Juvenile Drug Court Research Articles

System-level effects of integrating a promising treatment into juvenile drug courts

This study examined the system-level effects of implementing a promising treatment for adolescent substance abuse in juvenile drug courts (JDCs). Six JDCs were randomized to receive training in the experimental intervention (contingency management–family engagement [CM-FAM]) or to continue their usual services (US). Participants were 104 families served by the courts, 51 therapists, and 74 JDC stakeholders (e.g., judges, prosecutors, defense attorneys). Assessments included repeated measurements of CM-FAM implementation by therapists and therapist and stakeholder perceptions of incentive-based interventions and organizational characteristics. Results revealed greater use of CM and family engagement techniques among CM-FAM relative to US therapists. In addition, therapists and stakeholders in the CM-FAM condition reported more favorable attitudes toward the use of incentives and greater improvement on several domains of organizational functioning relative to US counterparts. Taken together, these findings suggest that JDC professionals are amenable to the adoption and implementation of a treatment model that holds promise for improving youth outcomes.

A Systematic Observational Study of a Juvenile Drug Court Judge

ABSTRACTThe shift of the juvenile justice system from its initial rehabilitative ideal toward a more punitive orientation highlights the need to systematically document key elements of the juvenile drug court model. In particular, it is important to clearly document the role of the juvenile court judge because he or she is considered vital to this program model. The current study used participant observation as well as confidential questionnaires on which youth shared their perceptions of the judge. Findings show the judge‐participant interactions typically were brief, varied by the participants' level of compliance with the program, and that sanctions were given twice as often as rewards. Youth perceived the judge to be fair, respectful, and concerned about their lives. Discussion focuses on the significant opportunity that juvenile drug court judges have for positively influencing the lives of drug‐involved youth.

Exploring the implementation of justice-based alcohol and drug intervention strategies with juvenile offenders: Reclaiming Futures, enhanced adolescent substance abuse treatment, and juvenile drug courts

There is a need for practice models to match young people in the juvenile justice system with timely and effective alcohol and drug intervention services. This paper reports on a new demonstration effort in which three practice approaches currently operating in the United States are being combined to maximize the potential of each. This public–private partnership combines juvenile drug courts (funded by the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention), adolescent treatment improvement efforts (funded by the Center for Substance Abuse Treatment) and the Reclaiming Futures initiative (funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation). Benefits of combining the three strategies are discussed, emergent implementation challenges and lessons are presented, and suggestions for further evolution are provided.

The Role of Family Affect in Juvenile Drug Court Offenders’ Substance Use and HIV Risk

Family-based interventions targeting parenting factors, such as parental monitoring and parent-child communication, have been successful in reducing adolescent offenders' substance use and delinquency. This pilot, exploratory study focuses on family and parenting factors that may be relevant in reducing juvenile offenders' substance use and sexual risk taking behavior, and in particular examines the role of family emotional involvement and responsiveness in young offenders' risk-taking behaviors. Participants included 53 juvenile drug court offenders and their parents. Results indicate that poor parent-child communication is associated with marijuana use and unprotected sexual activity for young offenders; however, family affective responsiveness is also a significant unique predictor of unprotected sexual activity for these youth. Findings suggest that interventions focused on improving parent-child communication may reduce both marijuana use and risky sexual behavior among court-involved youth, but a specific intervention focused on improving parents and young offenders' ability to connect with and respond to one another emotionally may provide a novel means of reducing unprotected sexual risk behaviors.

HIV Prevention for Juvenile Drug Court Offenders: A Randomized Controlled Trial Focusing on Affect Management

Juvenile drug court (JDC) offenders have benefited from evidence-based interventions addressing antisocial behavior, mental health, and substance use; however, interventions addressing HIV risk behavior are lacking. This study presents pilot findings and lessons learned from a group-based HIV prevention intervention delivered to JDC offenders. Participants were randomized to a five-session HIV prevention (n = 29) or health promotion (n = 28) condition and completed measures of sexual risk taking and substance use at baseline and 3 months postintervention. No between-group differences by time emerged on measures of sexual risk taking or other HIV-related behaviors and attitudes. Both groups improved their rates of HIV testing and decreased their substance use during sex over time. Delivering an HIV prevention intervention to drug court offenders is feasible; however, more intensive interventions that incorporate multiple systems and address co-occurring mental health difficulties may be needed to effect sexual behavioral change among these high-risk court-involved youth.

Does Completion of Juvenile Drug Court Deter Adult Criminality?

