Foley 1

Julia Foley Prof. Paul Anderson English 1010 Research Journal December 4, 2013 Source # 1 Part A. Bibliographical Information Genre: Behavioral Health Author: William D. McColl, Esq., and Opio Sokoni, Esq. Article Title: Treatment instead of Incarceration. Journal/Publication it appeared in: Behavioral Health Management Authors Purpose (s): They are saying that the initiative approach has advantages over the use of drug courts and discussing treatment vs. incarceration. Authors Intended Audience: managers and clinicians in the mental health and substance abuse fields. Part B. Authors Ideas/Arguments Authors main claim (thesis): The approach to treatment vs. incarceration should be run less by judges and more by state initiative and legislative processes and that the two approaches can be used together. Supporting Arguments (you should identify each one and number them): Unlike drug court the initiative approach has judges taking a much less active role in the treatment and wouldnt be as selective which would create eligibility for a much larger class of defendants. In both California and Arizona both approaches are used and even work together. Treatment can be as little as 10% of the cost of incarceration Treatment should be made more available.

Foley 2

Changed policies in Arizona diverted 2600 non-violent offenders into drug treatment in its first year, saving Arizona taxpayers $2.6 Million. Then in its second year it saved taxpayers more than $6 million in prison costs.

What arguments/ideas did you agree with and what ones did you disagree with? I agree with the argument that treatment be made more available and that drug courts are not able to treat as many defendants would the initiative approach where the state and communities are more involved and more treatment in created. I also agree that the two approaches can be used together instead of against each other. With the policies in Arizona and California showing how much of taxpayers money is saved by these initiatives it is clear that this approach is able to work. Alternatively, what arguments/ideas triggered a response in you as you read them? (They could be ideas you know a lot about, or know very little and would like to pursue): It made me curious to as what the different state policies are, especially the state we live in, Utah and what needs to be done to change it for more options to receive treatment to nonviolent offenders. This article was also written 10 years ago so I am curious as to what has been done since this was written. Part C. Your reflections: 1. What did you learn from this article? I learned about the initiative approach and how it differs from the drug court approach. 2. What value does it have for your topic/issue/problem? It shows me one way that organizations such as the Drug Policy Alliance are working towards changing the sentencing policies and options to treat offenders rather than to incarcerate mandatory sentences. 3. What is missing from the article that you want to consider? (The article may have answered some of your questions but not others): It doesnt answer what exactly needs to be done and I also need to know what has been done since this time frame. 4. Where you go from here (what do you still need to or want to)? I plan on looking onto the Drug Policy Alliance website and finding where it has gone on these issues since this article was written in 2003. 5. This should now lead to your next source (beginning with your search using [perhaps different] key words, or adding another key word or words, a list of possible titles, a narrowing of these into several, reading their abstracts and skimming the full text). What [next] source did this lead you to? Source # 2: Alcoholism & Drug Abuse Weekly

Foley 3

Part A. Bibliographical Information Genre: Behavioral Healthcare Author: Unknown Article Title: ONDCP stresses importance of treatment, not incarceration. Journal/Publication it appeared in: Alcoholism and Drug Abuse Weekly Authors Purpose (s): To stress that out of the 7 million individuals in the US currently under some form of criminal justice supervision, 5 million could benefit from treatment for addiction yet only 76% are receiving that treatment. Authors Intended Audience: Alcoholism and drug abuse professionals. Part B. Authors Ideas/Arguments Authors main claim (thesis): We cannot arrest our way out of our nations drug problem. Supporting Arguments (you should identify each one and number them): Obama administrations new public health approach to substance abuse is threepronged 1. Addiction is a disease that can be treated 2. People can recover, and 3. New interventions are needed Scientific assertions by the ONDCP are that drug addiction affects judgment, reasoning and changes the brains chemistry. Research shows that outcomes for people who are mandated to treatment are as good as those who enter treatment voluntarily Evidence that drug courts, by offering offenders the alternative of communitybased treatment instead of incarceration are promising in reducing criminal behavior and substance abuse. Research also shows that treating addiction requires addressing underlying issues and causes. Forced abstinence through detention in prisons or jails is not a substitute for treatment. Baltimore study found that giving methadone to prisoners before their release and continuing access to methadone after their release resulted in treatment engagement, a 40-percent decrease in drug use, and a 15-percent decrease in criminal activity six months after release. What arguments/ideas did you agree with and what ones did you disagree with? I agree with pretty much everything the author is saying other than the approval of using methadone as a treatment. I believe that methadone is also abuse of a drug and it is proven to be highly addictive and can get addicts high.

Foley 4

Alternatively, what arguments/ideas triggered a response in you as you read them? (They could be ideas you know a lot about, or know very little and would like to pursue): This triggered me into looking more into more into drug court as treatment instead of incarceration. The expense of this compared to incarceration and the success rate.

