Wednesday, March 3, 2010

Drug Court and Christian Rehabs can Work Together to Get Drug Abusers Drug Free

Drug Court obviously imposes constraints on drug abusers, but the problem is relapse and a return to using again, which can not only be discouraging, but land them into a long term battle with little hope of recovery. Or..sometimes a prison sentence.

Many drug abusers who've tried and failed are turning toward spiritual support. There are many good Christian rehabs in the US with a excellent success rate for those who are sincerely committed to making changes in their lives.
Something to think about......

Monday, March 1, 2010

Drug Court Grad Hope to Give Back

Can God help beat additions? Yes, absolutely, 100% and no doubt about it. I've seen it happen in several cases where people were absolutely at the end of their ropes and had tried every other possible means of recovery. Once they truly turned to God, and were honest with him as well as themselves, they were delivered completely with no withdrawals, or cravings.

However, the way to keep their deliverance and sobriety from drugs and alcohol depends on their continuing on with a true dependence on God, not drugs.

It works, I've been there. Drug court can help through constraints, but the "inner craving" to use will still be there. That's why there are so many failures with drug court alone.

Drug court graduate hopes to give back
Source: The Natchez Democrat | February 21, 2010

Feb. 21, 2010 (McClatchy-Tribune Regional News delivered by Newstex) -- NATCHEZ -- It was by the grace of God and the Sixth Judicial District Adult Drug Court Program that Robert Bailey was able to stand behind the lectern at Zion Chapel African Methodist Episcopal Church and declare his thanks.

"I want to thank all of you for seeing something in me that a lot of people didn't see, something I didn't even see," Bailey said. "But today, thanks to God, I am sober three years."

Bailey was one of four graduates from the drug court program Thursday, and he was the first to admit it wasn't easy.

"It wasn't fun, and it wasn't always nice," he said.

Drug court is a voluntary program that functions as a hyper-intensive probation program. While in drug court, participants are able to work, but they have to meet tough standards, stringent drug testing and constant checks from drug court administrators.

And it isn't always easy.

Two of the other graduates talked about having to spend time in jail, and another spoke of having to earn the love of his family over time.

But the end result is that the participants get to leave a life of addiction, and the court expunges the drug offenses that landed them in jail from their record.

That makes drug court a silver lining to the cloud of addiction that hung over their lives, Circuit Court Judge Forrest "Al" Johnson said.

"Whenever they got to the point that precipitated the action that brought them here, it was a blessing in disguise because it brought them to drug court," Johnson said.

For Bailey, it was a long, soul-numbing road to drug court. The first step, just like the 12-step addiction programs teach, was admitting he had a problem.

"Most of my adult life, I was on drugs," he said.

"After seven years of active addiction, I could admit to myself I had a problem."

And looking back, he was robbing everybody blind, but not monetarily -- he was robbing them of the love and attention they deserved.

"I have never stolen anything in my life, but I stole from my family, I stole from my kids," he said. "I couldn't be a child to my parents, a father to my kids."

For the first two years of drug court, he kept the rules, never failed a test and fulfilled his obligations despite some problems in his personal life.

But he didn't feel like he was alive, Bailey said.

And that is when the second step to the 12-step program, recognizing a greater power that can give strength, helped him.

"When you quit drugs, it leaves a hole, and you have to fill it with something," Bailey said. "I won't tell you what to fill it with, but I found Christ.

So with the support of his family, and a trust in God, Bailey said he's facing the future.

But this isn't the last time Bailey will be in drug court.

That's not because he'll commit another offense, though.

It's because he wants to help others in their struggle through drug court.

"I have never been addicted to drugs, and I don't know what that's like," Circuit Court Judge Lillie Blackmon Sanders said. "But (the graduates) do."

"This afternoon, I was speaking with Robert, and he said he will be back. He said, 'I will be back to help you.'"

Newstex ID: KRTB-1038-42235359

Wednesday, February 24, 2010

St. Louis Country Tests Alcohol Bracelets

Guys and gals,
Drug Courts can help. Monitoring systems such as alcohol bracelets are "control mechanisms", but maybe the best way out is to get committed to YOURSELF, get in a good treatment program, enlist the support of your family, friends and spiritual counselor, (last, but certainly not least,imo).

ST. LOUIS, Feb. 24 /PRNewswire/ -- Eastern Missouri Alternative Sentencing Services (EMASS) has announced that Saint Louis County Justice Services awarded their alcohol monitoring contract for the county's DUI offenders to EMASS and their transdermal alcohol sensors, known as SCRAM (Secure Continuous Remote Alcohol Monitors).

SCRAM includes an ankle bracelet, worn around-the-clock, that samples an offender's perspiration every 30 minutes in order to ensure compliance with court-ordered sobriety. Both the St. Louis County Circuit and Drug Courts have used the SCRAM System on 375 offenders to-date. Nearly 70 offenders, predominantly repeat drunk drivers, are monitored daily in St. Louis County. The St. Louis City Court has monitored an additional 85 offenders with SCRAM.

According to EMASS President Mike Smith, the contract is particularly important because the review process included testing of other alcohol monitoring systems by Saint Louis County Justice Services officials. "We've been providing SCRAM technology to courts in the eastern part of Missouri since 2003 because we believe this technology is the best and most reliable way for the criminal justice system to fight the epidemic of drunk driving," says Smith. "SCRAM has revolutionized the way we manage DUI offenders, allowing courts to focus on the root cause of the criminal behavior, which is the alcohol abuse and addiction." EMASS has monitored nearly 2,500 offenders with SCRAM in 28 eastern Missouri counties. Smith says that by testing other technologies and selecting SCRAM and EMASS, the award underscores the county's belief in the system. "It tells us that we're delivering the right technology and providing value to their program. We are honored to be a part of this contract," he says.

Denver-based Alcohol Monitoring Systems (AMS), which manufactures and markets the SCRAM System throughout the U.S., says the strongest testament to the reliability of the SCRAM System is when agencies test their product side-by-side with other testing protocols. "Seeing is believing," says Don White, AMS COO. "We've got a long, proven track record of successfully monitoring hundreds of thousands of offenders. But first-hand experience - putting SCRAM head to head with other testing protocols - is the best way to show officials the potential for managing their offenders and keeping communities safe," he says.

Statewide, SCRAM has been used to monitor nearly 4,000 Missouri offenders, including a highly publicized pilot program with the Missouri Department of Corrections. Nationally, SCRAM is used in 48 states and has monitored 125,000 offenders since 2003.

On February 1, AMS also began a controlled roll-out of the next generation of their system, which incorporates House Arrest monitoring into their transdermal monitoring bracelet. Known as SCRAMx, the system will begin limited use in eastern Missouri counties in March, allowing courts the option to increase or decrease supervision of repeat, high-risk offenders with a single monitoring bracelet.

Alcohol and Crime in Missouri

According to The Century Council, which compiles DUI/DWI data state by state, more than 35,000 offenders are arrested each year for DWI in the state of Missouri. Of those, more than 28 percent are repeat offenders. And according to the U.S. Department of Justice Bureau of Justice Statistics, nearly 36 percent of violent crimes and 75 percent of domestic violence cases include offenders who were drunk at the time of the offense. Drunk drivers represent 18 percent of all those on probation each year, more than any other single offense. "Recidivism rates for offenders struggling with alcohol are astounding. Programs that can manage the addiction and ensure sobriety through continuous testing are seeing significant impact," says White.

About Eastern Missouri Alternative Sentencing Services (EMASS), Inc.

Founded in 1991, EMASS is a company that provides a wide range of services to the courts and criminal justice system throughout Missouri, including private probation supervision, pre-sentence investigations, SATOP service for DWI offenders, domestic violence counseling and education seminars, driver improvement programs and alcohol/drug education programs, as well as traditional electronic (house arrest) monitoring. Headquartered in St. Louis, EMASS has field offices in St. Charles, the City of St. Louis, Florissant, Olivette, O'Fallon, Warrenton, Montgomery City, Jefferson City, Columbia, Springfield, Union and Troy, Missouri.

About Alcohol Monitoring Systems, Inc.

Established in 1997, Alcohol Monitoring Systems, Inc. manufactures SCRAM®, the world's only Continuous Alcohol Monitoring system, which uses non-invasive transdermal analysis to monitor alcohol consumption. SCRAM fully automates the alcohol testing and reporting process, providing courts and community corrections agencies with the ability to continuously monitor alcohol offenders, increase offender accountability and assess compliance with sentencing requirements and treatment guidelines. Alcohol Monitoring Systems employs 116 people across the U.S. and is a privately-held company headquartered in Littleton, Colorado.