Juvenile drug courts have been developed with the explicit mission of reducing juvenile substance use and related delinquency, and adult crime. Research has shown that juvenile drug courts continue to be popular and effective alternatives to other juvenile court initiatives in terms of decreasing juvenile recidivism. This study is the first to focus on the link between juvenile drug court participation and conviction for adult crime. The juvenile records of 79 former juvenile drug court participants in Tennessee were compared with their adult criminal convictions. Our findings indicate that graduating from juvenile drug court reduced adult felonies, but not misdemeanors, Racial differences between Whites and non-Whites were noted.

Predicting nonresponse to juvenile drug court interventions

Using data from a recent randomized clinical trial involving juvenile drug court (JDC), youth marijuana use trajectories and the predictors of treatment nonresponse were examined. Participants were 118 juvenile offenders meeting diagnostic criteria for substance use disorders assigned to JDC and their families. Urine drug screen results were gathered from weekly court visits for 6 months, and youth reported their marijuana use over 12 months. Semiparametric mixture modeling jointly estimated and classified trajectories of both marijuana use indices. Youth were classified into responder versus nonresponder trajectory groups based on both outcomes. Regression analyses examined pretreatment individual, family, and extrafamilial predictors of nonresponse. Results indicated that youth whose caregivers reported illegal drug use pretreatment were almost 10 times as likely to be classified into the nonresponder trajectory group. No other variable significantly distinguished drug use trajectory groups. Findings have implications for the design of interventions to improve JDC outcomes.

Managing and Sustaining Your Juvenile Drug Court

ABSTRACTSince the introduction and subsequent growth of the juvenile drug court movement in the mid‐1990s, practitioners have struggled to fully implement the Juvenile Drug Courts: Strategies in Practice. This struggle may lead to weaker outcomes for youth and a dysfunctional team atmosphere.Originally written as a two‐part technical assistance brief, this article will guide readers through the Juvenile Drug Court Development Cycle in order to help re‐direct practitioners to a more “back‐to‐basics” approach that focuses on collaboration, team dynamics, and decision making.

Latino Youth in the Juvenile Drug Court of Orange County, California

This study examines the factors associated with successful completion of the Orange County Juvenile Drug Court (OCJDC) for 232 (164 male and 68 female) adolescents between the ages of 12 and 17 years. No significant associations were found between graduation status and participants’ age, most serious prior offense, entry offense, primary drug of choice, or secondary drug of choice. While bivariate analyses revealed that Latino ethnicity (especially for females whose parents’ primary language was Spanish) and a lack of family involvement in the drug court programs were both negatively associated with successful program completion, these variables were not significantly associated with the likelihood of graduation in logistic regression models predictive of successful program completion. Rather, a shorter history of substance abuse, a history of prior juvenile offenses, and the presence of co-occurring psychiatric disorders all predicted poor completion rates from the OCJDC program, regardless of gender, ethnicity, or levels of family participation. Implications for policy and practices are discussed.

Identifying Leading Characteristics Associated with Juvenile Drug Court Admission and Success

Since first appearing in the late 1980s, drug courts have quickly become one of the leading intervention strategies for offenders exhibiting problems with drug abuse. Popular with policy makers for their innovative approach to breaking the drugs-crime nexus, drug courts are now considered one of the hallmarks of both the adult and juvenile justice systems of corrections. Empirical research has indicated that drug courts are one of the most promising contemporary correctional strategies in reducing recidivism among substance abusing offenders. This study examined a juvenile drug court in an effort to answer some recent research questions that have been proffered by empiricists. Results suggested that clients with a history of mental health problems had greater odds of being admitted to the drug court. No client characteristics, however, were predictive of client success in the drug court. Policy implications are also considered.

A Juvenile Drug Court Model in Southern Arizona: Substance Abuse, Delinquency, and Sexual Risk Outcomes by Gender and Race/Ethnicity

Alcohol and drug use related crimes continue to be processed in juvenile courts at high rates. One approach for addressing substance related issues has been the implementation of juvenile drug courts. Juvenile drug courts were established given the wide-spread success of adult drug courts. However, juvenile drug courts require different components as compared to adult models. This article provides a description of a juvenile drug court in Southern Arizona and examines treatment outcomes by gender and race/ethnicity. Youth participating in the drug court evidenced positive changes in substance related issues, delinquency and juvenile justice involvement, and sexual risk behaviors. Differential effects were evidenced between boys and girls and white and non-white youth. The authors discuss the main findings and offer areas for additional research.

