Dealing with mentally ill domestic violence perpetrators: A therapeutic jurisprudence judicial model.

People suffering from mental illness are increasingly referred to the domestic violence court. Yet the typical diversion programs available, including batterer's intervention programs, are inappropriate for those with serious mental illness. As a result, the Miami-Dade Domestic Violence Court has developed a new approach for dealing with this population that applies mental health court techniques in domestic violence court. This article will describe and discuss this pioneering model. It also will situate this model within the context of other problem-solving courts and discuss how the court uses principles and approaches of therapeutic jurisprudence. The paper presents some preliminary data that describe the social and legal characteristics of 20 defendants in the Domestic Violence Mental Health Court followed over a two year period between 2005 and 2007.

A testable theory of problem solving courts: Avoiding past empirical and legal failures.

Recent years have seen a proliferation of problem solving courts designed to rehabilitate certain classes of offenders and thereby resolve the underlying problems that led to their court involvement in the first place. Some commentators have reacted positively to these courts, considering them an extension of the philosophy and logic of Therapeutic Jurisprudence, but others show concern that the discourse surrounding these specialty courts has not examined their process or outcomes critically enough. This paper examines that criticism from historical and social scientific perspectives. The analysis culminates in a model that describes how offenders are likely to respond to the process as they engage in problem solving court programs and the ways in which those courts might impact subsequent offender conduct. This Therapeutic Jurisprudence model of problem solving courts draws heavily on social cognitive psychology and more specifically on theories of procedural justice, motivation, and anticipated emotion to offer an explanation of how offenders respond to these programs. We offer this model as a lens through which social scientists can begin to address the concern that there is not enough critical analysis of the process and outcome of these courts. Applying this model to specialty courts constitutes an important step in critically examining the contribution of problem solving courts.

Sex offender reentry courts: a cost effective proposal for managing sex offender risk in the community.

Recently enacted legal strategies to protect society from dangerous sex offenders generally use two very different approaches: Long-term incapacitation or outright release. The first strategy relies on harsh criminal sentences or indeterminate sexual predator commitment laws. The second relies primarily on registration and notification laws. Both strategies rely on prediction models of dangerousness. Authorities determine at a single moment the likelihood that an offender will sexually "recidivate" and then choose the appropriate type of control for an extended period. This paper reviews the problems of predicting sexual recidivism in the context of both strategies. It then proposes special sex offender reentry courts to manage the risk that sexual offenders will reoffend. Risk management allows decision makers to adjust calculations of individual risk on an ongoing basis in light of new information and to adjust the level of control. Drawing on Therapeutic Jurisprudence-a belief that legal rules, procedures, and legal roles can have positive or negative psychological impact on participants in the legal system-these courts can impose, and then adjust control over sex ofenders in the community. In a sex offender reentry court, the judge is a member of an interdisciplinary team that uses a community containment approach; the offender, as a condition for release, enters into a behavioral contract to engage in treatment and submit to periodic polygraph testing. This therapeutic jurisprudence approach creates incentives for offenders to change their behavior and attitudes, thereby reducing their recidivism risk and earning more freedom. It can also monitor compliance and manage risk more effectively.

Outpatient commitment: a therapeutic jurisprudence analysis.

This article analyzes the legal and therapeutic jurisprudence considerations raised by outpatient commitment. Although older forms of outpatient commitment have both legal and therapeutic advantages, preventive outpatient commitment raises serious legal problems and potential antitherapeutic consequences that may outweigh its claimed therapeutic value. As a result, alternatives are proposed, including wider availability of community treatment and outreach and case management services, assertive community treatment, police and mental health court diversion programs, and creative uses of advanced directive instruments and behavioral contracting. Proposals also are made for how preventive outpatient commitment can be applied more therapeutically, including hearings that accord patients a sense of procedural justice and techniques designed to motivate individuals facing such hearings to agree to accept treatment voluntarily.