Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Problems of criminal behavior
Problem and solution essay on crime
Problem and solution essay on crime
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Problems of criminal behavior
Relatively recently in history the development of specialized, or problem-oriented, courts have assumed a predominate role in multiple areas. Three of the major ones discussed here include drug, mental health, and domestic violence courts. In 1996, the American Bar Association provided their interpretation of specialization, stating:
Traditionally, specialization refers to a specialized subject matter combined with subject matter expertise. With reference to courts, specialization usually signifies that a court has limited and frequently exclusive, jurisdiction in one or more specific fields of the law. Specialized courts are typically defined as tribunals of narrowly focused jurisdiction to which all cases that fall within that jurisdiction
…show more content…
Specialized Domestic Violence Courts (women & Criminal justice) (Coulter, Alexander, Harrison, 2008)(Coulter et al., 2008)
While results from drug courts vary, many report a reduction in recidivism rates, drug abuse, judicial and probation caseloads as well as a reduction in cost (Turner et al., 2002; Goldkamp, White & Robinson, 2001). On the basis of the special- ized drug court model, specialized domestic violence courts builds from two legal philosophies of restorative justice and therapeutic jurispru- dence, assessing the positive and negative effects of the legal system on the social and psychological functioning of individuals and reflects a commitment to providing comprehensive services (Tsai,
…show more content…
Evidence shows orga- nizational and attitudinal weaknesses in traditional courts in regard to domestic violence cases, which affects victims’ experiences throughout the court process. Attitudes of court personnel, such as victim blaming (Hart, 1993) can reflect biases, thus adversely affecting victims’ cases (Hartman & Belknap, 2003; Erez & Belknap, 1998). Due to a lack of uniform understanding about the dynamics of domestic violence, tradi- tional courts tend to minimize the criminal nature of domestic violence cases (Ptacek, 1999). What could be potentially more dangerous is that court personnel underestimate the severity of their biases and their re- sulting impact on the judicial process (Erez & Belknap, 1998; Hart,
Michael Williams -Court Administrator, Murray City Municipal Justice Court Murray, Utah Evaluating The Murray City Municipal Justice Courts Domestic Violence Court, May 2002
Like child abuse, it affects every American by impacting those we love the most. Awareness for domestic violence victims has evolved since the beginning of our country. In earlier times, it was a private matter, and took place “behind closed doors”. They helped them past their sufferings and place them back into mainstream culture. (Karmen, 2015) Claims one movement that assisted with the process is the Feminist Movement. This widespread movement took place during the 1970’s, and represented the “beaten women”. It helped them stand up for themselves during their distraught times. Domestic tranquility ensures women their safety at home under their husbands’ protection. The Feminist’s Movement questioned domestic tranquility and urged women to stand up for themselves (Karmen, 2015). They discovered the “silent crisis” that lived inside so many women at the time. The crisis was that the men they married gave into the times of “behind closed doors” and “look the other way”. Those times would stand no more, due to the feminist’s movement and widespread awareness. Laws and legislation have changed since the rediscovery of the victims of domestic violence. One example is restraining orders. Restraining orders set up a level of protection for the women from the male offenders. Another example of legislation is The Violence Against Women Act. Promulgated in 1994 the act mandates that all states enforce protective orders issued in a
Pennington, B, E., S. (2014, September 19). In Domestic Violence Cases, N.F.L. Has a History of Lenience . Retrieved from
Harrell’s essay also introduces other facets of drug courts to be researched in an effort to understand inconsistences in drug court practices from jurisdictions across the country. In particular, Harrell notes that eligibility, treatment availability, and court practices vary significantly from one drug court to the next. He brings light to the possible correlation between drug court practices and recidivism, and the importance of understanding which court practices contribute positively toward successful program
“The nation 's first drug court was established in Florida in 1989, and there are now more than 2,500 operating nationwide” (Rankinf and Teegardin). From that moment in 1989, America’s judicial system decided to re-evaluate how the courts had been approaching drug addiction and crime. Instead
To begin, drug courts were established in Miami in 1989 during the “war on crime” era. According to Cooper (2003), “the immediate goals of the drug court were to reduce the recidivism rate of these defendants while they were awaiting disposition of their cases, reduce the failure to appear at trial rate, and provide at least some level of treatment services” (p. 1672). During the “war on crime” era, criminal rates were escalating and courts were overflowing with case loads and the drug court was implemented in order to find another way to help solve the drug problems with select offenders. Additionally, “the primary purpose of the Miami drug court was, therefore, not therapeutic, although it clearly had therapeutic elements, but, rather to promote public safety and more effective judicial supervision of defendants while awaiting trial” (Cooper, 2003, p. 1672). Providing a safe sanction for offenders as well as the community was an efficient solution to control the caseloads of drug offenders and ensure the safety of the community.
