'THERAPY WITH TEETH'

Drug Courts Save Money, Reduce Crowding, Aid Non-Violent Offenders.

In the mid-1990s, Carson Fox was a prosecutor in conservative
Lexington, S.C., where being tough on crime comes with the territory.
But another social undercurrent was also at work. "We found that in
talking to citizens, nearly everyone had been touched by addiction and
wanted to know if we were doing something that works, and if not, why
not?" Fox recalled. He became part of an experiment: drug courts.

Like so many who've seen them in action, Fox is now an advocate of
this alternative to regular courts. Their aim is to get at the
underlying problem -- through "therapy with teeth," as one judge put
it.

Drug courts are only for non-violent offenders whose crimes, from
marijuana possession to theft, are connected to abuse or addiction.
Participants typically appear weekly before a judge and case workers
for as long as 18 months. They submit to drug tests, treatment and
more. If they graduate, their records are often wiped clean. Dropouts
can go to prison, and many do. Studies vary widely, but they tend to
show that well-administered adult drug courts can reduce recidivism by
up to 35%. Not a magic bullet, obviously, but that is a lot of lives
saved.

For lower-income participants, the courts can be a once-in-a-lifetime
chance at sustained treatment. They have buy-in from the right as well
as the left: The Bush and Clinton administrations both directed
federal funding to state and local drug courts. Since the first court
opened in Florida in 1989, they have expanded to every state and now
number around 2,100.

Critics argue that those who flunk out might end up serving longer
sentences and giving up privacy. But participation is voluntary.
Arguments that they cause more arrests seem overblown. If expanded
further, drug courts have the potential to help reduce soaring
taxpayer costs, relieve prison overcrowding and give non-violent
offenders a better shot at rehabilitation.

All this is sorely needed because the justice and prison system is in
crisis. More than one in 100 U.S. adults are in prison, and a record
7.2 million are under supervision. While tough sentences have proved
to be an essential tool for getting repeat violent offenders off the
streets, separating out non-violent offenders makes sense and saves
dollars.

Some drug courts are better than others. Success rates depend a lot on
the dedication and quality of the judges and their teams.

The 55,000 adults in drug court programs make up only a small fraction
of the nation's 1.5 million non-violent, drug-related offenders. But
cuts triggered by the wider financial crisis could shrink that number.
More publicity and public support are needed. The U.S. Sentencing
Commission, which advises Congress on policy, is considering making
drug courts a priority. That would be a useful step.

Drug court graduates regularly testify to lives turned around from
addiction, prostitution, shoplifting and more. That's the kind of
success that turned prosecutor Fox into a believer -- and is worth
aiming for.