Courts of healing justice are specialized courts that deal in specific types of offenders. The ones that will be covered here are juvenile courts, family courts, and drug courts. These courts keep these specific types of cases out of the general courts. Their goal is to try to heal the offender of what is causing them to offend instead of just locking them up. They are also referred to courts of second chance.
These courts work with social services and law enforcement agencies to provide special attention to the offender’s problems (Kinsella, 2004). The purpose of specialty courts is to reduce recidivism and treat the offenders, setting them on the road to recovery (Kinsella, 2004). Not only can they help the offender but they also provide some relief to the over-crowded general court system, provide cost savings to the public, and provide specialization to the particular court cases (Legomsky, 1990).
There are many positive aspects to having specialized courts. Courts of healing justice provide an informal setting as compared to those of general courts. By having informal hearings it hopes to seem compassionate to the needs of the individual (Paulsen, 1966). It is the mission of these courts to focus on what is in the best interest of the person needing the help they can give them (Yermish, 2009). The courts can use the law to order treatment for the offender (Davis, 2003). Specialty courts can arrange for treatment when social services have been unable to do so, thus making court the last resort in the effort to obtain help for the offender (Davis, 2003). Not only do they serve to take away some of the over-crowding of the general courts; they keep personal problems from being exposed in general courts (Davis, 2003).
The issues on the opposite side of specialty courts are just as numerous. Public opposition to the specialty courts is that they are not viewed as real courts and they do not believe that the offender is getting the punishment they deserve or that the matters at hand are being treated fairly (Legomsky,1990). In specialty courts a defendant must plead guilty in order to receive treatment services; this takes away his attorney’s right to defend him (Yermish, 2009). When an offender is placed into a treatment program a non-offender is put at the end of the line for receiving the same treatment, the court has the ability to move the offender to the front of the line (Davis, 2003).
...es and cautions of jail diversion programs include safety of the public and the potential cross-purpose goals of the treatment services industry and the criminal justice system. Public safety is paramount when discussing jail diversion programs. Whatever has caused the offender to commit crime, be it substance abuse or a mental illness, does not negate the fact that the crime was committed and the public must be protected from the offender is some form or fashion. Jail diversion programs have various tracking methods of offenders but they do provide enough freedom and opportunity for recidivism. Also, treatment services and incarceration do often work at cross purposes and unless integrated successfully can cause barriers to coordination and solutions (SAMHSA, 1993). One organization emphasizes treatment and the other emphasizes public safety and punishment.
The focus of the juvenile justice system is to rehabilitate juvenile offenders, rather than to imprison and punish like the systems adult counterpart. According to Caldwell (1961) the juvenile justice system is based on the principle that youth are developmentally and fundamentally different from adults. This has lead to the development of a separate justice system for juveniles that was initially designed to assist troubled juveniles providing them with protection, treatment, and guidance. When performing as it is designed and up to the initial intentions, the juvenile court balances rehabilitation (treatment) of the offender with suitable sanctions when necessary such as incarceration. According to Mack (1909) the focus of the juvenile justice system has shifted from “how can we help the child”, “why did the child commit the crime” to “was the crime committed”. According to Griffin (2008) in some cases juveniles may be required to be “transferred” to adult court. The prerequisites for transfer to adult court are the duty to protect the public from violent youths, serious crime, and the lack of rehabilitation chance from the juvenile court. According to Flesch (2004) many jurisdictions handle the issue of serious juvenile crime by charging juveniles as adults. Charging a juvenile as an adult is done by a method which is called waiver to adult court. This waiver allows adult criminal court to have the power to exercise jurisdiction over juveniles and handle the juvenile’s case as an adult’s case would be tried. According to Flesch (2004) a juvenile is both tried and if convicted of the crime the juvenile will be sentenced as an adult when his or her case is waived from the juvenile court. Waiver to adult court initially was viewe...