What is Drug Court? According to Siegel (2013), drug courts are courts designed for non-violent offenders with substance abuse problems who require integrated sanctions and services such as mandatory drug testing, substance abuse treatment, supervised release, and parole. These courts are designed to help reduce housing nonviolent offenders with violent inmates. Drug courts work on a non-adversarial, coact approach.
In the New York Times article, “Safety and Justice Complement Each Other,” by Glenn E. Martin, the author informs, “The Vera Institute for Justice found a 36 percent recidivism rate for individuals who had completed alternative drug programs in New York City, compared with 54 sentenced to prison, jail, probation or time served.” Alternative programs are more likely to inhibit future criminal acts, while incarceration seems to lack long-lasting effects on individuals. In continuance, the author adds that 3 percent of treatment participants were rearrested for violent crimes, while 6 percent of untreated criminals were rearrested for violent crimes. Diversion programs are able to treat one’s motivation for their criminal acts, rather than assuming that illegal habits will go away with time. Instead of sending nonviolent offenders to jail, legislators should consider introducing practical
Kennedy, Bernice R. Domestic Violence: A.k.a. Intimate Partner Violence (ipv). New York: iUniverse, 2013. Print.
In the juvenile drug court a docket with selected delinquency cases are referred to a designated judge. These youth have been identified for having problems with alcohol and/or other drugs. The juvenile drug court judge maintains close oversight of each case through frequent court report updates through the probation officer and the therapist. The judge both services as the team leader and serve as an integral part of a team that comprises representatives from treatment, juvenile justice, social services, school and vocational training programs, law enforcement, probation, the prosecution, and the defense. This team determines how to address the problems of substance abuse and his or her family, which lead the youth into contact with the justice system (Cooper, 1998).
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 offender's chronic recidivism will continue.
In conclusion, it has been shown that drug courts are beneficial to both drug addicts and to our society. Too many addicts and their family’s drug court represent the foundation of a new, healthy, and productive life. Drug courts benefit the community by providing structure to non-violent drug offenders and a chance to rebuild their lives. Although there are arguments against the value or effectiveness of drug courts, the benefits that they provide are undeniable, and as the system uses drug court the benefits will only increase for everyone involved.
Although the legal profession is a single discourse community, it is made up of many smaller discourse communities. This is so because while all lawyers share the same broad goals of the legal profession and have a general knowledge and expertise in all areas of the law, most lawyers after graduating from law school and passing the bar exam specialize in a particular area of law. This specialization requires the lawyer to go beyond the broad concepts of law as a whole and to become knowledgeable and proficient in the sometimes minute details of a more specific area of law. Even then, some lawyers will go even further to focus on one aspect or another of that particular area of law. This results in most lawyers being members of many even smal...
The 'Secondary' of the 'Secondary' of Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice. Bureau of Justice Statistics Crime Data Brief (2003). Intimate Partner Violence, Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice. Edelson, J. L. & Co. (1999) The 'Secondary' of the 'Secondary' of the The Overlap between Child Maltreatment and Woman Battering: Violence against Women.
Domestic violence is not just fighting, hitting or an occasional argument. It’s a chronic abuse of power. The abuser of domestic violence, controls and tortures the victim of threats, intimidation, and physical violence. Domestic violence is one of the leading causes of violence in America. The abusers are not only men, women can be abusers as well. Women make up the vast majority of domestic violence. According to the American Bar Association (ABA), 90-95% of domestic violence victims are females and 70% of intimidating homicides are females. Domestic violence is a serious crime and everyone needs to be aware of its effects. This essay presents and explains the evidence supporting the major risk factors for intimate partner homicides.