Part C. Your reflections: 1. What did you learn from this article? I learned about Obamas administrations health approach to substance abuse. I learned that research shows that outcomes for people who are mandated to treatment are as good as those who enter treatment voluntarily which I think are a pretty big deal.

2. What value does it have for your topic/issue/problem? It talks about the alternative to prison and how prison isnt effective in actually treating addiction but just causing the addict to abstain from it. 3. What is missing from the article that you want to consider? (The article may have answered some of your questions but not others): I feel it answered most of my questions regarding this topic. 4. Where you go from here (what do you still need to or want to)? To look into how effective drug courts are and what it saves in cost compared to incarceration. 5. This should now lead to your next source (beginning with your search using [perhaps different] key words, or adding another key word or words, a list of possible titles, a narrowing of these into several, reading their abstracts and skimming the full text). What [next] source did this lead you to?

Understanding Success and Nonsuccess in the Drug Court

Source # 3 Part A. Bibliographical Information Genre: Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology Author: Andrew Fulkerson, Linda D. Keena, and Erin OBrien Article Title: Understanding Success and Nonsuccess in Drug Court. Journal/Publication it appeared in: International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology

Foley 5

Authors Purpose (s): This article is a qualitative study of drug court participants in an Arkansas drug court program and to compare and contrast the perceptions of those graduated from the program with those who were terminated from the program. Authors Intended Audience: Therapists, counselors, researchers, forensic psychologists and psychiatrists, criminologists and policy makers. Part B. Authors Ideas/Arguments Authors main claim (thesis): The article is a qualitative research study that focuses on the success and non-success of Drug Court. Supporting Arguments (you should identify each one and number them): Studies have consistently shown that the drug court program is effective in reducing recidivism for those persons who complete the rigorous program. Drug courts operate with the treatment coerced by threats of sanctions. Majority of drug participants stated that they entered the drug court program on advice of counsel. More than half the non-completers but less than one fifth of the graduates stated that the goal of this recommendation was to give the person a chance to avoid prison, while more than half of the graduates said their attorney suggested it based on the treatment they would receive for their addictions Almost three fourths of the participants stated that the schedule was too demanding and made it difficult to maintain employment. Most participants, even a majority of the non-completers stated that the drug court program allowed them repair relationships with family, significant others, and the community.

What arguments/ideas did you agree with and what ones did you disagree with? I agree that drug court program is effective in reducing recidivism. I believe that many participants enter into drug court solely to stay out of prison but believe many after put into treatment benefit from it.

Alternatively, what arguments/ideas triggered a response in you as you read them? (They could be ideas you know a lot about, or know very little and would like to pursue): It made me curious to the opposing view of drug courts and what issues other may have with drug courts.

Foley 6

Part C. Your reflections: 1. What did you learn from this article? I learned a lot from this study. It was informative on how drug court has affected a certain group of people and it was interesting on the data the authors collected regarding how effective it was. 2. What value does it have for your topic/issue/problem? It is valuable information to learn about alternatives to incarceration. 3. What is missing from the article that you want to consider? (The article may have answered some of your questions but not others): This study was done with a very small group of people. I would like to know more about the other side of drug courts and also maybe other options besides drug courts. For example drug court is only offered once you committed and gotten caught for the crime. I am curious on ways to get more community based programs offered so hopefully addicts dont necessarily need to be arrested and put in the system but treated for addiction before that can occur. 4. Where you go from here (what do you still need to or want to)? I am looking into the opposing view of drug court and people who may be against it and the reasons why. 5. This should now lead to your next source (beginning with your search using [perhaps different] key words, or adding another key word or words, a list of possible titles, a narrowing of these into several, reading their abstracts and skimming the full text). What [next] source did this lead you to? The Verdict on Drug Courts by Tracy Velazquez Source # 4 Part A. Bibliographical Information Genre: Criminal Justice Author: Tracy Velazquez Article Title: The Verdict on Drug Courts. Journal/Publication it appeared in: The Nation Authors Purpose (s): To discuss how with the creation of drug court less community based programs are being created and people are unable to receive treatment unless arrested and then referred to drug court. Authors Intended Audience: The Nation is the oldest continuously published weekly magazine in the United States. Its devoted to politics and culture and is self-described as a flagship to the left. Its readers are mainly left-winged democrats. Part B. Authors Ideas/Arguments

Foley 7

Authors main claim (thesis): Because of the lack of accessible, community-based resources, many people gain access to the treatment they need only after being arrested. Supporting Arguments (you should identify each one and number them): According to the National Survey on Drug Use and Health, about 9 percent of Americans are addicted to drugs and/or alcohol, and less than a quarter of these receive substance abuse treatment. Another study estimates that 37 percent of those who do are referred by the criminal justice system. Drug courts may be widening rather than shrinking the net of criminal justice control. Without drug courts in the mix, some addicts might have received the help they needed without getting involved in the justice system. Instead of referring someone to a social worker or community based program well-meaning police, prosecutors and judges send people to drug court, and given the lack of other options, people are often grateful for the opportunity to get treatment however generally a person must plead guilty to participate, with the conviction reduced or overturned only if he or she is successful. Community-based treatment is about nine times more cost-effective than drug courts.

