DOCSLIB.ORG

Drug Testing in a Drug Court Environment: COMMON ISSUES to ADDRESS

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Drug Testing in a Drug Court Environment: COMMON ISSUES to ADDRESS Covers 1-4 6/13/00 2:13 PM Page 1 U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Drug Courts Program Office Drug Courts Program Office DRUG COURTS RESOURCE SERIES Drug Testing in a Drug Court Environment: COMMONCOMMON ISSUES ISSUES TOTO ADDRESS ADDRESS Prepared by the Drug Court Clearinghouse and Technical Assistance Project Covers 1-4 6/13/00 2:13 PM Page 2 U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs 810 Seventh Street NW. Washington, DC 20531 Janet Reno Attorney General Daniel Marcus Acting Associate Attorney General Mary Lou Leary Acting Assistant Attorney General Marilyn McCoy Roberts Director Drug Courts Program Office Office of Justice Programs World Wide Web Home Page www.ojp.usdoj.gov Drug Courts Program Office World Wide Web Home Page www.ojp.usdoj.gov/dcpo For grant and funding information contact Department of Justice Response Center 1–800–421–6770 NCJ 181103 This report was prepared by the Office of Justice Programs Drug Court Clearinghouse and Technical Assistance Project at American University, Washington, D.C. This project is supported by grant numbers 95–DC–MX–K002 and 98–NU–VX–K018, awarded by the Drug Courts Program Office, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. Points of view or opinions in this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. OJP Drug Court Clearinghouse and Technical Assistance Project American University Issues Paper Series Drug Testing in a Drug Court Environment: COMMON ISSUES TO ADDRESS Jerome J. Robinson, M.F.S., T.C., S.C., M.T. Director, District of Columbia Pretrial Services Agency Drug Laboratory James W. Jones, Ph.D., D.A.B.C., D.A.B.F.E. Deputy Director, District of Columbia Pretrial Services Agency Drug Laboratory May 2000 Cover images © 2000 PhotoDisc, Inc. Foreword Drug testing is a cornerstone of drug court program operations. The functioning of all drug courts relies on the integrity and accuracy of the drug testing process as well as the immediacy with which drug testing services are accessed and the reliability of results obtained. This issues paper has been prepared by the OJP Drug Court Clearinghouse and Technical Assistance Project to address the most frequent issues that have been raised by drug court programs regarding drug testing. Although this report is by no means a definitive treatment of all of these issues, it is intended to provide an overview for drug court program officials—primarily lay persons—regarding the most critical topics that need to be addressed in developing and maintaining a drug testing capability. The authors, Jerome Robinson and James Jones, director and deputy director, respectively, of the District of Columbia Pretrial Services Agency Drug Laboratory, are forensic scientists and have worked for many years with the application of drug testing technologies in a variety of sectors. The results of their experience, research, and training, as they apply to drug testing in a drug court environment, are synthesized in this document. We are grateful for the helpful comments and insights of the following individuals who reviewed this document in draft: John N. Marr of Las Vegas, Nevada, who directs the drug treatment component of most of the Nevada drug courts, including the drug testing conducted by those programs, and Dr. Leo Kadehjian, of Palo Alto, California, a biomedical scientist who oversees the drug testing program for the U.S. Federal court system. Their advice and suggestions have been incorporated throughout the text. Drug testing is a science that requires the guidance and oversight of appropriately trained forensic scientists. We hope that this document will assist drug court officials in working with forensic experts in the design and operation of the drug testing component of their drug court programs. Caroline S. Cooper, Director OJP Drug Court Clearinghouse and Technical Assistance Project American University iii Contents 1. Introduction . .1 Drug Testing: A Continually Evolving Science . .1 2. Drug Testing Methodologies . .3 Most Commonly Used Samples for Detecting Drug Use . .3 Urine . .3 Blood . 3 Hair . .3 Sweat . .4 Saliva . .4 Testing Technologies . 4 Immunoassay . 4 Chromatography . 4 Testing Procedures . .4 Testing Methods . .4 Instrument Testing . .4 Non-Instrument Testing: Point-of-Contact Tests . 5 Role of Breathalyzers in Drug Testing Programs . 