SOURCE Alcohol Monitoring Systems, Inc.

Back to top

Thursday, February 18, 2010

Programs help Children, Parents suceed

U.S. Rep. Kurt Schrader praises efforts of local initiative
By Ruth Liao • Statesman Journal • February 17, 2010

"When northeast Salem esident Lucas Carpenter, 35, was arrested in June on theft and meth charges, he just felt failure and regret. He was having problems with his marriage, his children and his self-esteem.

But Carpenter underwent a turnaround as a participant of the Center for Family Success, a nonprofit program for parents with criminal backgrounds. He's going through drug treatment, family counseling, financial management and parenting classes.

"My life's in the middle of a complete overhaul," he said.

Carpenter shared his story with U.S. Rep. Kurt Schrader, D-Ore. and representatives from Senators Jeff Merkley and Ron Wyden on Tuesday.

The presentation showed the efforts of Marion County Kids First Initiative, a collaboration of programs and services for children whose parents are addicted to methamphetamine.

In 2008, Kids First was awarded federal grant funds of about $380,000, which were given in October 2008 and last until June of this year, said Barb Young, Marion County senior policy analyst.

Marion County also received $740,000 for its next phase of funding, which is set to come in October, Young said.

According to a survey conducted in 2005, 73 percent of inmates in the Marion County jail were parents, said Marion County Commissioner Janet Carlson.

"A lot of times, we don't think of people in the criminal justice system as parents, just individuals," she said.

Marion County Sheriff's Cmdr. Jeff Wood, who supervises the parole and probation division, said his agency is using evidence-based programs to help clients feel motivated to change, not simply referring them to a drug and alcohol treatment program.

Schrader said he was impressed to hear of the "wraparound" approach in the programs. Schrader said he wanted to invest in these types of programs.

"You cannot have success if you lock up people for an 'X' amount of time," he said.

He said he hoped to see smaller towns and rural communities adopt a similar approach.

The Center for Family Success is run by the Mid-Willamette Valley Community Action Agency. The program helps to motivate participants with skills and services such as goal-setting, housing referrals, financial management, parenting classes and mentoring in order to reunify families broken by incarceration or drug abuse.

In all, 65 men and women have participated at the center; 60 people took part in job and skills training and 25 people were placed in jobs.

For Carpenter, who began using alcohol and drugs when he was 9 years old, meth was the hardest addiction to overcome. He used meth for eight years before his arrest last summer. Then, he took part in Marion County drug court and the Center for Family Success. Carpenter said staying clean has helped improve his family relationships and ongoing job search, especially having a relationship with his mentor Christopher Hupp, the program's director.

"He's helped me dust off the tools that I have," he said." or (503) 589-6941

Sunday, February 14, 2010

Drug Testing Technologies:Sweat Patch

Drug Testing Technologies: Sweat Patch
A recent innovation in the science of drug testing, the PharmChek Drugs of Abuse Patch - or "sweat patch" - is used to test for various illegal drugs. The sweat patch is affixed to the skin in much the same way as a band-aid, and is worn for up to 14 days. The patch is used to detect the presence of drugs as excreted through perspiration. Individuals required to wear the sweat patch are those on probation or involved in child custody cases. The federal government is currently considering use of the sweat patch in federal workplace drug testing.

The Drug Policy Alliance and DPA Network feel that the use of sweat testing in any of these settings is inappropriate, as published, peer-reviewed research has revealed serious problems with current sweat testing technology. We believe that sweat patch testing poses an unacceptably strong potential for false positive test results. False positives carry serious consequences for tested individuals - sometimes including incarceration or loss of child custody.

If you are involved in a court case where sweat patch evidence is being used, please contact us at Drug Policy Alliance tracks the use of the sweat patch, and in some cases can assist individuals in challenging the use or admission of sweat patch test results.

How does the sweat patch work?

The sweat patch consists of a gauze pad covered by a protective membrane similar to that of a band-aid. The membrane has an adhesive perimeter that sticks tightly to the test subject's skin. The sweat patch is usually worn on the subject's upper arm. Before application, the subject's arm is swabbed with an isopropyl alcohol rub.

After the patch has been worn for approximately seven to ten days, it is removed and the gauze pad is sent to the laboratory for testing. The lab usually performs "screening tests" for several different drugs, using an immunoassay testing system. If any screening test indicates the presence of a drug, the lab performs a "confirmatory test" for that drug, using the more precise "gas chromatography / mass spectrometry" (GC/MS) testing system. If the confirmatory test finds levels of the drug above the "cutoff" the lab is using, the lab will report a positive test result.

Where is the sweat patch being used?

Many counties around the country use the sweat patch to drug test individuals who are on probation, in drug courts, or involved in child custody cases. PharmChem contracts with these counties to sell them the sweat patch testing kits, to perform the drug tests, and to help the counties defend the results in court.

The Administrative Office of the Federal Courts also has a contract with PharmChem. This contract gives individual federal court districts the option to use the sweat patch when they drug test individuals who are on probation or "supervised release" for federal crimes. Not all federal court jurisdictions use the sweat patch, but many do.

How has the sweat patch fared in court?

Each trial court has the right to make its own decision as to whether sweat patch evidence will be admitted, and how that evidence will be used. A decision by an appellate court would govern the trial courts in that appellate court's jurisdiction, but so far there are no appellate court decisions on the sweat patch from either state or federal courts.

Many trial courts have considered the sweat patch. Some courts have admitted sweat patch evidence, and relied on it in deciding to imprison probationers or terminate parental custody. Others have found the sweat patch insufficiently reliable for these purposes: at least six different federal courts have rejected government efforts to base punitive action on sweat patch test results.

While Drug Policy Alliance tracks court decisions on the sweat patch, many of these cases are confidential, and hardly any have resulted in written court decisions. There is no exhaustive list of court rulings on the sweat patch. Only two courts have issued written decisions that discuss the science behind the sweat patch and are published in official legal case reports.

§ U.S. v. Snyder. F.Supp. 2d. 2002 WL 257381 N.D.N.Y., 2002. This recent federal court decision finds that in certain circumstances, the sweat patch can be environmentally contaminated, leading to a false positive test result. Because the defendant in this case made a plausible case that his positive test results were a product of environmental contamination, the court rejected the use of the sweat patch to revoke the defendant's supervised release.

§ U.S. v. Stumpf. 54 F. Supp. 2d 972 D. Nev. May 31, 1999. This federal court decision finds sweat patch evidence admissible, and rules that it can be used as the basis for revoking an individual's supervised release. This decision was issued prior to the release of several scientific studies that indicate problems with the sweat patch. The decision contains virtually no scientific analysis: the court simply describes the views presented by each side's expert, and then states that the court agrees with the government's expert.

What are the problems with the sweat patch?

The problems with the sweat patch are many:

False positives through environmental contamination. Scientific studies have demonstrated that environmental contamination can produce false positives in the sweat patch.

Naval Research Lab study. This study by the United States Naval Research Laboratory found that the sweat patch is susceptible to environmental contamination through two scenarios:

"Contamination from within": Environmental contamination may occur when a test subject has a small amount of drug residue on her skin where the patch is to be placed, and the isopropyl alcohol rub fails to remove that residue. The sweat patch will then pick up that drug residue, which becomes indistinguishable from drugs excreted through the subject's sweat, resulting in a false positive test result.

"Contamination from without": Environmental contamination may occur when drugs in the environment leak through the protective membrane covering a patch that is being worn. This situation is more likely when the membrane is wet and when it is exposed to a substance with a high ("basic") pH level. This is the environmental contamination scenario that led to the rejection of sweat patch evidence in U.S. v. Snyder .

PharmChem's internal studies have duplicated the results of the Naval Research Laboratory Study in finding that "contamination from within" can occur. PharmChem has refused to release or publish the results of these studies, but the studies were described in detail in the recent court hearing in U.S. v. Snyder .

Studies designed in consultation with PharmChem and conducted at the Center for Human Toxicology in Salt Lake City also duplicated the results of the Naval Research Laboratory Study in finding that "contamination from within" can occur.

False positives through skin storage. A recent study suggests that long-term storage of drugs in skin could lead to false positive test results. See Levisky, Bowerman, Jenkins, and Karch, "Drug Deposition in Adipose Tissue and Skin: Evidence for an Alternative Source of Positive Sweat Patch Tests," Forensic Science International 110 (2000) 35-46. The study indicates that chronic drug users may store drugs under the skin surface. These drugs may be released a long time after drug use so that "a sweat patch, used as a detection device, might falsely indicate that new drug use had occurred." Such false positives are a particular concern to the many individuals who have been heavy drug users, have conquered their drug habits, and are currently being tested by the sweat patch.