Drug Abuse by Adolescents: General Considerations

1. Ximena Sanchez-Samper, MD* 2. John R. Knight, MD* 1. *Center for Adolescent Substance Abuse Research, Children's Hospital Boston, Boston, Mass After completing this article, readers should be able to: 1. Discuss current trends in adolescent substance use and the specific substances used most commonly among 8th, 10th, and 12th graders. 2. Identify risk and protective factors, including genetic and environmental correlates, for the initiation of substance use in adolescents. 3. Discuss the most common concomitant mental health disorders and how they can affect the course of diagnosis and treatment for substance abuse. 4. Delineate the variety of treatment options available. 5. Describe the role of the pediatrician in educating patients and families on substance abuse prevention; performing screening and initial assessments; and providing support, brief counseling, or referrals for in-depth treatment. Adolescence is a time of physical, emotional, and psychological maturation as well as a period of searching for independence and experimentation. One area of experimentation associated with adolescence is substance use. (1) Although many adolescents experiment with drugs and alcohol from time to time without enduring problems, those who develop the disorders of substance abuse and dependence make substance use a major public health concern. The Monitoring the Future Study (MTFS) is a nationwide survey measuring smoking, drinking, and illicit drug use among nearly 50,000 8th, 10th, and 12th graders in more than 400 secondary schools in the United States each year. (2)(3) According to the 2006 overview of findings from the MTFS, approximately one fifth (21%) of today's 8th graders, more than one third (36%) of 10th graders, and nearly half (48%) of all 12th graders reported using an illicit drug at least once during their lifetimes. Despite a minimum legal age requirement to purchase alcohol, 6% of 8th graders, 19% of the 10th graders, and 30% of the 12th graders self-reported drunkenness during the month prior to being interviewed. (2)(3) Among the problems experienced by adolescents who use alcohol and drugs are …

Maybe He's Depressed: Mental Illness as a Mitigating Factor for Drug Offender Accountability

Given the often perplexing relationship between mental illness and substance abuse among offenders, this article looks at how a juvenile drug court staff's presumptions of a youth's mental illness affect its decision‐making process. Based on thirteen months of ethnographic fieldwork at a Southern California juvenile drug court, this article uses Manzo and Travers's “law in action” approach to analyze how the staff readjusts its application of normal remedies (a concept developed by Robert Emerson) designed to respond to a youth's noncompliance when it suspects mental illness may be influencing the youth's actions. In doing so, it highlights how court staff's considerations of youth mental disorders arise out of its everyday work practices. Furthermore, the article discusses how staff negotiations around a youth's mental illness create tensions for the juvenile drug court's accountability‐based model of therapeutic jurisprudence, because assessments of mental illness tend to mitigate responsibility for a youth's behavior.

A Multisite Description of Juvenile Drug Courts

Like adult drug courts, juvenile drug courts have proliferated at a rapid rate during the past 15 years, but comparatively little research has been conducted on them. Although a few studies indicate that these programs appear to show promise as an intervention, almost nothing has been published using systematic and empirical methods to provide a description and specific examples of how these programs are structured and implemented. The purpose of the current study, therefore, is to summarize and integrate findings from systematic process evaluations of three juvenile drug courts. Similarities and differences in the structure and design of the programs are noted and findings regarding the program model for each juvenile drug court, including target population, therapeutic activities, and initial and long-term goals are presented. During-program outcome data also are presented, and findings are reported as a "snapshot" of what happened during one calendar year in the operation of each program.

Treating the Tough Cases in Juvenile Drug Court

Drug Courts are a fundamental change to trial courts. They are considered less adversarial and may alter past notions of treatment for offenders. One goal of drug courts is to provide defendants the opportunity to alter their drug-addicted lifestyles through intense supervision, feedback, treatment, and graduated sanctions and rewards for behavior. This study uses logistic regression to examine measures of failure such as termination from drug court and two measures of offender recidivism. Although the literature on drug courts has been developing for several years, the reality is that universal templates for explanation do not yet exist in the juvenile arena. This paper examines correlates that explain the above measures of failure. The study also proposes the creation of new measures that may assist future research. Findings indicate that participant experiences within the drug court program are the strongest predictors of termination and recidivism.