5 Testing for Special Substances . .5 Inhalants . .5 Tobacco . .6 Considerations in Selecting the Appropriate Testing Method for Individual Drug Court Programs . .6 3. Critical Components of a Drug Court Drug Testing Program . .7 Ensuring Adequate Staffing . .7 Maintaining the Integrity of the Process . .7 Detecting Adulteration . .8 Screening for Common Methods of Adulterated Specimens . .8 Waterloading . .8 Addition of Common Household Products . .8 Submission of Another’s Specimen . .8 Use of Diuretics . .8 Checking for Temperature, Color, and Other Evidence of Tampering . .8 Additional Tips . .10 Determining Appropriate Testing Frequency . .10 Spot Testing . .10 Random Testing . .10 Using Confirmation Testing . .10 Maintaining Specimens for Retesting . .11 Obtaining Accurate and Meaningful Interpretation of Results . .11 Establishing Cutoff Levels for the Drug Court Program . .11 Addressing “Spiking” Situations . .11 Understanding the Drug Use Characteristics in the Local Jurisdiction . .12 Determining an Acceptable Error Rate for the Testing Program . .12 Development and Periodic Updating of Procedures Manual Documenting All Aspects of the Drug Testing Process . .12 v DRUG COURTS RESOURCE SERIES Defendant Agreements To Comply With Drug Testing Program Requirements and for Release of Information . .12 4. Tips for Promoting an Effective Drug Court Drug Testing Program . .13 Educate and Train Everyone Involved About the Process and Procedures . .13 Anticipate Situations That May Occur . .13 Recognize Situations That Can Create Positive Test Results That Challenge the Integrity of the Testing Process . .13 Develop Contracts With Participants That Increase Responsibility for Eliminating Situations That Challenge the Test Results . .13 Document All Policies and Procedures in Writing . .14 5. Estimating Drug Testing Costs . .15 6. Questions To Ask Drug Testing Equipment and/or Supply Vendors . .17 7. Frequently Asked Questions . ..
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Medical Review Officer Manual
    Department of Health and Human Services Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration Center for Substance Abuse Prevention Medical Review Officer Manual for Federal Agency Workplace Drug Testing Programs EFFECTIVE OCTOBER 1, 2010 Note: This manual applies to Federal agency drug testing programs that come under Executive Order 12564 dated September 15, 1986, section 503 of Public Law 100-71, 5 U.S.C. section 7301 note dated July 11, 1987, and the Department of Health and Human Services Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs (73 FR 71858) dated November 25, 2008 (effective October 1, 2010). This manual does not apply to specimens submitted for testing under U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) Procedures for Transportation Workplace Drug and Alcohol Testing Programs (49 CFR Part 40). The current version of this manual and other information including MRO Case Studies are available on the Drug Testing page under Medical Review Officer (MRO) Resources on the SAMHSA website: http://www.workplace.samhsa.gov Previous Versions of this Manual are Obsolete 3 Table of Contents Chapter 1. The Medical Review Officer (MRO)........................................................................... 6 Chapter 2. The Federal Drug Testing Custody and Control Form ................................................ 7 Chapter 3. Urine Drug Testing ...................................................................................................... 9 A. Federal Workplace Drug Testing Overview..................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Quantitative Drug Test Menu Section 2
    1 Guthrie Square, Sayre, PA 18840 Bill To: Client GMG Toxicology Laboratory Requisition Toll Free Phone (844) 617-4719 Insurance Request Date: _____/______/______ Medical Director: Hani Hojjati, MD Fax (570) 887-4729 Patient PATIENT INFORMATION (PLEASE PRINT IN BLACK INK) INSURANCE BILLING INFORMATION (PLEASE PRINT IN BLACK INK) Pt Last Name First M I PRIMARY Medicare Medicaid Other Ins. Self Spouse Child __ Subscriber Last Name First M Address Birth Date Sex M F Beneficiary/Member # Group # City Pt. SS# or MRN Claims Name and Address City ST ZIP ST ZIP Home Phone (Attach a copy of the patient's insurance card and information) SECONDARY Medicare Medicaid Other Ins. Self Spouse Child Employer Work Phone Subscriber Last Name First M Work Address City ST ZIP Beneficiary/Member # Group # __ CLIENT INFORMATION - REFERRING PHYSICIAN Claims Name and Address City ST ZIP Client Address: (Atttach a copy of the patient's insurance card and information) COLLECTION / REPORTING INFORMATION Copy to: FAX Results to __ CALL Results to Phone: Fax: Date Collected: Time Collected: AM PM Specimen Type: Urine Saliva Other ___________________ Physician Signature (legible - No Stamp) For Lab Use Only (Required for Medicare & Medicaid patient orders) Signed ABN Obtained Place Lab Label Here Contact Laboratory Medical Director (570-887-4719) with questions concerning medical necessity PHYSICIAN When ordering tests, the physician is required to make an independent medical necessity decision with regard to each test thelaboratory will bill. The physician also understands he or she is required NOTICE to (1) submit ICD-10 diagnosis supported in the patient's medical record as documentation of the medical necessity or (2) explain and have the patient sign an ABN.
