Abstract
A transformation in the judiciary has occurred over the past 20 years. The traditional role of the courts has been to adjudicate disputed issues of fact in civil and criminal cases. Traditionally, judges were neutral arbiters considering conflicting evidence and rendering a decision based on the law and the facts. However, because a variety of social and psychological problems finding their way to the courts, a metamorphosis has occurred in the judicial role. Indeed, these courts, collectively often referred to as “problem-solving courts,” have different jurisdiction than traditional courts and separate judges who preside in them. The judicial teams in these courts address social problems such as drug addiction, alcoholism, domestic violence, untreated mental illness, and prisoner reentry into society. This chapter discusses therapeutic jurisprudence as the underlying philosophy that directs and guides these new courts. It discusses the changing roles of judges, attorneys, and clients who make use of the problem-solving court model highlighting the gains that the movement has made and comparing the gains to the new challenges that have arisen as the result of the altered roles of the legal actors in these courts. Problem-solving courts represent a newly broadened conception of the role of the courts, one that is fully consistent with the basic concept of therapeutic jurisprudence. It is a noble undertaking to close the revolving door to certain kinds of repetitive offenses by providing judicially supervised and monitored treatment to those motivated to undertake it. To perform this new judicial role, judges need to develop and improve their interpersonal, psychological, and social work skills. The chapter ends with a discussion of how therapeutic jurisprudence can add to the training and development of legal professionals who can make a difference in the problem-solving courts of the future.
This chapter was prepared for a conference at the University of Nebraska Lincoln in January of 2010. Professor Winick participated in this conference with a video link. He was ill at the time of the conference. At the time near the end of his life, Professor Winick was engaged in some empirical work with Richard Wiener, the editor of this book. Bruce nearly completed this chapter before his untimely passing. Margot Winick, daughter of Professor Winick gave permission for us to include this chapter in the current book. Dr. Wiener completed some sections and did some light editing of the manuscript. As was always the case, little work was required to prepare Professor Winick’s paper for publication.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Babb, B. (1998). Fashioning an interdisciplinary framework for court reform in family law: A blueprint to construct a unified family court. Southern California Law Review, 71, 469–545.
Babb, B., & Moran, J. (1999). Substance abuse, families, and unified family courts: The creation of a caring justice system. Journal of Health Care Law & Policy, 3(1), 1–43.
Bandura, A. (1962). Social learning through imitation. In M. Jones (Ed.), Nebraska symposium on motivation (pp. 211–274). Symposium conducted in Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
Belenko, S.R. (1998). Research on drug courts: A critical review. National Drug Court Institute Review, 1(1), 1–42.
Belenko, S.R. (2001). Research on drug courts: A critical review 2001 update. New York: The National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse, Columbia University.
Belenko, S., Lang, M., & O’Connor, L. (2003). Self-reported psychiatric treatment needs among felony drug offenders. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 19(1), 9–29.
Binder, D., Bergman, P., & Price, S. (1991). Lawyers as counselors: A client-centered approach. St. Paul: West Publishing Company.
Birgden, A. (2002). Dealing with the resistant criminal client: A psychologically-minded strategy for more effective legal counseling. Criminal Law Bulletin, 38(2), 225–243.
Boothroyd, R.A., Poythress, N.G., McGaha, A., & Petrila, J. (2003). The Broward mental health court: Process, outcomes, and service utilization. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 26, 55–71. doi:10.1016/S0160-2527(02)00203-0.
Braithwaite, J. (1989). Crime, shame and reintegration. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Brehm, S.S., & Brehm, J.W. (1981). Psychological reactance: A theory of freedom and control. New York: Academic Press.
Brown, A. (2001). Drug courts help keep families together. The Florida Bar.
Burdon, W.M., Roll, J.M., Prendergast, M.L., & Rawson, R.A. (2001). Drug courts and contingency management. Journal of Drug Issues, 31(1), 73–90. doi:10.1177/002204260103100105.
