roles and boundaries of specialty court supervision

H O N O RA B L E P E G GY DAV I S

ROLES AND BOUNDARIES OF SPECIALTY COURT

SUPERVISION

OBJECTIVES

• Examine the roles and duties of each specialty court team member.

• Develop an understanding of the importance of team communication within the specialty court setting.

• Discuss the laws and rules regarding confidentiality and how communication can take place between the members of the team.

• Begin to identify emerging research regarding the best practices and standards in drug courts.

DRUG COURT KEY COMPONENT # 1

Drug courts integrate alcohol and other drug treatment

services with justice system case processing.

What team members should attend the drug court staffing/meetings?


Using a non-adversarial approach, prosecution and defense counsel promote

public safety while protecting participants’ due process

rights.

Does allowing non-drug charges (e.g. violence) threaten public safety?


Eligible participants are identified and

placed in the program as soon as

possible.

Is it really important to get participants into the program quickly? What does quickly REALLY MEAN?


• Drug courts provide access to a continuum of alcohol, drug, and other related treatment and rehabilitation services.

Is it better to have a single treatment agency or to have multiple treatment options?How important is relapse prevention?

THE TEAM IS CRITICAL

• Who do we need on board in order to accomplish 10 Key Component 1 – 4?

• The Judiciary• District Attorney• Defense Attorney• Treatment Provider• Supervision• Law Enforcement• Ancillary Services

Note 1: Difference is significant at p<.10

Drug Courts Where a Treatment Representative Attends Court Hearings had

100% greater reductions in recidivism

0%10%20%30%40%

38%19%

Perc

ent r

educ

tion

in re

arre

sts

Note: Difference is significant at p<.05

Prosecu

tor atte

nds staf

fings

N=5

Prosecu

tor does

NOT atten

d staff

ings

N=5

0%10%20%30%40%

38%

14%

Perc

ent i

ncre

ase

in c

ost s

avin

gs

Drug Courts Where the Prosecutor Attends Staffings had

a 171% Higher Cost Savings


Drug Courts Where the Defense Attorney Attends Drug Court Team Meetings (Staffings) had

a 93% Higher Cost Savings

Defense attorney attends staffings

N=59

Defense Attorney does NOT attend staffings

N=11

0%

10%

20%

30%

29%

15%

Perc

ent I

ncre

ase

in C

ost S

avin

gs


Drug Courts where Law Enforcement is a member of the drug court team had


Law enforcement is on teamN=20

Law enforcement is NOT on team

N=29

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%45%

24%

Perc

ent r

educ

tion

in re

cidi

vism

Note 1: Difference is significant at p<.05Note 2: “Team Members” = Judge, Both Attorneys, Treatment Provider, Coordinator, Probation

Drug Courts where all team members attended staffings had


All team members attend staffings

N=31

All team does NOT attend staffings

N=28

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50% 42%

28%

Perc

ent r

educ

tion

in re

cidi

vism

Drug Courts That Held Status Hearings Every 2 Weeks During Phase 1 Had 50% Greater

Reductions in Recidivism

Note: Difference is significant at p<.1

Drug court has review hearings every two weeks

N=14

Drug court has review hearings

more or less oftenN=35

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

46%

31%

Perc

ent R

educ

tion

in R

ecid

ivis

m


Drug Courts Where the Judge Spends an Average of 3 Minutes or Greater per Participant During Court

Hearings had 153% greater reductions in recidivism

0%

20%

40%

43%

17%Pe

rcen

t red

uctio

n in

reci

divi

sm

SO WHAT IS EACH MEMBER’S RESPONSIBILITY?

• Overriding goals:

• Provide a coordinated response to offender behavior, through

• Shared decision making, docket control, informed and unified responses, and empowerment of the team,

• Thereby providing an environment in which the offender can address the addiction and related lifestyle issues that brought him or her into the criminal justice system.

CORE COMPETENCYJUDGE

• Interactive discussion with audience in order to explore attitudes, concerns and expectations.