    [Show full text]
  • Substance Abuse in the Workplace Policy
    Substance Abuse in the Workplace Policy Rexnord (herein referred to as “Rexnord” or the “Company”) has a strong commitment to its employees to provide a safe work environment and to promote high standards of employee performance. Consistent with the spirit and intent of this commitment, the Company has established a policy regarding substance abuse in the workplace. Further, the Company is committed to maintaining a drug-free workplace as required by “The Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1988.” Therefore, compliance with this Policy is a condition of continued employment with Rexnord. I. PURPOSE To outline the procedures to be followed by each location in order to ensure that the safety and performance of employees is not impaired by alcohol, illegal drugs or other substances. II. APPLICABILITY This policy shall apply to all employees (full-time, part-time, exempt, and non-exempt employees) as well as to all applicants who have received a conditional offer of employment. Personnel who perform their services on Company property or on a third party’s property at the request of the Company (e.g., a Company customer site), as provided under a contract either directly with the Company or through the services of an outside firm, are required to abide by this policy. It is the responsibility of the contracting firm (at its cost and expense) to ensure that its personnel are tested in conformance with this policy prior to working at / on behalf of Rexnord. III. SUBSTANCE ABUSE It is the Company’s policy that the following is prohibited and will result in discipline up to and including termination: A.
    [Show full text]
  • Supporting the Drug Court Process: What You Need to Know For
    U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Assistance Supporting the Drug Court Process:What You Need To Know for Effective Decisionmaking MONOGRAPHand Program Evaluation F EBRUARY 2003 SEARCH, The National Consortium for Justice Information and Statistics U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs 810 Seventh Street NW. Washington, DC 20531 John Ashcroft Attorney General Deborah J. Daniels Assistant Attorney General Richard R. Nedelkoff Director, Bureau of Justice Assistance Office of Justice Programs Home Page www.ojp.usdoj.gov Bureau of Justice Assistance Home Page www.ojp.usdoj.gov/BJA NCJ 197259 This document was prepared by SEARCH,The National Consortium for Justice Information and Statistics, under the Drug Court Training and Technical Assistance Program, under grant number 98–MU–VX–K017, awarded by the Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. The opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. The Bureau of Justice Assistance is a component of the Office of Justice Programs, which also includes the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the National Institute of Justice, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, and the Office for Victims of Crime. Notice n November 2002, the Bureau of Justice Assistance I Bureau of Justice 810 Seventh Street NW. Assistance (BJA) Washington, DC 20531 assumed responsibility Telephone: (202) 616–5001 for administering the Drug Court Grant Fax: (202) 514–6452 Program and the Drug Court Training and E-mail: [email protected] Technical Assistance Program.