False positives during application and removal. Application and removal of the sweat patch are usually performed by non-medical personnel, in a non-clinical setting. Patches are often applied and removed in a probation office by probation officers who have received only a videotaped training. Any sloppiness or failure to follow proper procedures can easily result in false positives. PharmChem officials have themselves admitted that a there is a risk of false positives during application and removal. Indeed, one study indicates that even when application and removal is performed by scientists, in a laboratory setting, contamination can result in false positives. See Cone, Hillsgrove, Jenkins, Keenan, and Darwin, "Sweat Testing for Heroin, Cocaine, and Metabolites," Journal of Analytical Toxicology 18 (1994) 298, 304.)

No dose-response relationship. For any drug testing system, the "dose-response relationship" indicates the test result that one would normally expect to see based on ingestion of a certain amount of a particular drug. This information is central to analysis of the results of any drug test. If one does not know the dose-response relationship for a particular drug in a drug testing system, one cannot make meaningful statements about test results for that drug. And most importantly, one cannot set a "cutoff level" that will distinguish a positive test result from trace contamination of the subject, the sample or the testing system.

No one knows the dose-response relationship for sweat testing. The few attempts at controlled-dose studies have been methodologically inadequate, and have found enormous variability in test results.

In one study, a subject tested at 15 ng/ml after being given a dose of methamphetamine, while the next subject tested at 631 ng/ml, 42 times higher, after being given a smaller dose. (Compare subject # 6 with subject # 7, in unpublished "SCRI" study in PharmChem's FDA submission.) Such wide variations in response between different test subjects are typical. Subjects given 20 ng of methamphetamine, tested six days after ingestion, show results as low as 5.7 ng/ml (SCRI subject # 7) and as high as 905 ng/ml (SCRI subject # 15). These high-end results are in no way aberrational: twenty different tests in the SCRI study alone produced readings above 500 ng/ml; many readings were over 1000 ng/ml.

Substantial disparities exist even with two patches taken simultaneously from a single individual. The SCRI study tested two patches from the lower chest of Subject # 13, nine days after a dose of methamphetamine. One patch tested "negative" at 7.1 ng/ml, while the other tested at 30 ng/ml - a "positive" four times as high. Similarly, the study tested two patches removed from the lower chest of Subject # 5, seven days after the dose of methamphetamine. One patch tested at 34 ng/ml, while the other tested at 185 - more than five times as high.

To our knowledge, neither PharmChem nor any scientist has claimed to understand the dose-response relationship for sweat testing. Nonetheless, PharmChem employs cutoff levels that it claims can distinguish actual drug use from contamination. Without an understanding of a dose-response relationship, however, PharmChem's cutoff level is unreliable.

No regulation of PharmChem's testing program. The federal government does not regulate the use of the sweat patch. PharmChem's sweat testing program is not overseen by the federal government. The federal government does not require PharmChem's sweat testing program to use any particular collection techniques, chain-of-custody procedures, quality control mechanisms, or testing procedures.
All aspects of PharmChem's sweat testing program are designed and operated by a private corporation, without any public checks and balances or quality assurances. No government entity ensures that PharmChem is spending the money necessary to make its tests as accurate as possible. When a company markets a product as a means to catch more drug users, there may in fact be a financial incentive to return positive test results, regardless of accuracy. Without government regulation of PharmChem's testing program, such a dynamic can take effect.

Patch wear problems. The adhesive membrane covering the sweat patch is supposed to bind tightly to the subject's skin, theoretically protecting the sweat patch and preventing tampering. However, subjects routinely report that the membrane does not adhere properly, peeling or rolling up along one or more edges of the sweat patch. This appears to be particularly common when subjects perspire heavily. As far as we know, there have been no studies to determine how often the sweat patch will fail to adhere in real-life wear conditions.

When a sweat patch does not adhere properly, the subject is usually accused of having attempted to tamper with the sweat patch, and is considered as having submitted a positive drug test.

What about rumors that PharmChem has given false testimony about the sweat patch in court?

This memorandum was submitted as part of an ethics complaint filed with the American Academy of Forensic Sciences and the Society for Forensic Toxicologists. It recounts testimony given under oath by Neil Fortner, a vice president of PharmChem, in various court hearings regarding the reliability of the sweat patch. These hearings occurred in cases involving removal of child custody and the threat of incarceration.

The memorandum describes numerous false statements made under oath by Mr. Fortner regarding scientific research on the sweat patch. The memorandum also describes false or strongly misleading statements made under oath by Mr. Fortner regarding his academic credentials. Drug Policy Alliance possesses and can produce copies of court transcripts and other documents referenced in the memorandum.

Thursday, February 11, 2010

Redmond O'Neal to be released from Jail and Sent to Rehab

Redmond O'Neal, son of Farah Fawcett and Ryan O'Neal was admitted last April to a drug court program in connection with two drug-related arrests – one involving possession of heroin and methamphetamine and the latter involving possession of methamphetamine...

However, O'Neal, 25, has been in jail since December 29 when he was arrested for an alleged probation violation

As it stands now, Redmond will be released from jail and sent to a residential treatment program, and from there to a clean living house after he finishes the treatment program.

No one knows what demons drive Redmond to continue this destructive pattern of drug use, or if the stint in rehab will be the answer for the troubled 25 yr. old. What has been shown is that continual exposure to a drug free environment is the key to success. Sometimes, simply giving sufficient time to get the drugs out of the system is enough to eliminate the strong addictive effects of the drugs, clearing the mind and body and set new healthy living patterns.

We wish Redmond all the best, but as the judge told Redmond, "It's up to you."

Wednesday, February 10, 2010

Woman Shares Drug Court Experiences

02/07/2010, 5:39 pm
Comment on this story | Print this story | Email this story
Related stories
Dan Churney,, 815-431-4050
Theresa Boyle wasn't sincere when she first entered Grundy County drug court. She said she was in it to keep two felony convictions off her record. Not to stop using drugs and alcohol. Not to straighten out her life. Nothing else.

But that changed.

The 24-year-old Minooka woman, who has relatives in Streator, was arrested in early 2007 in Grundy County and charged with possession of cocaine and fraud. While in the jail in Morris, another woman there told her about the drug court program, which then was a few months old. Boyle shrugged, not thinking much of it.

Later, Boyle's attorney also told her about the program in greater detail and she gave it some thought, but didn't like the sound of it — too much supervision. However, she didn't want a felony record to dog her in the coming years, so she entered the program. She went into it addicted daily to alcohol and smoking. At one time for about six months, she had a $150-per-day cocaine habit, but she weaned herself from the white powder before drug court. She can't credit drug court with that, but she can credit it with keeping her off it and everything else.

"I realized I had no self-esteem, no values. I thought I was invincible. I had grown up too fast."

She attributed her substance abuse problems to not having a father in her life, which made her feel worthless, as if something was always wrong with her. She saw other children with fathers, but hers wasn't there.

Drug court showed her she wasn't the spoiled goods she believed.

"I loved drug court. They forced me to get a job. I'm lucky I'm alive, but I wasn't sincere at first. I drank the night before my first day in court. The toughest part was organizing everything, because they expect a lot. I was wasting a lot of time. They taught me to prioritize."

Boyle remembered the turning point came early, when Halloween approached shortly after she entered the program and she was invited to several parties where liquor and drugs would flow.

"Halloween is my favorite holiday. It was a big temptation, but I used the tools (drug court counselors) put in front of me. I resisted because of the consequences. My attorney told me I was walking a fine line and my life was at stake."

Boyle graduated from drug court in March 2009. Boyle and her 4-year-old son live with her mother. She also has aunts involved in her life. Boyle attends a community college full time.

"I put my whole life into my son and school."

However, in the process, she said she has lost four friends from childhood because they're "still in the scene," as she described the drug culture. "My medication is positive people."

Boyle agreed to go out of her way to speak to The Times about her experience with drug court because she'll do "anything to help the cause."

Tuesday, February 9, 2010

Is Prison the Answer for Drug Users?

Is Prison the Answer for Drug Users?

Posted: Feb 8, 2010 11:37 PM CST

Updated: Feb 8, 2010 11:40 PM CST

Is Prison the Answer for Drug Users?

Reporter: Johnny Archer

Drug addicts and abusers can possibly face time behind bars if they are caught using drugs.

But is prison really the answer for drug abusers? Or is there an alternative solution to the problem?

"I graduated Drug Court with so much more knowledge on pill addiction," says Wes Elkins, a former drug user "How it changes your thought process. And your brain can out smart itself into basically an accidental overdose and the lose of your life, which is what happened to my friend."

