fewer infractions. Although the JDC youths had statistically lower infractions, the intervention overall appears to need strengthening. A close inspection of program components could document which programmatic skills are tied to efficacy, leading to the achievement of better outcomes.     

Judicial Perspectives on Family Drug Treatment Courts

Family Drug Treatment Courts are a specialized calendar or docket that operates within the juvenile dependency court. These courts provide the setting for a collaborative effort by the court and all the participants in the child protection system to come together in a non‐adversarial setting to determine the individual treatment needs of substance‐abusing parents whose children are under the jurisdiction of the dependency court. This article is intended to give judges and others a judicial perspective on FDTCs, and to offer some assistance for those who are operating or who are considering creating one.     

Implementing the Key Components of Specialized Drug Treatment Courts: Practice and Policy Considerations

The perceived need for specialized drug courts emerged from the most recent "war on drugs." Courts were no longer able to handle such cases effectively because of an overwhelming volume of drug arrests and prosecutions. The increased emphasis on drug enforcement also revealed that many of the most serious criminally involved drug‐using offenders were undeterred by threats of incarceration, but were amenable to substance abuse treatment. Drug court professionals have identified several "key components" that must be in place for these courts to achieve their goals of reducing drug use and crime. Through the lens of these key drug court components, we examine the development and initiation of specialized drug treatment courts in Cook County (Chicago), Illinois. By exploring and documenting Cook County's experiences, we elucidate several of the basic policy and organizational issues surrounding the implementation and operations of specialized drug treatment courts in the United States.     

MAKING FAMILIES AND CHILDREN A HIGH PRIORITY IN THE COURTS

This article describes the California Administrative Office of the Court's (AOC's) Center for Families, Children & the Courts (CFCC). CFCC is an interdisciplinary unit that brings together all of the AOC's work on statewide policies and practices related to families and children in the court system. CFCC thus models the unified family court model within the state AOC. CFCC's projects and activities are described to show the effectiveness of its multidisciplinary and collaborative approach in addressing complex policy and practice issues. It is hoped that readers may discover aspects of CFCC's work that could be adapted to their own jurisdiction or practice.     

从《纽约公约》在亚洲国家的实施看国际商事仲裁中的公共秩序

《纽约公约》第5条第2款的规定为各国法院适用公共秩序拒绝适用国际商事仲裁裁决提供了依据,然而公共秩序存在着多种解释,自公约实施以来,参加公约的亚洲各国法院提出了各种主张并在实践中有了各种做法,本文对中国、新加坡、日本、印度尼西亚等国的理论与实践进行了分析,对各国法院的做法进行了总结。     

Eighteen Ways Courts Should use Technology to Better Serve Their Customers

Courts have traditionally used technology to enhance their internal operations. “Outward‐facing” technology focuses on meeting the needs of the court's customers. The article gives 18 examples of such technology and shows how better serving a court's customers provides direct benefits to the court itself.     

Regulatory Reform: Creating Gaps and Making Markets

This article argues that dispute processing reform, such as regulatory negotiation, plays a role in constructing a "crisis" in regulatory litigation and defining a new partnership between regulated interests and the state. Unlike traditional studies of regulatory reform, which tend to evaluate the behavioral impact of legal reform on policy, I argue that reforms themselves play a constitutive role in politics. The article examines the ideology of regulatory negotiation and presents empirical data on federal regulatory litigation in the U.S. Courts of Appeals (1940–1985), to demonstrate that this legal reform is part of a general drive toward a minimalist state.     

Juvenile Justice in Pennsylvania: Mission‐Driven; Performance‐ Based; Outcome‐Focused

Since 1995, Pennsylvania's Balanced and Restorative Justice Mission has been the driving force behind Pennsylvania's reform and system improvement efforts. Pennsylvania has made strong and steady progress towards advancing this statutory mission and the related operational goals through policy, practice and programmatic enhancements over these past 20+ plus years. Three key events spurred forth this advancement: the legislative passage of Act 33 in 1995 that statutorily established the goals of Balanced and Restorative Justice (BARJ), the Models for Change Juvenile Justice Reform Initiative–Additional Reform Momentum (2004) and the Juvenile Justice System Enhancement Strategy–Evidence‐based Approach to the Reforms (2010).What follows is the story of how it all unfolded.     