    [Show full text]
  • Drug & Alcohol Testing Be a Driver in the Know
    Controlled Substances Consequences FEDERAL The regulations require 5-panel testing for the 3 A positive test result or a following classes of substances: refusal requires the driver to be immediately removed from Drug & Marijuana n operating any CMV on public n Cocaine roadways. The employer must provide you with a list of Alcohol n Opiates — opium and acceptable SAPs from which to codeine derivatives choose to begin the “return-to- ” n Amphetamines and duty process. This process must Testing meth amphetamines be completed before a positive or REGULATIONS refusal driver can legally return to n Phencyclidine — PCP driving CMVs for any employer, including himself. For more information, visit www.usdoj.gov/dea/concern 3 The impact of testing positive or refusing to test can be devastating for a driver and his family. It often results in extended periods of unemployment, due to the time necessary to complete the “return-to-duty” process with a qualified SAP and the tendency of employers not to hire drivers with drug or alcohol histories. 3 Even after completing the “return- to-duty” process and finding employment, the additional return- to-duty and follow-up testing often adds increased stress and financial strain on the driver. For additional research and reading on the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration’s Drug and Be a Alcohol Testing Regulations, please visit our web site at: www.fmcsa.dot.gov/ Driver In rules-regulations/topics/drug/drug.htm the Know... FMCSA-E-06-003 Revised July 2010 The U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) whenever they are involved in a fatal accident, or professional (SAP) drug and alcohol testing regulations for receive a traffic citation resulting from an injury or who signs the return- commercial driver licensed (CDL) employees are vehicle-disabling accident.
    [Show full text]
  • Ncaa Drug Policies
    MEDICAL EXCEPTIONS APPEALS The NCAA recognizes that some banned substances The NCAA drug-testing program allows an are used for legitimate medical purposes. According- institution to appeal a positive drug test on behalf ly, the NCAA allows exception to be made for those of a student-athlete who has tested positive or who student-athletes with a documented medical history violated NCAA drug-testing protocol. demonstrating the need for regular use of such a drug. Exceptions may be granted for substances • The institution must submit in writing the included in the following classes of banned drugs: grounds for the appeal and a summary of the stimulants (including those used to treat ADHD), institutional drug-education program. beta blockers, beta-2 agonists, diuretics, peptide • At least three members of the drug- hormones, anabolic agents and anti-estrogens. education and drug-testing subcommittee of the • Pre-approval is required for the use of peptide NCAA Committee on Competitive hormones or anabolic agents. The institution Safeguards and Medical Aspects of Sports must submit required documents to the NCAA (CSMAS) hear appeals. ([email protected]) prior to the student-athlete competing while using medications containing • Appeals are conducted by telephone these substances. conference. • For all other drug classes, the institution should • The director of athletics or designee and the maintain documents from the prescribing student-athlete must be on the appeal call. physician in the student-athlete’s medical record on campus that include the diagnosis, course of • The NCAA does not restrict the nature of the treatment and current prescription. appeal, that is to say that the NCAA will not restrict access for any reason to an institution that wishes • In the event that a student-athlete tests positive to appeal and has satisfied the appeal procedures.
    [Show full text]
  • 2008 Idaho Felony Drug Court Outcome Evaluation Report
    An Examination of Idaho’s Felony Drug Courts: Findings and Recommendations FINAL REPORT Shelley Johnson Listwan, Ph.D. Institute for the Study and Prevention of Violence Department of Justice Studies Kent State University James Borowiak, M.A. Department of Justice Studies Kent State University & Edward J. Latessa, Ph.D. Center for Criminal Justice Research Division of Criminal Justice University of Cincinnati August 2008 ______________________________________________ This report was supported through a grant from the Idaho Supreme Court & the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (CFDA 93.243). Views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of either funding agency. Table of Contents Acknowledgements………………………………………………………………………………3 List of Exhibits…………………………………………………………………………………...4 Section I. Overview………………...………………………………………………………10 Section II. Organizational Issues & Needs ………………………………………………..14 Methodology…………………………………………………………………….14 Sample…………………………………………………………………………...14 Court Descriptions……………………………………………………………...16 Results…………………………………………………………………………...23 Summary………………………………………………………………………...39 Section III. Statewide Outcome Evaluation Results……………………………………….41 Methodology…………………………………………………………………….41 Sample…………………………………………………………………………...41 Measures………………………………………………………………………...45 Analysis………………………………………………………………………….47 Results…………………………………………………………………………...47 Summary………………………………………………………………………..74 Section IV. GRPA Data Summary………………………………………………………….77 Methodology…………………………………………………………………….78