His friend was Jerome Modroo, who was caught with drugs along side with Wes. As a punishment, Wes chose to go to Drug Court, Modroo decided to go to prison. The day Modroo got out of prison he went right back to using pills and died.

"You can punish people into staying clean and sober, which does not work," says Addiction Rehabilitation Association Program Director Jared Vineyard. "Putting them in prison and then letting them out again with nothing to follow up, nothing to help them out with the addiction. Time after time, study after study has demonstrated [prison] being ineffective."

"I'm just so frustrated and fed up with what's happening to my friends and family, loved ones, neighbors, and co-workers," says Kelsey Elkins, Wes' wife. "I've had several friends who have lost their life to pain killers."

Kelsey did not want to see her husband also die from abusing OxyContin and using other pharmaceuticals.

"OxyContin is synthetic heroine ,basically, and it grabs you by the horns and slowly takes everything away from you," says Wes.

But Wes didn't want his life taken away. He entered into Drug Court, an intense rehabilitation program supervised by trained drug counselors, instead of the other option of going to jail

"Those guys are all concentrated in a cell block [in prison]," says Vineyard. "And when you come out, you're better able to get the drug you had before and you have more information on how you can get around the law, how to fraud pharmacies and doctors better than you were before. For people who really don't have a criminal behavior of thinking it's really kind of a training ground for them to get better at doing what they do."

Drug court is not free. Wes says he paid about $100 per month for two years. He says it was worth the money instead of just heading to prison for using drugs."

Monday, February 8, 2010

Family Drug Court-A good idea~!

Getting families involved in their kid's drug court situations is a top notch idea in my book. For one thing, the better informed parents are about drug use, and how to cope with their child's problems, they more able they'll be to assist in their recovery. Going through drug court successfully takes determination and stick-to-it-ive-ness. Parents can help bolster a child's ability to cope with the process, by their presence and encouragement.

Council to discuss family drug court

Monday, February 8, 2010 10:06 AM CST

"Alan D. Allbee, associate juvenile judge for the First Judicial District of Iowa, would like to start a family treatment drug court and is requesting the city’s permission to use council chambers at city hall for drug court hearings on Tuesday afternoons after magistrate court concludes. The mayor’s office would be utilized for staffing of professionals.

In a letter to the city Allbee said the drug court clients would be parents involved in child in need of assistance cases in Fayette County who live in Oelwein and have substance abuse as a major problem.

He said the Oelwein satellite court would be easier for local clients to access since weekly court attendance is required and many do not have valid driver’s licenses. It would also be beneficial since the attorneys who practice in both magistrate and juvenile courts would be in the vicinity. Allbee said there is no cost to the city associated with his request and he hopes to start the treatment court this summer. The council will have a discussion on this request."

Monday, February 1, 2010

DUI"s In Drug Court
Sunday, January 31st, 2010

CANYON COUNTY — "Only a year ago, if a defendant pleaded guilty to a felony DUI in Canyon County, he essentially had two options: prison or probation. Prison provides punishment, but does it offer sufficient treatment for rehabilitation? Probation provides a certain level of treatment, but with overwhelming caseloads, could offenders get lost in the shuffle, or get away with continued substance abuse?

On Jan. 12, 2009, Canyon County Prosecutor John Bujak decided that felony DUI offenders should be given another option: drug court. Though once a skeptic of the alternative, community treatment-based program, Bujak said data shows the program brings good and lasting change for offenders and society.

What is drug court?

Caldwell teacher's case

Caldwell High School teacher Jon Kelpin, who was arrested for felony DUI on May 31, 2009, began drug court on Dec. 18, 2009, after pleading guilty to the felony. Judgment is withheld on that charge, and if Kelpin successfully completes drug court, that case will be dismissed. The case can still be used for prosecution purposes in the future if he reoffends.

Kelpin's license is suspended, and he has been in custody at the work release center in Caldwell. He could receive a restricted driver's permit after 45 days per Idaho law.

Kelpin also received a withheld judgment for misdemeanor DUI on July 13, 2007, and was convicted of a misdemeanor DUI on Jan. 17, 2008.

Kelpin's defense attorney, Charles Crafts, said he believes his client is well suited to be successful in drug court.

"Kelpin, by all accounts, is this incredibly responsible person with this one aspect of his life that has gotten away from him a little bit. I think his personality and the fact that he's been (teaching) for 30 years, he certainly lends himself to be more successful in the program because it requires such a high degree of responsibility," he said.
*Editor's note: List of DUI offenders removed from this article. May be seen by clicking on Title.

DUIs in Idaho

• In 2008, there were 167 felony DUIs filed in district court and 1,307 misdemeanor DUIs filed in magistrate court in Canyon County. Statewide, 12,655 felony and misdemeanor DUI cases were filed in district court.

• 640 DUI offenders participated in Idaho problem-solving courts in fiscal year 2009.

• In 2008, 91 offenders graduated from Idaho DUI courts — 90 percent of those who left the program.

• 576 offenders graduated statewide from drug and mental health courts in 2009, up from 425 graduates in 2008.

• In FY 2009, 1,492 adults in Idaho entered into a drug court program. Of those, 1,293 graduated from or remained in drug court and mental health court; 199 did not successfully complete the programs.

• Information provided by Norma Jaeger, Idaho's director of problem-solving court and community sentencing alternative. Information provided by Norma Jaeger, Idaho's director of problem-solving court and community sentencing alternative.

E-mail story



Log in to save in your library
Become an registered user!

Subscribe for home delivery
Drug court is a problem-solving court that aims for holistic rehabilitation for criminal drug addicts and alcoholics. Canyon County's drug court only accepts felony-level offenders, although other courts in the state also handle misdemeanor crime.

Canyon County has several problem-solving courts, including mental health court, youth court and truancy court. These courts, which use community treatment, are more cost effective than imprisonment, according to Norma Jaeger, Idaho's director of problem-solving court and community sentencing alternative. According to 2007 data, the average felony drug court offender costs $6,836 per year, while the average prison inmate costs $20,382.

It also helps ease the overcrowding of the regular courts and prisons, Jaeger said. About 1,500 people were in program-solving courts in 2009. Without that option, most of them would have been incarcerated, she said.

Idaho Sen. Patti Anne Lodge, who earned the Idaho Drug Court Leadership Award in 2006 for her work with the specialty court, said the program is a cost-effective and beneficial option for taxpayers.

"If we can save taxpayer money and create an accountable citizen ... I'd rather have them there than in jail where they're not learning to be accountable," Lodge said. "(It's) one of the most cost-effective ways to process people and bring them back into society as productive citizens. Drug courts work; I'm totally supportive."

Who goes to drug court?

Idaho law limits who is eligible for drug court: no violent offenses or crimes with gun use and no sex offenses. When a defendant fits within the legal criteria, Canyon County Prosecuting Attorney Chief of Staff Tim Fleming, who screens all drug court applicants for the county, looks for other indicators of a potential good fit.

"If a person is ready and willing and able to accept responsibility, waive their defenses and is ready to deal with their addictions" they make a good candidate, Fleming said. He also weighs whether the person needs the intense level of treatment drug court provides, or if he or she could successfully complete a regular probation, which has less intense accountability.

Jaeger said drug courts initially targeted first-time offenders, but as data was collected, the court changed its focus.

"Drug courts are most effective for higher risk, in terms of addiction and more significant criminal or offense histories," Jaeger said. "Research shows people with a first or second offense generally do as well on (regular) probation. It's the harder core that requires the significant structure and regular accountability that drug court provides to have positive outcomes."

Carrots and sticks

Drug court is rooted in the method of rewards and sanctions — carrots and sticks, Fleming calls it. In drug court, participants' judgments are withheld — if they graduate from the program, the case is dismissed. This dismissal is the ultimate carrot drug court participants work toward, Fleming said.

Magistrate George Southworth, the current presiding judge of drug court, volunteers his time to take on the additional 70-plus drug court cases — without a reduction in his regular caseload. Each week, he reviews the defendants' progress in court.

There are punishments for offenders who don't follow the rules: everything from essay-writing to jail time and even expulsion from the program. But Southworth said that drug court participants come from all walks of life and backgrounds — for some, this is the first time in their life they are required to follow a set of established rules.

"We don't kick somebody out of drug court until we've given them every chance to comply. They don't change overnight," he said.

However, drug court is not designed to be a walk in the park.

"It's much more strenuous, more difficult," Fleming said of drug court compared to regular probation. "It's not a slap on the hand."

For Canyon County DUI offenders in drug court, Southworth mandates 90 consecutive days in jail or work release, triple the minimum time required by law.

"People in drug court are not pampered. They realize this is a serious crime. We take it seriously," Southworth said.

