Prisons and county jails are extremely over populated, so over populated that in some jails inmates are sleeping on the floors. According to Senator Jeanne Shaheen (From Senator Jeanne Shaheen: Prison Overcrowding, 2011), the federal prisons are currently 35 percent over their capacity. The overcrowding is costing the criminal justice system and taxpayers more money to transfer inmates to other facilities and in lawsuits brought by inmates against the prisons. With the prisons and county jails facing major overcrowding issues and drug treatment programs being a viable alternative to prison time, more states need to be implementing drug / treatment programs. Treatment / Drug Courts are specialized courts to help stop drug, alcohol, and related criminal activity (U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration,2011). These courts closely monitor the participants in the treatment programs and if a participant fails to meet the minimum requirements set by the courts, immediate sanctions are imposed (U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, 2011). The main goal of Treatment / Drug Courts is to give the individual a second chance to receive the therapy that is a necessity to help break the drug or alcohol addiction, without going to prison. Utilizing drug treatment programs, as an alternative to prison time does not just benefit the individual in the programs it also relieves some of the overcrowding prisons and county jails, saves the criminal justice system and taxpayers money, helps lowers the recidivism rates, and benefits the family of the individual in the drug treatment program.
After many years of prison population increasing, the utilization of Treatment / Drug Courts in the United States has helped with the long awaited decline i...
... middle of paper ...
...decline nationally, locally. Retrieved July 6, 2011, from EBSCOhost: http://search.ebsohost.com.lib.kaplan.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=nfh&AN=2W61693996317&site=ehost-live
U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration. (n.d.). What Are Drug Treatment Courts? Retrieved July 1, 2011, from U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration: http://www.justice.gov/dea/ongoing/treatment.html
Zarkin, G. A. (2006, Febuary 3). Study Finds Drug Treatment Is Cost-Effective Alternative to Prison. Retrieved July 1, 2011, from RTI International: http://www.rti.org/page.cfm?objectid=45f0612f-80cf-452e-b9466cad5f1b786c
From Senator Jeanne Shaheen: Prison Overcrowding. (2011, June). Retrieved July 25, 2011, from EBSCOhost: http://web.ebscohost.com.lib.kaplan.edu/ehost/detail?sid=0b342550-d055-4e34-93ef-4b7ab4ebabf8%40sessionmgr104&vid=1&hid=110&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=voh&AN=60905407
The complex issues of dealing with offenders in the criminal justice system has been a point of ongoing controversy, particularly in the arena of sentencing. In one camp there are those who believe offenders should be punished to the full extent of the law, while others advocate a more rehabilitative approach. The balancing act of max punishment for crimes committed, and rehabilitating the offender for reintegration into society has produced varying philosophies. With the emanation of drug-induced crimes over the past few decades, the concept of drug treatment courts has emerged. The premise of these courts is to offer a “treatment based alternative to prison,” which consist of intensive treatment services, random drug testing, incentives
Drug court is between one to two years in duration, depending on which county the program is located in and how willing the participant is to implement the program into their daily lives. The philosophy is, “keep individuals in treatment long enough for it to work, while supervising them closely” (nadcp.org). Participants are held accountable for every action they have, whether positive or negative. Meaning, they are “rewarded for doing well or sanctioned when they do not live up to their obligations” (nadcp.org). Sanctions can range anywhere from community service, earlier curfew restrictions, a treatment facility, and even up to a weekend or months in jail, depending on the severity of the
As offenders are diverted to community residential treatment centers, work release programs and study release centers, the system sees a decrease or stabilization of the jail population. While the alleviation of overcrowding is a benefit it is not the only purpose of diversion. A large majority of crimes are committed while under the influence of drugs or alcohol. Studies have shown that more than half of all individuals arrested in the United States will test positive for illegal substances (NCVC, 2008). Efforts to reduce crime through incarceration usually fail because incarceration does not address the main problem, the offender’s substance abuse.
As you might already be aware there is a ballot initiative on this upcoming November’s election about drugs, and drug treatment. This measure is called Proposition 36. If this measure were to pass, state law would be changed, so that certain non-violent adult offenders who use or possess illegal drugs would receive drug treatment and supervision in the community, not prison. Right now California is ranked number one in the nation for its rate of imprisonment for drug offenders. If Proposition 36 passes, California could become number one for its treatment for drug offenders. The measure also provides state funds to counties to operate the drug treatment programs. Additionally, studies have shown that drug treatment is a far more effective than prison in reducing future criminal activity. Robert Roseman, a 51-year-old heroin addict from Sacramento says, “I was always able to get drugs in prison…all you’re going to learn in prison is to do crime better.”
...ng is possible. On many occasions, I have witnessed first hand how drug court saved someone’s life. The system has been implemented to benefit the abuser and their families. This program helps prevent future drug usage by implanting a relapse program free of charge. These courts are designed to help reduce housing nonviolent offenders with violent inmates. Drug courts work on a non-adversarial, coact approach. The implementation of drug courts has the right intentions. They were put in place to help change a person’s life, if and when, they are willing to help themselves.