    [Show full text]
  • Western Judicial Circuit Felony Drug Court
    Western Judicial Circuit Felony Drug Court (Athens-Clarke and Oconee Counties) PARTICIPANT HANDBOOK This handbook belongs to: 325 E. Washington Street, Suite 210 Athens, Georgia 30601 (706) 208-7078 (706) 613-3179 (fax) Table of Contents Welcome 3 Overview 4-5 Confidentiality 5 Treatment 5 Program Phases 6-10 Commencement 11 Program Rules 12-14 Program Fees 15 The Drug Court Team 15 Staffings 15 Court Appearances 16 Incentives 17 Sanctions and Treatment Responses 17 Termination 18 Drug/Chemical Testing 19 Prohibited Drugs/Permitted Medications 20-27 Travel/Leave Requests 27 Compliance & Home Visits/Job Checks, Searches 28 Search Requirements 28 Commencement Ceremony 29 Conclusion 29 Important Phone Numbers 30 Community Resources 31 Attachment I: Random Drug Screen Policy Attachment II: Urine Abstinence Testing/Incidental Alcohol Exposure Contract (original signed copy on file with Felony Drug Court) Attachment III: Emergency On-call Telephone Policy Attachment IV: Felony Drug Court Contract 2 Welcome to the Western Judicial Circuit Felony Drug Court! This Handbook was designed to answer your questions and provide specific information about what you must do in order to successfully complete the requirements of the Western Judicial Circuit Felony Drug Court Program. As a participant, you are expected to follow the instructions found in this Handbook, as well as the instructions of the Felony Drug Court Judge, Staff, and Treatment Provider. You will also be expected to comply with the treatment plan developed for you by your Treatment Provider. This handbook is not exhaustive and there is no possible way to make it complete and detailed to answer every question or situation that arises.
    [Show full text]
  • Retrospective Evaluation of Drug Courts in Clark County (Las Vegas) and Multnomah County (Portland)
    The author(s) shown below used Federal funds provided by the U.S. Department of Justice and prepared the following final report: Document Title: From Whether to How Drug Courts Work: Retrospective Evaluation of Drug Courts in Clark County (Las Vegas) and Multnomah County (Portland) Author(s): John S. Goldkamp ; Michael D. White ; Jennifer B. Robinson Document No.: 194124 Date Received: 05/05/2002 Award Number: 98-DC-VX-K001 This report has not been published by the U.S. Department of Justice. To provide better customer service, NCJRS has made this Federally- funded grant final report available electronically in addition to traditional paper copies. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. R CRIME AND JUSTICE RESEARCHINSTITUTE .---- PROPERTY OF National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS) Box 6000 Rockville, MD 20849-6000 From Whether to How Drug Courts Work: Retrospective Evaluation of Drug Courts in , Clark County (Las Vegas) and Multnomah County (Portland) Phase II Report,fiorn the National Evaluation of Drug Courts (I) Johi S. Goldkamp Temple University Michael D. White University of North Florida Jennifer B. Robinson University of Ottawa c Approved By: Bate: The researc scribed in this report was supported by grant #98-DC-VX-K001 from the National Institute of Justice, United States Department of Justice. The points of view expressed in the document do not represent the official positions of the National Institute of Justice, the local justice agencies in Multnomah County and Clark County, nor the Federal Government.
    [Show full text]
  • Frequently Asked Questions About Marijuana
    Frequently Asked Questions Marijuana Q: What is marijuana? A: Marijuana is the product of the hemp plant, Cannabis sativa, containing the psychoactive chemical delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and other related compounds. Popular names/slang for the drug include weed, pot, or cannabis. Q: How do people use marijuana? A: Marijuana is typically smoked using rolled paper cigarettes (joints), pipes, water pipes (bongs), and vaporizers. However, the drug is also mixed into edibles and drinks and extracted into oils and waxes. Q: How does marijuana affect users? A: Marijuana use impacts the human body both physically and mentally. The “high” from the drug can include distorted senses, impaired judgment, lack of balance and coordination, increased appetite, elevated heart rate, and sometimes anxiety and panic. Q: How many people use marijuana? A: Below is the most current data estimating marijuana use. • The National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) reports more than 26 million Americans aged 12 or older, or 9.6% of the total population, were current users of marijuana in 2017. • The World Drug Report 2019 estimates that there were 188 million global cannabis users in 2017. • Marijuana comprised the most common substance use disorder, impacting an estimated 4.1 million Americans in 2017, according to the NSDUH. Q: Can an employer drug test for marijuana? A: Yes. There are currently no restrictions (other than New York City which is expected to implement restrictions beginning in May 2020) limiting an employer’s ability to drug test for marijuana, although there may be limitations on permissible disciplinary action that an employer may take if an employee is using marijuana in accordance with that state’s marijuana laws.