Another carrot, approved by Idaho lawmakers last year, is a restricted driver's permit, which can be issued to a drug court offender after a 45-day license suspension. Outside drug court, offenders lose their licenses for at least one year.

Southworth said with Idaho's lack of public transit, it's hard to expect defendants to make all of their counseling sessions, alcohol testings, court appearances and probation meetings if they can't drive.

A violation of driving privileges automatically boots offenders out of the program, and they will be resentenced in regular court. Fleming said it often means prison time for the offender.

Does it work?

Both national and local statistics show that, whether it relates to drugs or alcohol, recidivism is lower among offenders who complete drug court compared to those who go to prison or are on regular probation, Fleming said.

According to a 2008 study submitted to the Idaho Legislature, Idaho DUI offenders are half as likely to reoffend after completing DUI court versus completing regular probation.

High-risk offenders who don't receive treatment through drug court either tend to not follow through with treatment, drop out or fail to follow conditions of probation, Jaeger said. But in drug court, "they stay in treatment long enough, are held accountable consistently and regularly enough to really change their behavior," Jaeger said. "The treatment effect is more than skin deep."

"Drug court — it gets right to the heart of the problem. They are there to treat people and help them overcome their addictions, period," defense attorney Charles Crafts said.

Continued from 12 MAIN

And treatment also deals with more than the person's addiction.

"It's really focused on all the characteristics that makes a person pro-social, less likely to have attitudes toward committing crime ... not just abstaining from the use of alcohol," Jaeger said.

She said it's common for repeat DUI offenders to have other attitude adjustments to make.

"They think, 'Well, I can drink, I just need to be more careful, make plans to not drive.' When they do drink, their judgment becomes impaired. The decisions they make in that condition are not good decisions."

Another benefit to rehabilitation through problem-solving courts, Jaeger said, is that offenders can keep social supports.

"Having a job, having a family, taking care of your bills are protective factors, assets in making a recovery," Jaeger said. "Those social supports are important in making lasting behavior change. The more supports that you can keep for a person, the greater likelihood that they can establish a lasting recovery."

Crafts said the community-based treatment in problem-solving courts is a "progressive-thinking model" for rehabilitating offenders.

"I think that we have a tendency when someone gets in trouble to just turn around and want to punish them," Crafts said. "Drug court — it's definitely a punishment to be in drug court, but they do build in these motivations for people to be successful in the program. ... It's much more of a progressive-thinking model of rehabilitation."

Some voice concern

Miren Aburusa, victim advocate with Idaho's Mothers Against Drunk Driving, said her agency supports the use of drug courts "post adjudication," but is concerned that judgments are withheld and, upon graduation, dismissed for DUI offenders in drug court.

"I don't think it should be used to avoid a record of conviction or license sanctions," Aburusa said. "There's close supervision, lots of interaction, I think that's a success ... I don't think it should be used as an opportunity for someone to clear their record."

Aburusa also said she fears not having a record of conviction could lead to fewer restrictions for defendants who reoffend because a judge wouldn't know about past offenses.

But Fleming said withheld judgments are still fare game for charging enhancements on any future charges. By law, if a felony DUI drug court graduate gets another DUI within 15 years, it's a felony charge, Fleming said.

"If the concern is that the state can't hold them accountable in the future, they're wrong. We can," he said.

Aburusa also said she wants to see Idaho mandate ignition interlock devises — 11 states require this — rather than just license suspension.

"I don't think that license suspension is the answer," she said. "We support mandatory interlock on all drivers. Someone who's had their license revoked, it doesn't stop them from drinking and driving, but if we can get an interlock, that saves lives."

Lodge said she thinks a mandatory interlock law has merit, but she would want to know where funding would come from.

"We can't have one more thing that's costing the taxpayers more money," she said.

'Drug courts work'

Because the DUI participants are a new addition to Canyon County, none of them has graduated from the program yet. Fleming said the program typically takes about 18 to 24 months to complete.

Bujak said when he first learned of drug courts more than a decade ago, he was skeptical.

"I thought it was a terrible idea," Bujak said. "I remember hearing about drug court and thinking it was 'hugs for thugs,' a reward for people breaking the law."

But Bujak said as data began to support the real, positive change drug court makes for offenders, his mind changed.

"Drug courts work, and I support them wholeheartedly," he said.

As a defense attorney, Bujak said he would often work to get his clients into drug court. But he said some who weren't prepared to give up their drug addictions balked at the thought of going.

"They'd say, 'I don't want to do drug court, it's too hard,'" he said.

Crafts said about half of the people he talks to about drug court are hesitant to participate because they think it's too difficult to complete. Nevertheless, he recommends drug court for every client who is eligible "in any way shape or form," and applauds Canyon County's move to include DUI offenders in its program.

"I give a lot of credit to John Bujak for putting people into drug court with DUIs," Crafts said. "I think that kind of progressive thinking, to me it's a no brainer. ... Some counties choose not to do that, some do and I'm glad that he's made that option available."

Fleming agreed.

"This office very much believes in specialty courts, because the data supports them," Fleming said. "Communities that have drug courts are safer communities than those who don't."

Sentenced on felony DUI in drug court

• Judgment: Defendant pleads guilty to a felony and judgment is withheld. If the defendant is referred from a felony probation violation or comes from a retained jurisdiction (Rider) program, conviction has already been entered and judgment will not be withheld.

• Jail/prison time: Mandatory 90 consecutive days in jail or, if employed, work release. Additional discretionary jail time of 180 days, and judge can add more if needed.

• Probation: Lasts for three years. Ends when defendant graduates from program. The average person graduates after 18 to 24 months.

• Driver's license: Suspended for three years. Can receive a restricted driver's permit after 45 days per judge's discretion. Restricted permit requires interlock device installation, and participants must be current with fees and insurance. Permit may be revoked if defendant violates permit requirements or fails to comply with other drug court mandates.

• Fees: $40 per week, plus probation supervision cost of $25 a month (about $3,330 to $4,440 total, on average). Judge can implement sanctions if a participant falls behind.

• Testing: Check in by phone each morning for potential testing. Required two tests per week, average of three times a week for new participants. Substance abuse tests and breath tests. Also may be randomly tested by probation officer on home visit or office visit.

• Treatment/counseling: Must attend at least three AA meetings a week. Must attend 200 to 250 hours of group and individual counseling through the course of the program. New participants attend counseling at least two to four times a week.

• Other requirements: To graduate, offenders must have a GED or high school diploma, maintain full-time (35 hours or more) employment for one year, remain sober for 180 consecutive days, pay fees and costs in full and complete an extensive community service project approved by the judge. Unemployed participants are required to do 20 hours a week of community service until they gain employment. Participants also take social classes (like budgeting class), family group sessions and attend alumni group.

• Contact with court, probation officer: Appear in court once a week. Check in with probation officer at least once a week. Officer can make additional appointments through office visits or house calls.

• Last step: Felony charge is dismissed once participants graduate from the program. Defendants whose judgment was withheld do not have a conviction on their record.* Defendants who entered the program on a felony probation violation will go to unsupervised felony probation or discontinue probation; those cases are not dismissed and defendants retain convictions. Civil rights suspended during judiciary process are reinstated.

* Although cases are dismissed, they are still considered for future charges and can be used for charging enhancement purposes. According to Idaho Code 18-8005, if a person received a withheld judgment on a felony DUI and gets another DUI within 15 years, the new offense will automatically be charged as a felony.

Sentenced on felony DUI in regular court

• Judgment: Pleads guilty to a felony and is either convicted and sentenced to prison, prison with a retained jurisdiction (Rider) or to probation, or judgment is withheld and the defendant goes on probation.

• Jail/prison time: Minimum 30 days in jail, 48 consecutive hours. Maximum 10 years in prison.

• Probation/parole: Up to 10 years

• Driver's license: Suspended one to five years after release from incarceration. Interlock device installation after mandatory suspension ends and during any remaining probation time, per judge's discretion. Must have proof of insurance to drive while on probation.

• Fees: Fined up to $5,000

• Testing: No required testing. Typically judge authorizes probation officer to assign testing.

• Treatment/counseling: No required treatment or counseling. Typically judge authorizes probation officer to assign treatment or counseling.

• Other requirements: No required classes. Typically judge authorizes probation officer to assign classes.

• Contact with court/probation officer: DUI probationers are usually placed on high-level probation. No required court appearances. Two separate contacts with probation officer a month, at least one of which is face to face. One home visit every three months; must visit within 30 days of a change of address. One employment verification every three months; must verify new employment within 30 days of job change. One treatment verification every three months; officers usually receive updates once a month or even once a week from treatment providers.