The three goals are promoting public safety, reducing criminal recidivism, plus engaging and retaining mentally ill offenders in appropriate treatment resources. Public safety is the main reason courts in America were invented, so they can determine if someone is or not, a danger to society (Yuma County Superior Court Mental Health Court, 2013). Keeping those who are consider dangerous locked up and away from society, creates a safer environment. Secondly, reducing criminal recidivism is another goal for MHC. Studies showed that the majority of mentally ill people who entered jail/prison, would come in and out of the Justice System (Yuma County Superior Court Mental Health Court, 2013). As a result, this court was created to maintain mentally ill individuals’ stable, so they can have control over themselves. This helps them to maintain themselves away from crimes. Reducing criminal recidivism, allows the government to save millions of dollars. The last goal is engaging and retaining mentally ill offenders in appropriate treatment resources so they can maintain themselves stabilized (Yuma County Superior Court Mental Health Court, 2013). This will not only secure mentally ill individuals from snapping, it will also help them maintain a regular life. With these goals, comes great benefits for both the mental ill person and society itself. Benefits such as having a mentally ill defendant not being sentences on
In 1899, the juvenile justice court system began in the United States in the state of Illinois. The focus was intended to improve the welfare and rehabilitation of youth incarcerated in juvenile justice system. The court mainly was focused on the rehabilitation of the youths rather than punishing them being that they still have immature ways and still growing. Specialized detention centers, youth centers, and training schools were created to treat delinquent youth apart from adult offenders in adult facilities. “Of these, approximately 14,500 are housed in adult facilities. The largest proportion, approximately 9,100 youth, are housed in local jails, and some 5,400 youth are housed in adult prisons” (Austin, 2000).
With increased media coverage of violent juvenile behavior, legislators began to pass laws to toughen up on juvenile crime. Many laws made it easier to waive juveniles into adult courts, or even exclude juveniles who had committed serious crimes from juvenile court jurisdiction. Furthermore, the sentences to be handed out for offenders were lengthened and made much more severe. As a result, the juvenile courts began to resemble the adult courts. Yet, this movement’s influence began to fade, and by the turn of the century, another shift had occurred. In the current juvenile courts, a balanced approach is emphasized. While the court deals with chronic and dangerous offenders with a heavy hand, needy youth who need help to get back on track are still assisted under the parens patriae philosophy. Restorative justice has come to be the preferred method of today’s juvenile courts. In an overall sense, the modern juvenile court has taken on a paternalistic view similar to parens patriae towards youths who are in need of guidance, while punitively punishing offenders who do not respond to the helping hand extended to
“Specialized courts differ from traditional courts in that they focus on one type of offense or offender. Usually the judge plays an intensive supervisory role. Other criminal justice components (e.g., probation) and social services agencies (e.g., drug treatment) are involved and collaborate closely in case processing.” (Office of Justice Programs [OJP], 2008). High statistical correlations between offenders may demonstrate a need or possibility of specialized courts. These courts focus on the underlying issues behind the offending and try to cure it at it’s roots (NIJ, 2008). There are a variety of specialty courts such as drug, domestic violence, and restorative justice.
One of the major differences between juvenile and adult corrections is the large number of private facilities in the juvenile system. Private facilities have the luxury of being able to "cherry-pick" their clients, and they can also sometimes do things and perform treatments that public facilities cannot do. One of the big problems in public juvenile justice is how long it takes to get an arrested juvenile tried and adjudicated as a delinquent. Only after they have been so adjudicated can they technically be placed in a "rehabilitation" program, and obviously, this kind of delay exacerbates the problem of delivering psychological services in a timely fashion. Juveniles who are still in detention status can only receive substance abuse treatment, sex education, remedial education, and crisis intervention services.
