As we know today the war on drugs have failed, not only are nonviolent drug offenders risking their lives in prison, their causing corrections facilitates to be overcrowded and underfunded. It would seem that there should be other options rather than just sending nonviolent drug offenders to prison. “There is no evidence that imprisonment reduces the likelihood of recidivism. Instead, we find compelling evidence that offenders who are sentenced to prison have higher rates of recidivism and recidivate more quickly than do offenders placed on probation.” (Spohn, C., & Holleran, D, 2002) There is one option thou, Drug treatment court. With drug court you get the treatment you need to battle the addiction. Although it may sound like a good thing
…show more content…
They also defined regular courts as todays legal system where prison and probation are the final outcome not therapeutic justice.
This source was in favour that drug treatment court is more effective than regular court. This source brought many facts from the state of Maryland and the USA about the benifits that drug treatment programs have had on many peoples lives compared to if prisons would of played a role.
This source concluded by stating that therapeutic justice methods like drug treatment court is much more effective and cost effective than regular …show more content…
“(Peters
While peters gives information about rearrest rates he also shares the employment rates after arrest for graduates and non graduates. “43% of graduates had full time employment,” while only 17% of non graduates had full time employment. Just like my previous source says drug treatment-based programs are more effective than our traditional court system in many ways.
Peters describes drug treatment court as a therapeutic justice method that has beneficial effects for graduates. Not just throwing them in jail, but actually helping them battle the cause of the crime the addiction.
Peters provides us with useful insight in the comparison of non graduates to graduates of the program. For example the re arrest rate or the employment rate while comparing the
They also defined regular courts as todays legal system where prison and probation are the final outcome not therapeutic justice.
This source was in favour that drug treatment court is more effective than regular court. This source brought many facts from the state of Maryland and the USA about the benifits that drug treatment programs have had on many peoples lives compared to if prisons would of played a role.
This source concluded by stating that therapeutic justice methods like drug treatment court is much more effective and cost effective than regular …show more content…
“(Peters
While peters gives information about rearrest rates he also shares the employment rates after arrest for graduates and non graduates. “43% of graduates had full time employment,” while only 17% of non graduates had full time employment. Just like my previous source says drug treatment-based programs are more effective than our traditional court system in many ways.
Peters describes drug treatment court as a therapeutic justice method that has beneficial effects for graduates. Not just throwing them in jail, but actually helping them battle the cause of the crime the addiction.
Peters provides us with useful insight in the comparison of non graduates to graduates of the program. For example the re arrest rate or the employment rate while comparing the