• Last step: If the defendant received a conviction, was placed straight on probation and complied with the terms and conditions of probation at all times, a judge can dismiss the case. Civil rights suspended during judiciary process are reinstated. If the defendant received a conviction, completed a Rider, then complied with the terms and conditions of probation at all times, a judge could amend the felony charge to a misdemeanor. Contact with court/probation officer: DUI probationers are usually placed on high-level probation. No required court appearances. Two separate contacts with probation officer a month, at least one of which is face to face. One home visit every three months; must visit within 30 days of a change of address. One employment verification every three months; must verify new employment within 30 days of job change. One treatment verification every three months; officers usually receive updates once a month or even once a week from treatment providers.

• Last step: If the defendant received a conviction, was placed straight on probation and complied with the terms and conditions of probation at all times, a judge can dismiss the case. Civil rights suspended during judiciary process are reinstated. If the defendant received a conviction, completed a Rider, then complied with the terms and conditions of probation at all times, a judge could amend the felony charge to a misdemeanor."

Saturday, January 30, 2010

Mental Health Court Launched

Drug Court is not for everyone! Mental Health Court may very well be the best option for those with drug related mental health issues that land them up on the wrong side of the law.

Friday, January 29, 2010 10:30 AM EST

"Batavia Drug Court has slowly incorporated a new aspect into its 10-year-old program, one that will officially be celebrated in March.

Batavia Mental Health Treatment Court, which has been in operation for about three months, will meet the needs of criminal defendants with mental health issues, said Nicole Desmond, Drug Court coordinator.

Drug Court has been helping people with mental health problems, beginning with two participants were referred to the program by officials at Batavia Veteran's Administration. The two graduated from Drug Court in October.

Drug Court began in 1999 and was solely for non-violent felony drug and alcohol offenders.

About 300 people have graduated from the program.

Desmond is planning a March 23 opening ceremony at Batavia City Court to honor those participating in the new aspect of Drug Court."

Thursday, January 28, 2010

24/7Alcohol Bracelets Helping to Keep Vets Sober and Accountable

Bienvenue sur mon blog
« Patent No. D604,192 Issued on Nov. 17, Ornamental Design for Identification Bracelet (Louisiana Inventors)
Patent No. D603,287 Issued on Nov. 3, for Silicone Bracelet (Maryland Inventor) »
24/7 Alcohol Bracelets Helping to Keep Veterans Sober and Accountable:Buffalo Veterans Court Tackling Alcohol Issues With Tough Monitoring, a Touch of Compassion
As the country prepares to honor its military veterans November 11th, the Buffalo Veterans Treatment Court is employing a high-tech tool to help keep their community's struggling military veterans sober tiffany and accountable.
The veterans program began using the technology, known as SCRAM (for Secure Continuous Remote Alcohol Monitor), in December of 2008 in order to help manage the epidemic rate of alcohol abuse and addiction among the combat veterans in their court. The system includes an ankle bracelet, worn 24/7, that actually samples an offender's perspiration every 30 minutes in order Paloma Picasso Loving Heart Pendant to measure for alcohol consumption and ensure compliance with court-ordered sobriety and treatment requirements.
The award-winning program was the first veteran-specific court in the country to deal with the unique needs of the ever-increasing number of combat veterans going through the criminal justice system. Under the direction of the Honorable Robert T. Russell, the court aims to link veterans coming through the city's criminal justice system with a full range of social services, including drug and alcohol treatment, mental health services, medical care, anger management, family counseling, vocation/educational services and housing. “Substance abuse, homelessness, unemployment, mental health problems–these issues are found in combination and in alarming numbers with our combat veterans,” says Russell. “Ensuring the sobriety of these offenders while we address their issues is essential for long-term success and for helping these men and women get their lives back on track, as well as community safety,” he adds.
The National Association of Drug Court Professionals (NADCP) has recently launched a Veterans Treatment Court Clearing House in response to the overwhelming interest in creating a veterans program from courts across the U.S. According to NADCP, there are now 13 Veterans Treatment Courts across the country, and with funding from the Veterans Administration, the number of programs is expected to increase substantially in 2010.
According to the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), 1.8 million combat veterans meet the criteria for having substance abuse issues. The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) reports that 35 percent of justice-involved veterans suffer from alcohol dependency, and the U.S. Department of Defense reports that the rate of veteran involvement in alcohol-related incidents,Paloma Picasso Loving Heart pendant including DUI, reckless driving and drunk and disorderly conduct, more than tripled between 2005 and 2006 alone. “This isn't about criminality,” says Mike Iiams, chairman and CEO of Denver-based Alcohol Monitoring Systems, which manufactures and markets SCRAM throughout the U.S. “This is about addiction. When these individuals drink, bad things happen, and this program is redefining the way our justice system can change the course of their lives,” says Iiams.
The Buffalo Drug and DUI courts have utilized the SCRAM System since 2007, monitoring more than 330 offenders to-date, and the Veterans Treatment Court began using the anklets in December of 2008. AMS donated 10 units to the Buffalo Veterans program in 2008, acknowledging what Iiams calls the “critical importance” of the ground-breaking program. Today, veterans monitored by SCRAM in the Buffalo program pay $6 per day for the monitoring fee, making the program self-sustaining.
SCRAM currently monitors just over 10,000 offenders daily and has monitored more than 115,000 offenders in 48 states since it became available in 2003. SCRAM is used to manage and monitor drunk drivers, drug and domestic violence offenders and underage drinkers. It's also utilized as a tool in family court, where the determination of custody may be dependent on a participant's sobriety.
About Alcohol Monitoring Systems, Inc.
Established in 1997, Alcohol Monitoring Systems, Inc. manufactures SCRAMA, the world's only Continuous Alcohol Monitoring system, which uses non-invasive transdermal analysis to monitor alcohol consumption. SCRAM fully automates the alcohol testing and reporting process, providing courts and community corrections agencies with the ability to continuously monitor alcohol offenders, increase offender accountability and assess compliance with sentencing requirements and treatment guidelines. Alcohol Monitoring Systems employs 108 people across the U.S. Tiffany 1837 pendant and is a privately-held company headquartered in Littleton, Colorado.
SOURCE Alcohol Monitoring Systems, Inc.
Cette entrée a été postée le Jeudi 28 janvier, 2010 à 9:01 dans la catégorie Non classé. Suivez les réponses grace au feed RSS 2.0. Vous pouvez répondre, ou faire un trackback depuis votre propre site.
google_protectAndRun("render_ads.js::google_render_ad", google_handleError, google_render_ad);
Poster une réponse
Nom (oblig.)
Email (ne sera pas publié) (oblig.)
Site webXHTML: You can use these tags:


Un Blog, des Blogs - Vous pouvez, vous aussi créer un blog ! Posts (RSS) et Commentaires (RSS).

Wednesday, January 27, 2010

Crime Statistics:DWI Court Shows Promise-Crime in

Executive Summary
In June 2007, the New York State Unified Court System launched hybrid DWI/drug courts in Erie and Niagara Counties to address the issue of persistent driving while intoxicated (DWI).
The courts, based on the proven drug court model, target nonviolent felony DWI offenders who have at least one prior DWI conviction and who are identified as having an alcohol abuse problem.
An earlier process evaluation describes the DWI court model, documenting court policies, implementation challenges, and participant characteristics (Washousky 2008). The current report evaluates the impact of the Erie and Niagara courts on re-arrest and case processing. Outcomes were compared between 90 DWI court participants and 259 similar defendants sentenced by judges in Erie and Niagara. Weighting techniques were implemented to adjust for baseline differences in current charges, prior criminal history, and key demographic characteristics (age, sex, and race). In addition, the report examines DWI court compliance and alcohol use outcomes among the participant sample.
Impacts on Recidivism
Consistent with previous research, overall re-arrest rates were low among both the DWI court participants and the comparison sample. Less than 1% of both samples had been re-arrested at three months post-sentence; slightly more comparison defendants than DWI court participants had been re-arrested at both six months (2% versus 4%) and one year (5% versus 8%) postsentence.
While not statistically significant, these results suggest a possible positive effect of the DWI court program. The results further suggest that DWI court participants may be slightly more likely to have a new DWI re-arrest at six months and one year; though again, these results do not reach statistical significance.
Survival analysis results reveal that the DWI court did not significantly impact the amount of crime-free time prior to a new arrest for DWI court participants. This is likely due, in part, to the low re-arrest rate among both DWI court participants and comparison defendants.
Impacts on Case Processing
Defendants in both the participant and comparison samples took over eight months on average to reach disposition. There was no difference in time to disposition between the two samples.
DWI Court Participant Outcomes
The majority (75%) of DWI court participants included in the evaluation were still actively enrolled in the program at the time of the analysis. Of those who were no longer active (23 defendants), the majority (83%) had successfully graduated. Only three defendants (13%) failed the program outright and were resentenced; an additional defendant (4%) entered the court and was then returned to standard case processing in response to noncompliance. Despite constant blood alcohol monitoring via an ankle monitor and frequent drug screening, very few DWI court participants tested positive for alcohol (3%) or drugs (7%). Nine percent of defendants tried to tamper with the screening device, which suggests an intent to ingest alcohol.
In total, only 14 defendants had ever re-used or participants were somewhat more likely to have a noncompliant incident (i.e., positive drug or alcohol screen, removal or blocking of the required monitoring anklet, or program failure); white defendants and those charged with “common law” DWI (VTL §1192.3) were less likely to have a noncompliant incident.
Over the limited time period covered by this evaluation, the Erie and Niagara hybrid DWI/drug courts did not significantly impact the probability, prevalence, or timing of re-arrest. However, while not statistically significant, slightly more comparison defendants than DWI court participants had been re-arrested at both six months and one year post-sentence, suggesting a possible positive effect of the DWI court program. Future research should examine court impact over a longer time period, including post-program time for DWI court participants.