Every year, nonviolent people are incarcerated for crimes that do not threaten the safety of others only because they have a mental illness. Because of this, 25-30% of inmates are mentally ill (McClealland 16). To prevent this, most jurisdictions have at least one criterion that is reflected on whether or not a person is posing a danger to themselves or others. Some other criteria which can also be connected to a danger such as a disability or inability to provide for one's basic human needs or that some treatment would be crucial for ones wells being. But being committed requires proof that hospitalizing the patient will be the least restrictive in addition to showing a sign of being dangerous ("Commitment." 26). Court stated that involuntary commitment procedures restrict a harmless person to live safely outside an institution despite the fact that they are mentally ill ("Commitment." 27). Polly Jackson Spencer, Bexar County Judge states, “We don't want to send people to jail if they are not a threat to society” (Dayak, Meena, and Gonzales 24). Forcing harmless individuals into jail will not help their illness. In fact, it will only worsen it. Jails are incapable of handling unstable individuals. Because of their incompetence to help inmates, there is a high number of mentally ill being beaten, mistreated, and killed by guards, or ultimately killing themselves (McClealland 16). Many jails don't even test their incoming inmates for any mental illn...
A. Community Justice and Restorative Justice –Restorative justice is an alternative to traditional court processing in that it seeks to involve offenders, victims, and ...
It was this effort that identified the problem as failures of the judicial process. These failures included sluggish courts, increased levels of recidivism, and a significant loss of public trust (Ballenstedt, 2008). To solve the problem, the program takes a multifaceted approach to punishment in non-violent cases. Through the program, justices have more options available to them when sentencing such offenses as drug possession, prostitution, or even shoplifting. The concept combines social services with punishment in order to reduce reliance on expensive and ineffective short-term jail sentences for non-violent offenders and boost the community’s confidence in the system (Ballenstedt, 2008).
The concept of restorative justice became a game-changer in juvenile justice system. Through the course of time, professionals explored every possible methods and approaches that could positively affect the children without the expense of harming their future and wellbeing. The idea of restorative justice is “administer justice that focuses or repairing the harm done to the victim and the community. (Save the Children-UK, 2005)” The four guiding principles are to: (1) Repair and restore the balance within the community. (2) restitution for the victim. (3) Ensure that the offender understand and take responsibility. (4) Help the offender to change and improve. In South Africa, this is practiced in their community throughout
...93). Intensive probation and parole (Vol. 17). In M. Tonry (Ed.), Crime and justice: A review of research. 281-335. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Retrieved November 5, 2013 from http://heinonline.org.proxy.libraries.uc.edu/ HOL/Page?collection=journals&handle=hein.journals/cjrr17&id=289#289.
The Criminal Justice system was established to achieve justice. Incarceration and rehabilitation are two operations our government practices to achieve justice over criminal behavior. Incarceration is the punishment for infraction of the law and in result being confined in prison. It is more popular than rehabilitation because it associates with a desire for retribution. However, retribution is different than punishment. Rehabilitation, on the other hand is the act of restoring the destruction caused by a crime rather than simply punishing offenders. This may be the least popular out of the two and seen as “soft on crime” however it is the only way to heal ruptured communities and obtain justice instead of punishing and dispatching criminals
For the offender, the main goal of diversion is rehabilitation. Diversion programs provide offenders with essential services that can address the underlying causes of criminal behavior, such as alcohol and drug abuse. It is hoped that diversion will allow offenders to establish a normal lifestyle, without the burden of a criminal record. Diversion may also be less costly for the offender and be less costly than other criminal justice processing. In many cases treatment or counseling is less expensive than prosecution and incarceration. The most obvious benefit of diversion programs is that they avoid the expense and harshness of the full operation of the criminal law. Rising prison populations and their associated costs have led criminal justice
Over the past 30 years, the criminal justice systems sentencing and corrections practices have changed immensely. Going from a rehabilitative approach in the early twentieth century, to the current uniform approach of the justice model in the 1970s (Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice, 2001). These changes have had an immense impact on probationary practices and terms. Under the rehabilitative models, probations goal was to focus on individualize treatment that would work to better the offender, help make him/her a productive individual and community member. A focus was placed on the criminal, rather than the crime. However, with the increase in crime rates during the 1960s, the rehabilitative approach to crime quickly ...