NIPPING IT IN THE BUD®: ADOPTING A FAMILY DRUG COURT APPROACH TO FIGHTING THE CYCLE OF ALCOHOL ADDICTION FOR CHILDREN WHEN PARENTS ARE CONVICTED OF DUI

Many states have implemented Drug Courts in recent years by combining drug and alcohol treatment with ongoing judicial supervision. Through the use of incentives such as reduced and dismissed charges and fines combined with supervised treatment, Drug Courts have been shown to be very effective in helping to break the cycle of addiction, crime, and repeat incarceration for those involved. However, these courts do little to address situations in which the addict is the custodial parent of a minor child, who is exponentially more at‐risk for future alcohol addiction simply by being the child of an alcoholic, due to both environmental and biological factors. Thus, while the parent's addiction is theoretically being addressed by the courts, little is being done, absent a showing of abuse or neglect, by the judicial system to combat the seeds of addiction that have already been planted in these children. Therefore, this Note advocates for states to include an alcohol education and counseling program aimed at children of alcohol‐related offenders based on the Drug Court Model. Participation in this program would then act as a mitigating factor for the addicted offender when receiving their final sentence. This proposed program would then serve as a model for other states to adopt in the near future.     

AFCC Think Tanks: Promoting Dialogue on Difficult Issues in Family Law*

This article examines three think tanks sponsored by the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts, which convened representatives of different disciplines, often with differing perspectives, to address policy and practice dilemmas in family law and dispute resolution. This essay was initially commissioned by the Nuffield Foundation, London, UK, as an Insight Article for its Family Justice Observatory, which aims to improve the use of data and research evidence in the family justice system in England and Wales. The think tank process is described and analyzed, identifying factors that created challenges and those that led to success.     

Reentry and Removal: Implications for Juvenile Confinement Facilities

An important national initiative in juvenile justice is Juvenile Offender Reentry (JOR). The renewed emphasis on offender reintegration has generated significant attention to juvenile justice practices, with the notable exception of juvenile confinement facilities. Juvenile detention and, to a lesser degree, juvenile corrections practitioners are involved but not invested in reentry, having made very few programmatic changes to accommodate JOR initiatives largely because these initiatives have been external to the institution and its staff. Yet, reentry is a powerful concept for juvenile facility practitioners, and the application of reentry principles could have a profound impact on daily operations. This article addresses a range of issues about investing juvenile institutions in reentry practices. Several reentry models are discussed along with their implications for daily operations and programs.     

Who is Qualified to Provide Expert Testimony on the Psychological Fitness for Duty of a Police Officer? A Guide for Agencies,Lawyers and Hearing Officers

The Rules of Evidence in the Federal Courts and most State Courts are lenient in qualifying witnesses as experts. This article looks at the most common standard for determining who is qualified to testify as an expert regarding the psychological fitness for duty of a serving police officer. The article then discusses key areas that agencies, attorneys and hearing officers should focus on in determining the credibility of an expert’s testimony. Finally, this paper suggests trial preparation techniques for counsel, should a disputed fitness evaluation become involved in litigation.     

Public Safety Outcomes of Virginia's Detention Assessment Instrument

The placement of juveniles in secure detention has been the subject of considerable attention recently. For the past several years, Virginia has been engaged in efforts to improve detention practices at both the state and local levels. One important policy and practice change is the implementation of a standardized, structured decision‐making instrument to guide detention decisions by intake officers of the Virginia Department of Juvenile Justice (DJJ). This report will present a brief background on the Detention Assessment Instrument (DAI); an analysis of the performance of the DAI on key public safety outcomes; and an overview of Virginia's participation in the Juvenile Detention Alternatives Initiative (JDAI).     

Participants' Attitudes in the Utah Juvenile Victim‐Offender Mediation Program

This paper describes an archival evaluation of the Juvenile Court Victim‐Offender Mediation Program (VOMP) of the Utah State Courts in Salt Lake City. From 1997 to 2000, 147 victims and 330 offenders reported their attitudes towards their experiences in VOMP. Although victims were more satisfied than offenders for some outcomes, all participants reported exceptionally high satisfaction. These promising results are consistent with other published studies on the effectiveness of VOMP and other forms of restorative justice in demonstrating the promise of mediation in criminal justice.     

