Law Enforcement: Drug Court Program Needs Serious Reforms, Defense Attorneys Say
Drug courts have spread all across the country since the first one was instituted in Miami 20 years ago by then local prosecutor Janet Reno, but now, the nation's largest group of criminal defense attorneys says they have become an obstacle to cost-effective drug treatment and a burden on the criminal justice system. In a report released Tuesday, America's Problem-Solving Courts: The Criminal Costs of Treatment and the Case for Reform, the National Association of Criminal Defense Attorneys (NACDL) argued that drug addiction should be considered a public health problem, outside the criminal justice arena.
drug court
Minorities, immigrants, and poor people are often underrepresented in drug court programs, leaving them to rot behind bars at taxpayer expense. Drug courts also mean that access to drug treatment comes at the cost of a guilty plea, the group said.
"Today's drug courts have been operating for over 20 years yet have not stymied the rise in both drug abuse or exponentially increasing prison costs to taxpayers," said NACDL president Cynthia Orr. "It is time for both an extensive review of these courts and for the average American to ask themselves: Is our national drug policy working, and perhaps it is a public health concern rather than a criminal justice one?"
In the report, NACDL recommended the following reforms:
- Treating substance abuse as a public health issue rather than a criminal justice one;
- Opening admission criteria to all those who need, want and request treatment;
- Enforcing greater transparency in admission practices and relying on expert assessments, not merely the judgment of prosecutors;
- Prohibiting the requirement of guilty pleas as the price of admission;
- Urging greater involvement of the defense bar to create programs that preserve the rights of the accused;
- Considering the ethical obligations of defense lawyers to their client even if they choose court-directed treatment; and
- Opening a serious national discussion on decriminalizing low-level drug use.
digg
reddit1."drug" scam;2."therapists";3.$cigtaxquidproquo;4.Big pHARMa
Comment posted by maxwood on Fri, 10/02/2009 - 3:33pm1. To paraphrase the previous comment, many defendants plead guilty in order to pass for "easy" and avoid the hard time that "hard cases" get. ("Admission" to the drug court program is a better deal than prison-- you are better protected against gang-rape, persecution etc.) That in turn enables prohibitionists to "prove" marijuana is a problem-causing "drug" by pointing to the large statistical number of marijuana "offenders" admitted to the drug court program.
2. Both in prison and in "drug programs" are to be found well-paid bureaucrat "therapists" punitively pretending to "treat" the marijuana "drug offenders" on the premise that cannabis must be classified as a "drug" rather than as an "herb" or "nutritional supplement" which would place it in a non-punitive category.
3. Police, prosecutors, judges, bailiffs, guards are all benefiting from their share of over $30-bil./yr/US nicotine $igarette tax money, and for that they reward the big tobackgo corporations by suppressing cannabis as an illegal "drug" and thereby suppressing the anti-overdose smoking and vaporizing equipment (which, if cannabis were legal, could become readily available to tobacco users and replace the now entrenched profitable hot burning overdose $igarette marketing format), on the premise that such equipment is related to illegal cannabis and thus also illegal or "evidence". (How would you like your $600 Volcano vaporizer to be confiscated, or used as evidence to convict you of a crime?)
4. Big pHARMa doesn't want unprofitable homegrown cannabis to get a chance to (a) outclass their currently profitable proprietary Stop Smoking remedies at $20, $40, $60 a box and a 10% success rate, and (b) cause an abrupt decline in cigarette smoking, leading to a consequent decline in sales of profitable Statins and other drugs now used to manage chronic tobacco-related degenerative diseases.
addiction
Comment posted by Anonymous on Fri, 10/16/2009 - 7:20pmthe fact that revenue not only drives but fuels this whole debate is not only desatirous to the community as awhole but goes to show that treatment and recovery comes down to the individuals commitment to not only better themselves but the people they associate with. Real addicts cant be forced into recovery. They have to choose recovery. It has become a feeding frenzy all these businesses fighting over goverment contracts. allocated to fund drug treatment centers in the name of bettering the people . the fact is you have to not only give up your constitional rights but give up the fact that forcing people who really dont have the desise of addiction but the diesese of money. patients are forced to sign blank releases of information upon admmission to these so called department of correction treatment facilities. these release are used to sercumvent are basic constitutional rights. The 12 step meetings of alcholics anonymous and narcotics anonymous have grown to numbers in the millions while not only give people a chance at a new life but doing it with honesty. when will honest become an everyday god given right to the poor and less fourtunate.They make these laws complexe for a reason. so the uneducated cant figure them out. So now we must trust the laws and the people who right them. when will the counstition not be for sale
Drug Courts
Comment posted by Anonymous on Fri, 10/02/2009 - 12:37pmI have for the last 10 years been questioning the efficiy of Drug Courts, the very fact that "Clients"are forced to plead guilty to be addmitted is in direct violation of the United States Constitution.
The fact that Drug Courts are based on Coersion and Punishment goes against every evidenced based model for effective treatment of Substance use Disorders.
And the fact that clients are forced to pay for treatment that in effect is no treatment at all, is again a constitutional question.
And as mentioned in the article, often Judges with no training in Substance abuse often overrule the accesments of train clinicians.
As much as I detest Lawyers, I have to agree with the NACDL, Substance use Disorders is a public health issue, which should be handled by those trained in the field. It would be a benifit to treatment if the monies allocated to drug courts could be funneled into access to treatment, and evidenced based educational programs.