CORE COMPETENCY DISTRICT ATTORNEY

• Interactive discussion with audience in order to explore attitudes, concerns and expectations

CORE COMPETENCYDEFENSE COUNSEL


CORE COMPETENCYTREATMENT


CORE COMPETENCYLAW ENFORCEMENT


CORE COMPETENCYSUPERVISION


CONFIDENTIALITY/PRIVACY

Several rules apply to participants in DWI treatment courts• 42 CFR Part 2 – The

alcohol and substance abuse treatment confidentiality rule.

• HIPAA – New federal rules covering all health related information

42 U.S. CODE 290DD42 CFR PART 2

• First issued 1975, revised 1987

• Designed to help deal with the stigma of addiction.

• Requires notification of confidentiality, consent forms, prohibition of redisclosure

• “I’m sorry I cannot acknowledge whether someone is or isn’t in our treatment program”.

CONFIDENTIALITY/PRIVACY

• 42 CFR (1975)– Encourages

treatment– Applies to DWI Court

programs– Prevails if conflict

with state laws

HIPAA• Health Insurance

Portability & Accountability Act (1996)• Protect confidentiality

and security of patient information

• General Rule• If DWI Court is in

compliance with 42 CFR- it is in HIPAA compliance also (with few exceptions)

42 CFR

The 42 CFR General Rule applies– Screening– Assessments– Referrals– Treatment– Diagnosis

GENERAL RULE

• Treatment Programs may only release information or records• With a knowing and

written consent from the participant, AND

• Some limited exceptions

CONSENT• A proper consent can

authorize all parties involved in the DWI Court

• HIPAA prohibits a program from conditioning treatment on a patient signing a consent, but judges, probation etc. can condition participation in the DWI Court program on an offender signing the consent form

ELEMENTS OF A CONSENT

• Who may make the disclosure

• To whom disclosure may be made

• Participant’s name• Purpose of the

disclosure

CLIENT NOTICE FORM

• A second form required by 42 CFR in addition to the Consent form

• Participants must be informed of privacy rights in writing and given to the Participant to keep

PERMITTED DISCLOSURES–NO CONSENT

• Medical emergency• Crimes on the premises• Crimes against staff• Administration / qualified

service programs working with drug court

• Outside auditors, central registries and researchers

• No re-disclosures unless permitted

MANDATORY DISCLOSURE–NO CONSENT

• State child abuse laws

• A valid court order • State laws relating

to cause of death• Duty to protect

others, to warn of imminent, serious harm

GENERAL ETHICS• Everyone on the drug

court team has both personal and professional ethical standards• At times, these can conflict• Word most associated with

ethics: dilemma• The “rules” can change, or

be different in different jurisdictions

• Seek advice of state experts on ethical dilemmas

ETHICAL ISSUES

• Treatment Providers• Consent is permissive, not

mandatory• Information released must

be what is minimally necessary to meet the terms and conditions of the consent

• Every staffing is a potential ethical dilemma

• What to do with information about illegal activity? Sexual abuse? Personal health issues?

DEFENSE ATTORNEYS

• Unlike Treatment Providers, no federal statute has provided Defense Attorneys with a consent to set aside attorney-client privilege

• Participation in staffing could be similar to a Treatment Provider with a consent allowing only the release of information verifying client is in treatment

PROSECUTORS

• Duty to protect public safety

• Proverbial “rock and a hard place” if confronted with information they should act on ethically, but cannot act on legally

JUDGES

• Cannot outsource their decision to another person or group of persons—must be the final decision maker

• Cannot raise money• Be sure to check your

individual state’s Judicial Canons on what is allowed.

ABA RULE 2.9

• Comment [4] A judge may initiate, permit, or consider ex parte communications …when serving on therapeutic or problem-solving courts, mental health courts, or drug courts. In this capacity, judges may assume a more interactive role with parties, treatment providers, probation officers, social workers, and others.

EMERGING RESEARCH

Adult Drug Court Best Practice Standards, Volume One, National Association of Drug Court Professionals.

QUESTIONS

CLOSING COMMENTS

roles and boundaries of specialty court supervision

Documents

drug court staffingmeetings

drug courts

drug court key component

specialty court team

traditional court

drug treatment services

specialty court setting

sense of team members