Substance Abuse And Its Impact On Criminal Involvement

In today’s world the drug culture is often one that goes underestimated, or unseen do to people’s lack of vigilance, ignorance, and oblivion. Not only are drugs dominantly prevalent in mainstream society but are even more dominate within the criminal justice system. This paper will examine in-depth the prevalence and scope of the drug epidemic in context to probation and the criminal justice system.

Many different states have begun sending nonviolent drug offenders to various kinds of drug treatment program the state offers. By doing this, it has significantly reduced the problems with overcrowding. If an individual is arrested and charged with simple possession of a drug and no other crime is being commented, then this person is doing no harm to anyone else. They should be given the opportunity to try and make a change in their life and beat the addiction. Instead, if this person is thrown into jail, they are still going to be an addict with a criminal record now and will not be able to be a contributing member of society. (Everett 1 ).

The purpose of this study was to show that an effective drug treatment program in the criminal justice system is a necessity and to show that treatment will reduce recidivism thus reducing crime in society as a whole.

In assignment one, I stated that substance abuse disorders can cause barriers for ex-prisoners reentering back into the community because research shows that “individuals who are released from prison are more likely to encounter difficulties with substance abuse, as 73.6% individuals in the criminal justice system have drug and alcohol involved with their criminal behavior. “Researchers found that 80% of individuals incarcerated in state prison have serious substance abuse problems. Substance abuse has a significant role in recidivism upon release from prison and desire to use substances or craving of substance was the most common barrier to reentry” (Phillips and Spencer 127-128). In order to decrease substance abuse in prison reentry and create defensible solutions for ex-offenders, the criminal justice must create incarceration-based therapeutic programs for adults that will use an in-depth drug treatment program model for treating ex-offenders who are addicted to drugs, and change the ex-offender’s attitude, perception, and behavior linked to substance abuse. The program will aim to stop the ex-offender from using drugs and create will power inside the ex-offender not to back track into a life of drug

With California jails and prisons still struggling with finding a reform for non-violent drug offenders the states recidivism rates continue to reach unprecedented numbers. Between 1983 and 1998, drug admissions to state and federal prisons increased sixteen-fold, from over 10,000 drug admissions in 1983 to almost 167,000 new prison entries for drug offenses in 1998 (Worrall et al, 2009). This has been a direct result of our legal system incarcerating offenders who have substance abuse related issues instead of providing a way for treatment or rehabilitation outside of incarceration. Through public policies regarding criminal justice interventions that address drug use and crime, an initiative was created to provide treatment services

This study on drug courts intends to systematically review quasi-experimental and experimental evaluations of the effectiveness of drug courts. With an emphasis on committing future crimes and continuous drug use. This report focused on the programs associated with the standard in the criminal justice system case processing. This review expresses the effects of recidivism in the long and short-term soundness with the current evidence along with the relationship reduction and effectiveness. Eligibility for drug court applies to a non violent offender, with proof of substance dependency. Drug courts stand on the concept that combines drug treatment with legal and moral authority in the attempts to break the cycle of addiction and the committing

In 1989, the first drug court came into existence in Miami-Dade County, Florida. They emerged in response to demands for change in the criminal justice system because of the War on Drug. (Listwan, Sundt, Holsinger, & Latessa, 2003) By 2007, drug courts were established in all 50 states. Statistics show that the prison population of women increased because of the War on drug policies. (Shaffer, Hartman, & Listwan, 2009) The drug court model became an alternative to sanctions given to drug offenders. Drug courts address addiction by merging treatment services, judicial monitoring, and probation supervision. (King & Pasquarella, 2009; NADCP, 2005; Shaffer, Hartman, & Listwan, 2009)

Drug use and abuse is not a new problem for America’s prison system, and is one which speaks to the larger issue corrupting the judicial system as a whole. As of 2013, of those prisoners serving at least a year long sentence, 51 percent (98,200) of them were serving for drug offenses (Carson, 2014). To contrast the incarcerated with those on probation and parole, some 25 percent (977,662) of the 3.9 million people on probation were charged with drug