    [Show full text]
  • Fact Sheet: Drug Testing in the Criminal Justice System
    DOJ/OJP logo, Adobe Illustrator, 11/89 T O EN F J TM U R ST A I U.S. Department of Justice P C E E D B O J C S F A V M F O Office of Justice Programs A I N C I J S R E BJ G O OJJ DP O F PR Bureau of Justice Statistics JUSTICE Drugs & Crime Data March 1992 Fact Sheet: Drug Testing in the Criminal Justice System As part of ongoing research the Drugs & tion hearings. Drug tests in prisons can that a positive immunoassay be retested Crime Data Center & Clearinghouse pre- also assist in monitoring drug use in cor- and confirmed, preferably by a different pared this fact sheet on drug testing in rectional facilities and by inmates during technique of equal or greater sensitivity, the criminal justice system. “Drug test- temporary absences from the institution. such as gas chromatography/mass ing” in this fact sheet refers to urinalysis, spectrometry.4 ● Identify persons in need of treatment. since that is the testing methodology Drug tests can identify drug users who Chromatography involves separating typically used throughout the criminal can be placed in treatment. Drug testing and identifying the components of a justice system. is also used to monitor persons undergo- specimen. GC/MS (gas chromatogra- ▲ ing drug treatment. phy/mass spectrometry) is considered to Who is tested? be “the most legally defensible” method ▲ Drug testing can take place in all stages Drug testing technology of urinalysis.5 GC/MS testing, however, of the criminal justice system: arrest, in is more expensive than immunoassay There are two primary methods of the pretrial phase, and during incarcera- testing (typically between $25 and $100 detecting drugs in the urine: immunoas- tion, probation, and parole.
    [Show full text]
  • DRUG COURT REVIEW Winter 2019
    DRUG COURT REVIEW Winter 2019 Rural Treatment Court Programs EDITOR IN CHIEF Julie Marie Baldwin, American University ASSOCIATE EDITORS Leola A. Abraham, American University John M. Eassey, American University EDITORIAL SUPPORT Steve Collins, American University Zephi Francis, American University Preeti P. Menon, American University ADVISORY COMMITTEE Jon D. Berg, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration Jerry Gardner, Tribal Law and Policy Institute Peggy Fulton Hora, Justice Speakers Institute Preeti Menon, American University Carrie F. Mulford, National Institute on Drug Abuse Roger H. Peters, University of South Florida Noreen Plumage, South Dakota State Court Administrators Office Annie Schachar, Center for Court Innovation Faye S. Taxman, George Mason University Gregory D. Torain, US Department of Justice EDITORIAL OFFICE Justice Programs Office American University 4801 Massachusetts Ave NW, Suite 508 Washington, DC 20016 This publication was supported by Grant No. 2016-DC-BX-K008 awarded by the Bureau of Justice Assistance. The Bureau of Justice Assistance is a component of the Department of Justice’s Office of Justice Programs, which also includes the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the National Institute of Justice, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, the Office of Victims of Crime, and the SMART Office. Points of view or opinions in this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the US Department of Justice. Drug Court Review Winter 2019 3 Introduction to the Issue on Rural 4 - 7 Treatment Court Programs John M. Eassey The Effect of Disproportionate 8 - 25 Sanctioning on Client Noncompliance Jamie C. Vaske Treatment Needs and Gender 26 - 49 Differences Among Clients Entering a Rural Drug Treatment Court with a Co-occurring Disorder Paige M.
    [Show full text]