Tuesday, January 26, 2010

Young Offenders Need Safeguards in Detention Centers

Tuesday, January 26, 2010
As the Department of Youth Rehabilitation Services has "struggled to manage the juvenile offender population and adequately staff the District's juvenile detention facilities" ["D.C. facility has surge in juvenile detainees," Metro, Jan. 21], dozens of nonviolent juveniles are put at risk of horrifying abuse every day.
D.C. officials fear that poor security could result in escapes. But poor security can lead to worse than that. It was poor security that was cited in a recent report by the Bureau of Justice Statistics as one of the main factors for the sexual assault of more than 12 percent of detained youths by staff and other inmates. In some facilities, the assault rate was as high as 30 percent.
We can't afford to warehouse kids in such conditions. Sexual abuse can leave lifelong psychological scars that make it harder for offenders to reintegrate into society. We must hold juveniles accountable, but we must also provide real opportunities for change in safe environments, including through alternatives to incarceration such as drug courts, substance-abuse programs and electronic monitoring. No juvenile offender deserves a sentence of sexual assault.
Kathryn Wiley, Round Hill
The writer is a researcher for the group Justice Fellowship.

Monday, January 25, 2010

HOPE program pilots strong probation methods for addicts without mandatory drug treatment:Grits for breakfast

Monday, January 25, 2010
HOPE program pilots strong probation methods for addicts without mandatory drug treatment

"Drug courts have been at the forefront of using strong probation methods in Texas and throughout the country, but evidence-based practices in community supervision are applicable to all sorts of crimes and don't necessarily involve drug treatment. So I was interested to read this discussion from Reuters distinguishing drug courts from the much-ballyhooed HOPE program out of Hawaii:

The first drug court was founded in the Miami area more than 20 years ago and there are now nearly 2,400 nationwide.

They focus on probationers "because if you use drugs for a long period of time, sooner or later you will more than likely end up in trouble with the law," RAND's Kilmer said.

A number of studies have shown that drug courts reduce crime in their area by up to 40 percent and cut rearrests and convictions by up to 26 percent. According to an April 2008 Urban Institute study, for every $1 spent on drug courts, $2.21 is saved through reduced police, hospital and other costs.

Treatment programs also cost about 50 percent less than incarceration, a fact that has apparently grabbed the attention of many cash-starved U.S. states.

"Quite frankly, we're in a very tough economy," Kerlikowske said. "That is spurring people to look at different solutions, especially ones that cost less than incarceration."

Domanick of John Jay College estimates 800,000 Americans a year are arrested for marijuana and said the situation has become unsustainable. "All of the data shows drug treatment works for people who are ready... if it works, you don't have to spend $50,000 to incarcerate people," he said.

Federal funding for drug courts was increased in the fiscal 2010 budget to $88.8 million from $63.8 million in 2009. West Huddleston, head of the National Association of Drug Court Professionals, said the group aims to use bipartisan support in Congress to seek $1 billion in federal funding over four years to expand drug courts because they only reach about 10 percent of people who need them.

Others like Mark A. R. Kleiman, a professor of public policy at UCLA, argue in favor of a new approach used in Hawaii, called Project Hope. Started by Judge Steven Alm, Hope uses swift punishment of a few nights in jail for those who fail drug tests and makes drug treatment voluntary -- in drug court, participation in treatment is mandatory.

Kleiman said the program had led to a 50 percent reduction in crime and a recidivism rate of 7 percent. "Drug courts are resource hogs," he said. "This system is much cheaper and more effective."

Critics of the program say without treatment for addiction, they doubt that drug addicts can go clean.

Drug Czar Kerlikowske said the Hope program would also be considered by the administration as part of the drug strategy it will make public in February.

For people like Chief Lamkin in St Charles, working with the drug court involves partnering closely with judges and defense attorneys to work out who has a chance of making it through the treatment program and who would be better off going to jail.

"But one thing is clear," he said. "If we locked up all the drug users we'd break the bank. It just isn't physically possible."

I tend to agree that not everyone convicted of drug possession needs mandatory treatment, and many (probably most) drug users who quit do so without treatment. But I know quite a few drug court judges (starting with John Creuzot up in Dallas) who would balk at the prospect of making treatment voluntary.

OTOH, Dr. Edward Latessa and others have argued for focusing treatment resources on only the most high-risk offenders, and that high treatment levels for low-risk offenders actually increase recidivism. That mitigates in favor of HOPE's approach. It's likely the majority of drug-possession defendants don't fit into the "high risk" category.

Latessa argues for use of screening and assessment tools to figure out where is that dividing line among drug users - who would benefit from mandatory treatment and who would not. At the HOPE program, though, the process is essentially self selective. Treatment is not initially required, but "repeat offenders are often ordered into residential treatment."

In any event, with all the attention paid recently to Hawaii's HOPE program, which has been touted as among the most promising strong-probation methodologies, I hadn't realized that key distinction compared to drug courts - the lack of mandatory treatment, at least on the front end. That probably represents better stewardship of scarce resources than a one-size-fits-all approach.

MORE: Thanks to Jake Horowitz for letting me know that the Pew Trusts' Public Safety Performance Project this month released a research brief (pdf) on the HOPE program based on an evaluation (pdf) funded by the National Institute of Justice that came out in December."
From Grits for Breakfast blog.

Sunday, January 24, 2010

Redmond O'Neal Ordered to Drug Court

April 30, 2009
Redmond, the son of Ryan O'Neal and Farrah Fawcett, ordered into Drug Court program which will consist of a rehabilitation program lasting for one year, or longer. This will include spending time in a treatment facility. Redmond will be required to do frequent drug testing, counseling, and a 12-step program.

Redmond faces up to four years in jail if he fails his Drug Court program. He will be required to report back to court in May for a progress report.

Redmond was arrested in September,2008 on a methamphetamine possession charge. At that time he was on probation for pleading guilty to a DUI charge in June 2008. He was required to participate in the Drug Court program due to these charges. He made a not guilty plea on yet a third drug-related charge in court yesterday. He will be required to stand before the court on May 22 for this offense.

Saturday, January 23, 2010

Drug Court-Dawn's Story

By Mary Meehan

"I messed up," reads the plea in careful, girlish script. "I used. I don't know why or what's wrong with me. ... I thought I didn't have a problem, that I could just quit. But I'm wrong. How can all those other people just quit? ... What if I can't get better? I don't want to be this way anymore. ... I want to be normal again."

Dawn Nicole Smith is desperate to get clean when writing this letter in May 2004, pleading with her Fayette County Drug Court caseworker, Elton Terry, for help.

She's praying that if she admits to taking drugs before a drug test shows she has, the judge will take pity and not send her to jail for a year. That's her sentence for stealing a prescription pad to obtain 540 pain pills in 53 days.

She's been using almost daily for two years. If too many hours pass without a pill, her body revolts. Her hands shake. Her insides cramp. Her head aches. Sitting up, tracking a conversation or watching television takes almost unfathomable energy and focus.

"It just feels like I'm fighting myself," she says. "My mind is tired. I've asked the Lord to help me not to do those pills no more."

She's tired because it's not just her life, but her family's, hanging in the balance. Dawn, 22, already has three sons, from her six-year marriage to Tony Smith. She's convinced herself she's shielded them from the worst of her addiction, one of the many lies she tells herself to get through the day. Tonio, 5, acts as if it's his job to make his mama better; David, 3, is an ever-watchful boy with a head of wild curls, and baby Kobe, 2, copes with the family chaos by careening between fits of anger and tears.