Juvenile Drug Court Program Admission, Demeanor and Cherry-Picking: A Research Note

The influence of demeanor in criminal justice research has predominantly centered on arrest and sanctioning outcomes. This study examines demeanor at the juncture of juvenile drug court admission by attributing behavior perceived to be favorable or unfavorable to program compliance and success to either juveniles or their parents/guardians. Analysis of 76 juvenile drug court case files enabled examination of how parent and child demeanor impacts specialty court admission. Findings suggest that program admittance (i.e., system leniency through diversion) is largely a function of projected attitude and behavior during screening interviews, but selection decisions are made irrespective of demeanor source. Implications of the findings for drug court processes and continued system involvement are discussed.

Sibling Outcomes from a Randomized Trial of Evidence-Based Treatments with Substance Abusing Juvenile Offenders

ABSTRACT This study examined the substance use and delinquency outcomes for the nearest age siblings of substance abusing and delinquent adolescents that participated in a randomized clinical trial evaluating the effectiveness of integrating evidence-based practices into juvenile drug court. The sample of 70 siblings averaged 14.4 years of age, 50% were male, 71% were African-American, and 27% were white. Measures of sibling substance use and delinquency were collected at four points in time (i.e., pretreatment, 4 months, 12 months, 18 months). Multilevel Longitudinal Models were used to evaluate whether changes in sibling substance use and delinquency paralleled the treatment effects observed for their substance abusing delinquent brothers and sisters in the juvenile drug court study. Parallel sibling outcomes were obtained for substance use but not for criminal behavior, and possible reasons for the divergence in these results were discussed. The findings add meaningfully to the literature on the effects of evidence- and family-based treatments on siblings.

Combining Drug Court with Adolescent Residential Treatment: Lessons from Juvenile and Adult Programs

ABSTRACT Drug courts have been recognized and empirically supported as an effective means of reducing recidivism and use of substances for both juveniles and adults. The paper reports the results of an outcome evaluation of a juvenile drug court in the Upper Cumberland area of Middle Tennessee. As with previous studies, the program showed impressive outcomes for many juveniles. Improvements, however, may be possible. Adding a residential component similar to the one for adults currently operated by the Davidson County Drug Court might enhance program retention, provide housing opportunities during treatment for neglected and abused youth, and offer opportunities for more regular and intensive supervision of specific juveniles. Such programs would likely be both practical and fundable, and should be considered by courts and treatment providers.

Estimating the Differential Costs of Criminal Activity for Juvenile Drug Court Participants: Challenges and Recommendations

Juvenile drug court (JDC) programs have expanded rapidly over the past 20 years and are an increasingly popular option for rehabilitating juvenile offenders with substance use problems. Given the high cost of crime to society, an important economic question is whether and to what extent JDC programs reduce criminal activity among juvenile offenders. To address this question, the present study added an economic cost analysis to an ongoing randomized trial of JDC conducted in Charleston, South Carolina. Four treatment conditions were included in the parent study: Family Court with usual community-based treatment (FC, the comparison group), Drug Court with usual community-based treatment (DC), DC with Multisystemic Therapy (DC/MST), and DC/MST enhanced with Contingency Management (DC/MST/CM). The economic study estimated the cost of criminal activity for nine specific crimes at baseline (pretreatment) and 4 and 12 months thereafter. A number of methodological challenges were encountered, suggesting that it may be more difficult to economically quantify frequency and type of criminal activity for adolescents than for adults. The present paper addresses methodological approaches and challenges, and proposes guidelines for future economic evaluations of adolescent substance abuse and crime prevention programs.

US Public Health Agency Involvement in Youth-Focused Illicit Drug Policy, Planning, and Prevention at the Local Level, 1999–2003

We examined local public health agencies' involvement in community illicit drug policy advocacy and provision related to youths to determine the extent to which public health agencies were involved in local drug policy activities and could potentially provide an infrastructure for policy alternatives. We conducted telephone interviews from 1999 to 2003 with 1793 US public health agencies in 804 communities surrounding schools participating in the Monitoring the Future study. Respondents reported public health agency planning, priorities, and involvement in alternative drug policy advocacy and prevention activities. We examined results for variance by site sociodemographic characteristics. Most students lived where public health agencies provided resources for community- and school-based drug use prevention. More than one third resided where public health agencies advocated for drug policy alternatives and more than one quarter where public health agencies were involved in juvenile drug court programs. Such activities were significantly higher in urban communities, in the West, and in sites where the proportion of African Americans was above the national average. Although local public health agencies could increase participation levels in drug policy alternatives, current involvement suggests that agencies may provide a base for supporting the development of public health alternatives to deterrence-based drug policies. Such a base may be more likely in communities with the highest need for such policies and services.