Vogel, Nancy. “Rehab in Prison Can Cut Cost, Report Says; Crowding Exacerbates High Recidivism Rate by Denying Inmates Useful Treatment, Experts Find.” Los Angeles Times: 0. Jun 30 2004. Proquest. Web. 24 Feb 2014
In recent years, there has been controversy over mass incarceration rates within the United States. In the past, the imprisonment of criminals was seen as the most efficient way to protect citizens. However, as time has gone on, crime rates have continued to increase exponentially. Because of this, many people have begun to propose alternatives that will effectively prevent criminals from merely repeating their illegal actions. Some contend that diversion programs, such as rehabilitation treatment for drug offenders, is a more practical solution than placing mentally unstable individuals into prison. By helping unsteady criminals regain their health, society would see an exceptional reduction in the amount of crimes committed. Although some
The problem is that the people who are being incarcerated don’t need to be incarcerated. Instead of trying to do what is best for the offenders and help them we are just throwing them in prisons for so many years and hoping it will help. Yes, this idea is working in some cases, but in other cases throwing the person in for many years is actually making it worse. They are not getting the help or treatment they need. I spoke with a man who was in prison for many years and he said getting drugs in prison is so much easier than getting them outside of prison. He also said that most drug offenders go back to prison, because they do not get help with their addictions. They are being put into a place that is just making their addictions worse.
For county jails, the problem of cost and recidivism is exacerbated by budgetary constraints and various state mandates. Due to the inability of incarceration to satisfy long-term criminal justice objectives and the very high expenditures associated with the sanction, policy makers at various levels of government have sought to identify appropriate alternatives (Luna-Firebaugh, 2003, p.51-66). I. Alternatives to incarceration give courts more options. For example, it’s ridiculous that the majority of the growth in our prison populations in this country is due to people being slamming in jail just because they were caught using drugs. So much of the crime on the streets of our country is drug-related.
The Judiciary Branch of the United States government is responsible for interpreting the law. Those involved with this branch determine the meaning of the laws and decide what to do with those who break them. Because of a drug movement that took place through the 1980s, the courts have severely punished those who break laws associated to drugs; Congress is now trying to step in to change the way the Judiciary Branch is forced to punish such criminals. Congress has been busy the past couple of years evaluating the proper sentencing of those convicted of drug crimes. Many men and women of Congress are joining forces in an attempt to come up with a solution to propose as an amendment. Our elected leaders believe the need for the reform of drug crimes is due because of the number of cases and number of years those convicted are spending in prisons. Because of the drug wars that took place in the United States, the minimum sentence has been set so high today. Drug reform is needed in the United States, and those convicted of drug crimes with improper sentences need to have their sentence reduced. 1
More are sentencing options are great because just like every person is different, so is the crime. Prison may not always be the most effective response for people, so If courts have options other than incarceration, “they can better tailor a cost-effective sentence that fits the offender and the crime, protects the public, and provides rehabilitation” (FAMM, 2011). Findings have also proven that alternative saves taxpayers money. “It costs over $28,000 to keep one person in federal prison for one year1 (some states’ prison costs are much higher). Alternatives to incarceration are cheaper, help prevent prison and jail overcrowding, and save taxpayers millions” (FAMM, 2011, para. 3). Lastly, alternatives protect the public by reducing crime. There is a 40% chance that all people leaving prison will go back within three years of their release (FAMM, 2011). “Alternatives to prison such as drug and mental health courts are proven to confront the underlying causes of crime (i.e., drug addiction and mental illness) and help prevent offenders from committing new crimes” (FAMM, 2011, para.
Women in Prison. Washington, D.C.: Bureau of Justice Statistics Varnam, Steve. Our prisons are a crime (reforming the prison system). Editorial. Christianity Today 21 June 1993
In 1989, a Republican county executive of Mercer County, N.J., estimated that it would cost approximately one billion dollars to build the jail space required to house all the drug users in Trenton alone (Roffman 1982). All of this money could be spent on things of greater importance. Not only has the drug problem increased, but the drug related problems are on the rise. Drug abuse is a killer worldwide. Some are born addicts (crack babies), while others develop addictions later in life.
The states and United States government contribute billions of dollars to prisons; where, the majority of offenders are substance abusers. However, are they really getting the help they need? Here is a little history on drug abuse. According to David Musto (1987) drug abuse has been around for approximately 100 years.
The “Tough on Crime” and “War on Drugs” policies of the 1970s – 1980s have caused an over populated prison system where incarceration is policy and assistance for prevention was placed on the back burner. As of 2005, a little fewer than 2,000 prisoners are being released every day. These individuals have not gone through treatment or been properly assisted in reentering society. This has caused individuals to reenter the prison system after only a year of being release and this problem will not go away, but will get worst if current thinking does not change. This change must be bigger than putting in place some under funded programs that do not provide support. As the current cost of incarceration is around $30,000 a year per inmate, change to the system/procedure must prevent recidivism and the current problem of over-crowed prisons.