Cascardi, M., Poythress, N.G., & Hall, A. (2000). Procedural justice in the context of civil commitment: An analogue study. Behavioral Sciences & Law, 18(6), 731–740. doi:10.1002/bsl.421.
Casey, P. & Rottman, D. (2000). Therapeutic jurisprudence in the courts. Behavioral Sciences & Law, 18(4), 445–457. doi:10.1002/1099-0798(2000)18:4<445::AID-BSL371>3.0.CO;2-J.
Catalano, S. (2007). Intimate partner violence in the United States. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics. http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=1000.
Clark, M. (2001). Change-focused drug courts: Examining the critical ingredients of positive behavior change. National Drug Court Institute Review, 3(2), 35–87.
Conference of Chief Justices and Conference of State Courts Administrators (2000). CCJ Resolution 22: COSCA Resolution 4: In support of problem-solving courts. Journal of the Center for Families, Children, and the Courts, 2, 1–3.
Cosden, M., Ellens, J., Schnell, J., Yamini-Diouf, Y., & Wolfe, M. (2003). Evaluation of a mental health treatment court with assertive community treatment. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 21, 415–427. doi:10.1002/bsl.542.
Daicoff, S. (2000). The role of therapeutic jurisprudence within the comprehensive law movement. In D.P. Stolle, D.B. Wexler, & B.J. Winick (Eds.), Practicing therapeutic jurisprudence: Law as a helping profession (pp. 465–492). Durham: Carolina Academic Press.
Deci, E. (1975). Intrinsic motivation (E. Aronson, Ed.). New York: Plenum.
Erickson, S., Campbell, A., & Lamberti, S. (2006). Variations in mental health courts: Challenges, opportunities, and a call for caution. Community Mental Health Journal, 42, 335–344. doi:10.1007/s10597-006-9046-7.
Fisler, C. (2005). Building trust and managing risk: A look at a felony mental health court. Psychology, Public Policy and Law, 11, 587–604. doi:10.1037/1076-8971.11.4.587.
Fritzler, R., & Simon, L. (2000). The development of a specialized domestic violence court in Vancouver, Washington utilizing innovative judicial paradigms. University of Missouri at Kansas City Law Review, 69, 139–177.
Goldkamp, J., & Irons-Guynn, C. (2000). Emerging judicial strategies for the mentally ill in the criminal caseload: mental health courts in Ft. Lauderdale, Seattle, San Bernardino, and Anchorage. US Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance.
Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional intelligence. New York: Bantam Books.
Hawkins, M.D. (2010). Coming home: Accommodating the special needs of military veterans to the criminal justice system. Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law, 7, 563–572.
Hora, P.F. (2002). A dozen years of drug treatment courts: Uncovering our theoretical foundation and the construction of a mainstream paradigm. Substance Use & Misuse, 37, 1469–1488. doi:10.1081/JA-120014419.
Hora, P., Schma, W., & Rosenthal, J. (1999). Therapeutic jurisprudence and the drug court movement: Revolutionizing the criminal justice system’s responses to drug abuse and crime in America. Notre Dame Law Review, 74, 439–538.
Kaye, J., & Knipps, S. (2000). Judicial responses to domestic violence: The case for a problem solving approach. Western State University Law Review, 27, 1–13.
King, M., Freiberg, A., Batagol, B., & Hyams, R. (2009). Non-adversarial justice. New South Wales: The Federated Press.
LaFond, J.Q., & Winick, B.J. (2003). Sex offender reentry courts: A cost effective proposal for managing sex offender risk in the community. Annals of the New York Academy of Science, 989, 300–323. doi:10.1111/j.1749-6632.2003.tb07314.x.
Lind, E.A., & Tyler, T. (1988). The social psychology of procedural justice. New York: Plenum.
Littel, K. (2003). Specialized courts and domestic violence. Issues of Democracy: The Changing Face of U.S. Courts, 8, 26–31.