Between 1990 and 1999, individuals who were convicted of a drug crime rose past 100,000, which accounted for 20 percent of our nation’s increased prison population (Lurigio, 2008). Between 1995 and 2003, the number of drug-related offenders constituted the largest increase of criminals in our nation’s prison population (Lurigio, 2008). In 2004, approximately 50 percent of state prisoners were known to be substance abusers or have drug dependency (King & Pasquarella, 2009). During these years, drug offenders were crowding dockets, prisons, and nearly the entire criminal justice system (Lurigio, 2008). Due to the expensive cost of handling such cases and the difficulty of changing the habits of drug abusers, community based programs were introduced to slow the drastic increase of drug-related incarcerations (Lurigio, 2008). According to the Office of National Drug Control Policy, Americans owed nearly 32 billion dollars toward criminal justice expenses, 31 billion dollars toward lost productivity, and three billion towards property damage in 1998 (King & Pasquarella, 2009). These chain of events built the foundation for Drug Treatment Courts (DTC) here in the United States. The origin of the first-ever drug court was located in the 11th Judicial Circuit in Miami-Dade County, Florida in 1989 (King & Pasquarella, 2009). DTC programs maintain

The objective of drug courts is to impede the neglect of illegal drugs and alcohol related criminal wrongdoing. Additionally, drug courts encourage reclamation using a corresponding reaction to criminal violators reliant on alcohol and other illicit drugs. More importantly, apprehension of these objectives necessitates a group method, together with teamwork and support of the prosecutors, judges, probation officers, defense attorneys, and other correctional facilities staff, law enforcement agencies, treatment facilities and halfway houses, and public neighborhoods. Federal and State programs assessing alcohol and drug issues, vocational rehabilitation, housing, and education also have significant responsibilities in the rehabilitation of drug

The authors showed that with the growing criteria for offenders to be submitted to drug programs caused a “widening net” effect. This effect causes many offenders who would have needed help with their addicted fall-through and are incarcerated. These individuals then contribute to the growing population of prisons and jails. I agree with the author’s idea to fix this problem by creating more drug court programs with will allow more offenders to filter through to get help. Another fix for drug courts is to widen the restrictions of offenders and allow more addicted offenders into the drug courts. This also will allow numerous offenders to get the help that they need and hopefully not

Drug courts, which combine judicial supervision with substance abuse treatment, are rapidly gaining popularity as a tool to combat crime and drug use. Based on a five-year study, we found that people who took part in drug courts had lower relapse rates and committed fewer additional crimes, such as selling drugs and driving while intoxicated. Forty-nine percent of drug court participants reported committing new crimes, compared with 64 percent of

This report was done at Columbia University’s National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse (CASA) and talks about the drug court model. This report explains that some drug courts evolved from other existing programs that focused on reducing drug use for offenders. Although the drug court is different than other programs that are meant to reduce drug use. In the drug court model, criminal justice components and substance abuse treatments work together to promote abstinence and prosocial behavior. Drug courts also result in closer and more intensive supervision and drug tests, court appearances, and treatment contacts are much more frequent than any other forms of probation. The key goals of most drug courts are to reduce drug use by engaging

Currently, drug courts have been proven to be successful at reducing recidivism of offenders. In the United States there are about 120,000 people receiving help in order to rehabilitate them and to try to reduce the chances of recidivism (Office of National Drug Control Policy, 2011). These programs require individuals to participate in the programs for a minimum of one year. During this year the individuals are required to appear in court and be drug tested at

The United States Correctional System is often challenged as to whether it wants to rehabilitate drug offenders or punish them, and because of this it mostly does neither. Even though drug abuse and drug trafficking are widely spread national issues, the mental, social, and economic costs of "healing" through incarceration are only making the "disease" worse. Never before have more prisoners been locked up on drug offenses than today. Mixed with the extremely high risks of today's prison environment, the concept of incarceration as punishment for drug offenders cannot be successful. Without the correct form of rehabilitation through treatment within Michigan's Correctional System, drug