Adaptive Programming Improves Outcomes in Drug Court: An Experimental Trial

Prior studies in Drug Courts reported improved outcomes when participants were matched to schedules of judicial status hearings based on their criminological risk level. The current experiment determined whether incremental efficacy could be gained by periodically adjusting the schedule of status hearings and clinical case-management sessions in response to participants' ensuing performance in the program. The adjustments were made pursuant to a priori criteria specified in an adaptive algorithm. Results confirmed that participants in the full adaptive condition (n = 62) were more than twice as likely as those assigned to baseline-matching only (n = 63) to be drug-abstinent during the first 18 weeks of the program; however, graduation rates and the average time to case resolution were not significantly different. The positive effects of the adaptive program appear to have stemmed from holding noncompliant participants more accountable for meeting their attendance obligations in the program. Directions for future research and practice implications are discussed.     

Once more with ‘sympathy’ but no resolution for intended mothers: the EU,Ireland and the surrogacy dilemma

This article examines the decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in Z v A Government Department and the Board of Management of a Community School and the court’s interpretation of existing EU legislation on whether commissioning or intended mothers are entitled to paid leave equivalent to maternity benefit. It highlights the failure of the CJEU in this case to call for specific EU legislation on the issue of surrogacy. The Irish Courts have been more proactive in this regard. The Supreme Court has acknowledged that ‘pending the introduction … of legislation dealing with this field, it is … not for the courts to attempt to resolve the complex questions that need to be addressed’. This article compares recent decisions of the Irish Courts to that of the CJEU as they struggle to keep abreast with modern society in the absence of legislation at national and EU level.     

Expert Evidence,Judicial Reasoning,and the Family Courts Information Pilot

The Family Courts Information Pilot took a modest step towards open justice in Children Act cases by publishing 161 judgments of the County Courts and Family Proceedings Courts. Combining socio‐legal and philosophical analysis on lines inspired by the work of Habermas, this article examines the epistemology of expert testimony implicit in the judgments. What emerges is a form of reasoning based on ‘inference to the best explanation’: judges seek to show that the best explanation for experts saying what they do is that they have good reasons for their opinions. While this approach is not blindly deferential, it has serious limitations in cases where the only experts are local authority social workers and the guardian, and an awareness of these limitations is one reason for the courts' willingness to allow other experts to be instructed. The article also criticizes the analysis of the courts’ use of experts by the recent Family Justice Review.     

Establishing a compulsory drug treatment prison: Therapeutic policy, principles, and practices in addressing offender rights and rehabilitation

A Compulsory Drug Treatment Correctional Center (CDTCC) was established in Australia in 2006 for repeat drug-related male offenders. Compulsory treatment law is inconsistent with a therapeutic jurisprudence approach. Despite the compulsory law, a normative offender rehabilitation framework has been established based on offender moral rights. Within moral rights, the offender rehabilitation framework addresses the core values of freedom (supporting autonomous decision-making) and well-being (supporting support physical, social, and psychological needs). Moral rights are underpinned by a theory or principle which, in this instance, is a humane approach to offender rehabilitation. While a law that permits offenders to choose drug treatment and rehabilitation is preferable, the article discusses the establishment of a prison based on therapeutic policy, principles, and practices that respond to participants as both rights-violators and rights-holders. The opportunity for accelerated community access and a therapeutic alliance with staff has resulted in offenders actively seeking to be ordered into compulsory drug treatment and rehabilitation.     

CHILD PROTECTION MEDIATION: A 25-YEAR PERSPECTIVE

This article reviews the creation, development, and growth of child protection mediation (CPM) in the United States. Starting with a few pilot projects in the 1970s, CPM has grown throughout the country. The article traces child protection's development through the publication of the Resource Guidelines and Model Courts and then discusses what the necessary ingredients for a mediation program are. Mediation is then discussed from a judicial perspective. Barriers to mediation are listed, followed by a discussion of special issues that arise when developing and maintaining CPM programs. The article concludes with the observation that CPM is now recognized as a best practice by most judges and court improvement professionals and that it continues to grow.