Mazur, R., & Aldrich, L. (2003). What makes domestic violence court work? Lessons from New York. The Judges’ Journal, 42, 5–11.
McKune v. Lile, 536 U.S. 24 (2002).
Meichenbaum, D., & Turk, D.C. (1987). Facilitating treatment adherence: A practitioner’s guidebook. New York: Plenum.
Miller, W. R., & Rollnick, S. (2002). Motivational Interviewing: preparing people for change (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.
Monahan, J., Hoge, S.K., Lidz, C., Roth, L.H., Bennett, N., Gardner, W., & Mulvey, E. (1995). Coercion and commitment: Understanding involuntary mental hospital admission. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 18(3), 249–263. doi:10.1016/0160-2527(95)00010-F.
National Drug Court Institute (2009). Drug courts: A national phenomenon. http://www.dci.org/research.
Petrila, J. (2007). Civil commitment: A therapeutic jurisprudence model. Psychiatric Services, 58, 572–573.
Petrila, J, Poythress, N.G., McGaha, A., & Boothroyd, R. (2001). Preliminary observation from an evaluation of the Broward County Mental Health Court. Court Review, 37, 14–22.
Petrucci, C. (2002). Respect as a component in the judge-defendant interaction in a specialized domestic violence court that utilizes therapeutic jurisprudence. Criminal Law Bulletin, 38, 263–295.
Quinn, M. (2009). The modern problem-solving court movement: Domination of discourse and untold stories of criminal justice reform. Washington University Journal of Law and Policy, 31, 57–82.
Redlich, A. (2005). Voluntary, but knowing and intelligent: Comprehension in mental health courts. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 11, 605–619. doi:10.1037/1076-8971.11.4.605.
Redlich, A., Steadman, H., Petrila, J., Monahan, J., & Griffen, P. (2005). The second generation of mental health courts. Psychology, Public Policy and Law, 11, 527–538. doi:10.1037/1076-8971.11.4.527.
Reisig, M. (2002). The difficult role of the defense lawyer in a post-adjudication drug treatment court: Accommodating therapeutic jurisprudence and due process. Criminal Law Bulletin, 38, 216, 218–219, 221–223.
Rottman, D., & Casey, P. (1999). Therapeutic jurisprudence and the emergence of problem solving courts. National Institute of Justice Journal, 240, 12–19.
Sack, E. (2002). Creating a domestic violence court: Guidelines and best practices. San Francisco: Family Violence Prevention Fund.
Schma, W. (2003). A New kind of power: Judges gain fresh perspectives on how to steer cases toward productive outcomes. ABA Journal, 89, 66–67.
Schopp, R. (1999). Therapeutic jurisprudence: Integrated inquiry and instrumental prescriptions. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 17(5), 589–605. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1099-0798(199923)17:5<589::AID-BSL368>3.0.CO;2-3.
Shiff, A., & Wexler, D. (1996). Teen court: A therapeutic jurisprudence perspective. Criminal Law Bulletin, 32(4), 342–357.
Shuman, D. (1993). The use of empathy in forensic examinations. Ethics & Behavior, 3, 289–302. doi:10.1080/10508422.1993.9652109.
Steadman, H.J., Deane, M.W., Borum, R., & Morrissey, J.P. (2000). Comparing outcomes of major models of police responses to mental health emergencies. Psychiatric Services, 51, 645–649. doi:10.1176/appi.ps.51.5.645.
Steadman, H.J., Redlich, A., Callahan, L., Robbins, P.C., & Vesselinov, R. (2010). Effect of mental health courts on arrests and jail days. Archives of General Psychiatry, 68(2), 167–172. doi:10.1001/archgenpsychiatry.2010.134.
Stefan, S., & Winick, B. (2005). A dialogue on mental health courts. Psychology, Public Policy and Law, 11, 507–526. doi:10.1037/1076–8971.11.4.507.