These dark-haired boys — her "heart," Dawn calls them — cling to her even when she's too high to feel the gentle rise of their chests as they nestle close in sleep.

She smiles a face-splitting grin, a rare instance of joy, at a mention of them. As she talks about them, she leans her head to the right, taking one strand of her long, dirty hair and twirling it around the inside of her ear, a calming tic she's had since she was a kid.

The drugs exaggerate in their lives the imperfect affection found in all families. But the children love her, as only kids can. And she loves them, as much as she is able.


Dawn's goals, even when she was a kid, were never ambitious. She thought, once, about becoming a veterinarian, but she never finished high school. Now she longs for much more basic things: a house with the heat on, food for her kids, 24 hours without taking a pill.

Growing up in Crab Orchard and Lexington, she saw others turn to alcohol, then crack and sometimes pills. Even as Dawn begins drug court, her stepfather, Larry Raines, is on probation for forging a prescription for the painkiller Percocet in the name of Brenda Raines, his wife and Dawn's mom. Brenda is on probation for writing bad checks to support a crack habit that, she says, once cost her $1,000 in a day. Dawn says she doesn't know anyone who has, long-term, quit using drugs or alcohol.

Dawn was wild in middle school. For running with a fast crowd and drinking, she was sent away to a group home.

The drugs started after her babies were born.

She was dragging, exhausted from working, taking care of the boys and worrying about paying the rent and having food in the house. Someone she worked with at McDonald's said she had something that could help. Dawn waited until she got home to take that first oblong pain pill — a Lortab. As she sat on the couch in the dark with a battered old television on, a hazy sense of peace settled into her bones.

It was like a missing piece of herself slipped into place.

"It just made me feel sooooooo relaxed," she says, smiling at the memory, even after all the trouble that pill set into motion. "It's like people do crack, that one hit gets them. That one pill got me."

The warm release was followed by a burst of energy. She felt like she could actually do things better, take care of the kids, clean the house. "Weird and wonderful," Dawn says, dreamily, of that first time. "Weird and wonderful."

*Note: to read the rest of Dawn's story, and view the video's, click on the title link.

Friday, January 22, 2010

Four People Complete Drug Court Program in Emotional Ceremony

Posted: 01/14/2010 09:28:31 PM PST

Sometimes the road to victory is rough, but as four Butte County residents testified Thursday, one can definitely make it.
Those victors were two men and two women who made the long, stringent journey through the county's drug court program to a graduation ceremony at the courthouse in Oroville.

It was an emotional afternoon, not only for the graduates and current drug court clients, but for friends, families and drug court officials, including Superior Court Judge Sandra L. McLean.

Before the ceremony, excited Chicoan Troy Woodrow was anxious to get started.

"I feel great," Woodrow said. "I'm excited to get on with the rest of my life. It took this program to change my life, but now that I'm through it, I'm ready to get on with the rest of my life."

Drug Court is an 18-month program, but it took Woodrow 26 months to complete it. During the graduation, he told the audience that in the beginning, he didn't think he would make it.

"At one point, early on, I made a decision to change everything and do everything asked of me by drug court to be successful," he said.

Woodrow said he began taking one day at a time. Those days turned into months and eventual success. He advised those still in the program to do what they're asked.

What got him into the program was possession of methamphetamine. He has turned his life around, is employed and has a good relationship with his 17-year-old son.

During the ceremony, graduate Jill Hoxby fought tears



as she received her diploma and listened to comments from probation counselor Roberta Powell.
Powell spoke of Hoxby's remarkable change from being like a hermit to becoming a beautiful woman who now chases after her life.

When given a copy of her initial jail booking photo, Hoxby exclaimed the picture was awful and that she's a new person.

"When I came into drug court, I had given up on me," said Hoxby. Referring to public defender Steve Trenholm, who was missing due to a recent accident, she continued, "Steve said he saw something in me that I didn't know I had. Drug court and God show me there's another way."

Quiet and subdued, graduate Kristina Moon shared few words during the ceremony, but she urged others working through the program to be honest.

"If you're honest, they'll help you get through anything, no matter how bad it is," Moon said.

Throughout the ceremony, McLean congratulated each graduate in a unique way, and happily granted an end to their participation in drug court. At times her eyes glistened with tears.

After the ceremony, graduate Nolan Zink beamed excitedly. Inside the courtroom, about a dozen family members and friends had cheered and applauded his long road to victory. It took him three years and two months, but he made it.

Zink said he began using drugs in college, and use quickly became a lifestyle. Then he had a motorcycle accident in 2003 and couldn't walk. His addiction coupled with depression, and he "went south," he said.

For him, the turnaround was after he got into a faith-based recovery program for a year.

"I never had any faith before that, but I began to see people around me who had hope and joy, so I followed their lead."

Zink said he felt great.

"I know that with the goals I set for myself, the world is at my hands now," Zink said. "I have the choice not to go back."

Dan Nelson of the District Attorney's Office said officials in the program are pleased to see the progress the four individuals made.

"They're reconnecting with their families, becoming productive, and getting jobs," Nelson said. "They've become people I would be glad to recommend for employment."

The journey included intensive meetings with Behavioral Health counselors, probation and drug testing, monthly reviews and attendance at self-help meetings.

There were words of advice in a message from Trenholm read by a probation official. He advised them to stay away from people and places where there is drinking and/or drugs. He also reminded them they're not alone, and can get help if they need it in the future.

"We are here," Trenholm stated. "Don't try to do recovery by yourself."

Staff writer Barbara Arrigoni can be reached at 533-3136 or

Thursday, January 21, 2010

Addiction is a Disease-Marietta

Matthew Fourman, died Jan. 1 after a long battle with opiate addiction. Fourman’s battle with drugs helped shed light on the problem in Washington County, but it continues to be an issue and resources to help with addiction have been decreasing.
At age 17, Matthew Fourman was popular, living in Devola with his family, attending Marietta High School with plans to go to The Ohio State University.

On New Year's Day, at age 32, Fourman died in a Columbus recovery house after a 15-year battle with opiate addiction.

Between 2001 and 2009, at least 47 Washington County residents have died as a result of drug abuse. Hundreds more have suffered near-fatal overdoses.

For Matt, addiction began late in his high school career after he was prescribed a painkiller for a knee injury incurred while running track.

The disease of addiction took hold and although Matt continued to battle, often publicly, he could never break free from drugs.

"When you are the parent of an addict, you know this could happen, but nothing ever prepares you for the day when the sheriff comes to your door," said the man's mother, Rosie Fourman, of Devola.

During his battle with addiction, Matt also fought to bring change to the local community by participating in a community drug study, calling for increased treatment options, including a recovery house, and allowing himself to be interviewed for a series of articles in The Marietta Times about his struggles with addiction.

Matt's story and his efforts with various recovery groups helped shed light on a serious drug problem affecting many people in the area.

But many of the things Matt and others championed are now gone.

Within the past few years, funding cuts have caused Washington County to lose chemical dependency treatment services at Marietta Memorial Hospital and the county's drug court programs have stopped operating.

"Matt was a kid who had everything going for him and every opportunity available. ... Where are families and addicts going to turn tomorrow when they need help?" Rosie Fourman asked.

Cathy Harper, local program director of The Right Path, said it is hard knowing the local addiction problem hasn't improved, but watching treatment services disappear.

"Addiction is a disease, just like cancer is a disease," she said. "People would be up in arms if there was ever talk about getting rid of cancer treatment options in the area."

The drug court allowed judges to consider treatment for non-violent offenders with substance abuse problems. Most offenders who may have qualified for the program now are sentenced to jail or placed on probation.

The program was operated by Washington County Common Pleas Court and was funded by a three-year, $450,000 federal grant, which expired and could not be renewed.

Last fall, Marietta Memorial Hospital closed its mental health and chemical dependency units, saying they were losing an estimated $500,000 annually.

The loss of a drug court and mental health and addiction services has not only limited options for judges, it also put more pressure on the Washington County Jail. Sheriff's officials have estimated that when the 124-bed facility is full, more than 90 percent of the inmates are there on drug-related charges.

"There is certainly a need for chemical dependency centers," Washington County Sheriff Larry Mincks said. "We have been hurt by the loss of those services. Actually, we've also been hurt by the loss of mental health services. Chemical dependency and mental health problems often go hand-in-hand."

When the county began the drug court program, there was nearly $70 million available in federal funds to help get courts launched and maintained. Last year, there was less than $4 million available, and most of it was earmarked for communities with high crystal meth problems."