What arguments/ideas did you agree with and what ones did you disagree with? I agree that there arent enough community based options for addicts to get treatment. I disagree that we dont need drug courts. Many addicts will not seek help until it gets to the point where they are arrested and have no other option than to get treatment through drug court. While it may be true that some addicts would have been able to get treatment without getting into the system first I dont believe that it is a big enough difference that drug court could be harming this.

Alternatively, what arguments/ideas triggered a response in you as you read them? (They could be ideas you know a lot about, or know very little and would like to pursue): How well do drug courts really work? Do the pros outweigh the cons? Part C. Your reflections:

Foley 8

1. What did you learn from this article? I learned that community based treatment has a much higher success rate than drug courts and costs a lot less. I also learned that they are becoming rarer due to drug courts and the funding. 2. What value does it have for your topic/issue/problem? It is valuable to my topic because it is talking about alternative other than incarceration for addicts. 3. What is missing from the article that you want to consider? (The article may have answered some of your questions but not others): Maybe on how to work on getting more funding for community-based programs and how much money it saves to provide treatment rather than imprisoning addicts. 4. Where you go from here (what do you still need to or want to)? I would like to see research on how much money is saved through treatment and the success rate. 5. This should now lead to your next source (beginning with your search using [perhaps different] key words, or adding another key word or words, a list of possible titles, a narrowing of these into several, reading their abstracts and skimming the full text). What [next] source did this lead you to? Treatment or Incarceration National and State Findings on the Efficacy and Cost Savings of Drug Treatment Versus Imprisonment

Source # 5 Part A. Bibliographical Information Genre: Drug Policy Research Author: Doug McVay, Vincent Schiraldi and Jason Ziedenberg Article Title: Treatment or Incarceration National and State Findings on the Efficacy and Cost Savings of Drug Treatment Versus Imprisonment Journal/Publication it appeared in: Justice Policy Institute Authors Purpose (s): To provide research that shows that, on the whole, providing drug offenders with treatment is a more cost-effective way of dealing with substance addicted drug and nonviolent offenders than prison. Authors Intended Audience: Maryland General Assembly and Governor Ehrlich as well as readers of the justicepolicy.org who are made up of advocates, policymakers and the media Part B. Authors Ideas/Arguments Authors main claim (thesis): Drug treatment can be more effective than cycling people in and out of prison.

Foley 9

Supporting Arguments (you should identify each one and number them): Reports by government agencies, centrist and center-right think tanks and surveys of programs in Maryland show that treatment is a much less expensive option than incarceration for handling substance abusing offenders. Other studies that used a cost-benefit analysis-a broader measure of how money spent on treatment alternatives compares to money spent on prisons in terms of crime rates and other societal benefits like employment and tax revenues have shown that, dollar for dollar, treatment reduces the societal costs of substance abuse more effectively than incarceration does. The Center for Substance Abuse Treatments final report on NTIES noted that In summary, we observed a pattern of substantially reduced alcohol and drug use in every type of treatment modality, with reductions typically between one-third and two-thirds depending on the type of service unit and the specific measure.

What arguments/ideas did you agree with and what ones did you disagree with? I agree with all the research found in this policy brief.

Alternatively, what arguments/ideas triggered a response in you as you read them? (They could be ideas you know a lot about, or know very little and would like to pursue): findings that treatment can reduce substance abuse and recidivism is something I strongly agree with. There is much research done that finds that along with reduced drug addiction and recidivism, many treatment programs are community builders, helping people facing severe challenges become productive parts of their families and neighborhoods. Part C. Your reflections: 1. What did you learn from this article? Drug treatment in prison such as in-prison therapeutic community programming, or that same program with community aftercare after the person leaves prison yields a benefit of between $1.91 and $2.69 for every dollar spent on them. By contrast, therapeutic community programs outside of prison typically work release facilities yielded $8.87 if benefit for every program dollar spent. 2. What value does it have for your topic/issue/problem? This is valuable research done showing actual monetary data that incarceration costs a lot more and has a lot less effect on the inmate and the community. 3. What is missing from the article that you want to consider? (The article may have answered some of your questions but not others): This article answers my questions on the data and research done to show that incarceration is not as effective as treatment.

Foley 10

4. Where you go from here (what do you still need to or want to)? From here I want to wrap up my project with the conclusion. 5. This should now lead to your next source (beginning with your search using [perhaps different] key words, or adding another key word or words, a list of possible titles, a narrowing of these into several, reading their abstracts and skimming the full text). What [next] source did this lead you to? To my conclusion.