Stolle, D.P., Wexler, D.B., & Winick, B.J. (Eds.). (2000). Practicing therapeutic jurisprudence: Law as a helping profession. Durham: Carolina Academic Press.
Tauber, J. (2002). Address at the eleventh annual symposium on Contemporary Urban Challenges at the Fordham University School of Law, problem solving courts: Adversarial litigation to innovative jurisprudence. Fordham Urban Law Journal, 29, 1755, 1901–1905.
Trupin, E., & Richards, H. (2003). Seattle’s mental health courts: Early indicators of effectiveness. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 26, 33–53. doi:10.1016/S0160-2527(02)00202-9.
Tyler, T. (1990). Why people obey the law. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
United States Government Accountability Office (2005). Adult drug courts: Evidence indicates recidivism reductions and mixed results for other outcomes. Washington, DC. http://gao.gov/products/GAO-05-219.
Watson, A., Hanrahan, P., Luchins, D., & Lurigio, A. (2001). Mental health courts and the complex issue of mentally ill offenders. American Psychiatric Services, 52, 477–481. doi:10.1176/appi.ps.52.4.477.
Wertheimer, A. (1987). Coercion. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Wexler, D.B., & Winick, B.J. (1991). Essays in therapeutic jurisprudence. Durham: Carolina Academic Press.
Wiener, R.L., Winick, B.J., Georges, L.S., & Castro, A. (2010). A testable theory of problem solving courts: Avoiding past empirical and legal failures. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 33, 417–427. doi:10.1016/j.ijlp.2010.09.012.
Winick, B.J. (1991). Harnessing the power of the bet: Wagering with the government as a mechanism for social and Individual change. University of Miami Law Review, 45, 737–816.
Winick, B.J. (1992). On autonomy: Legal and psychological perspectives. Villanova Law Review, 37(6), 1705–1777.
Winick, B.J. (1995). The side effects of incompetency labeling and the implications for mental health law. Psychology, Public Policy & Law, 1(1), 6–42.
Winick, B.J. (1998). Counseling about advance directive instruments: Client denial and resistance in the advance directive context: Reflections on how attorneys can identify and deal with a psycholegal soft spot. Psychology, Public Policy & Law, 4, 901–923. doi:10.1037/1076-8971.4.3.901.
Winick, B.J. (1999). Therapeutic jurisprudence and the civil commitment hearing. Journal of Contemporary Legal Issues, 10, 37–60.
Winick, B.J. (2000). Applying the law therapeutically in domestic violence cases. University of Missouri Kansas City Law Review, 33, 36–45.
Winick, B.J. (2003). Therapeutic jurisprudence and problem solving courts. Fordham Urban Law Review, 30, 1055–1090.
Winick, B.J. (2005). Civil commitment: A therapeutic jurisprudence model. Durham: Carolina Academic Press.
Winick, B.J., & Perez, A.M. (2010). Aging, driving, and public health: A therapeutic jurisprudence approach. Florida Coastal Law Review, 11,189–236.
Winick, B.J., & Wexler, D. (2003). Judging in a therapeutic key: Therapeutic jurisprudence and the courts. Durham: Carolina Academic Press.
Winick, B.J., Wiener, R.L., Castro, A., Emmert, A., & Georges, L.S. (2010). Dealing with mentally ill domestic violence perpetrators: A therapeutic jurisprudence judicial model. Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 33, 428–439.
Wyatt, T. (2001). Threat of jail helping keep mentally ill on medication: Domestic violence court offering program monitored probation. The Dallas Morning News. http://www.dallasnews.com/metro/stories/STORY.eaaf9ac391.b0.af.0.a4.4c9c0.html
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Winick, B. (2013). Problem Solving Courts: Therapeutic Jurisprudence in Practice. In: Wiener, R., Brank, E. (eds) Problem Solving Courts. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-7403-6_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-7403-6_12
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-4614-7402-9
Online ISBN: 978-1-4614-7403-6
eBook Packages: Behavioral ScienceBehavioral Science and Psychology (R0)