Australian Magistrates, Therapeutic Jurisprudence and Social Change
Therapeutic jurisprudence (TJ) is an orientation to decision-making that is attracting interest amongst some judicial officers and courts. A TJ approach emphasises the quality of the interaction between judicial officers and the individuals who appear before them, which is enhanced by direct engagement, empathy and communication. Drawing on a national survey of Australian magistrates, this paper shows that many magistrates are concerned to make a difference to the operation of the courts and those who use them. Magistrates identify many of the qualities and values associated with a TJ approach as important aspects of their work or as the characteristics of a good magistrate, regardless of whether they explicitly or consciously adopt a TJ orientation. There is also some evidence that the capacity to interact positively with citizens is a source of job satisfaction for some magistrates. However, the limited capacity in their current position to contribute to change in the court system is a source of dissatisfaction for many magistrates. Therapeutic jurisprudence (TJ) is an orientation to decision-making that is attracting interest amongst judicial officers, especially those in the lower courts, both in Australia and overseas. A TJ approach focuses on the quality of the interaction between judicial officers and the individuals who appear before them, with an emphasis on direct engagement, empathy and communication. The core idea is that legal processes have the potential for positive impact on the physical and psychological well being of participants, perhaps ultimately contributing to progressive social change. This paper examines the TJ implications in individual magistrates‟ orientation to their work in two ways. First, drawing on a national survey of Australian
Drug Courts in Australia: The First Generation
Articles Miranda Kaye, Julie Stubbs & Domestic Violence, Separation and Parenting: Negotiating Julia Tolmie Safety Using Legal Processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 Emily Camins War against Terrorism: Fighting the Military Battle, Losing the Psychological War . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 Mike Grewcock Irregular Migration, Identity and the State — the Challenge for Criminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114 David Indermaur & Lynne Roberts Drug Courts in Australia: The First Generation . . . . . . . . . . . . 136 Eileen Baldry, Desmond McDonnell, Peter Maplestone & Prisoners' Post-Release Homelessness and Manu Peeters Lack of Social Integration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155
THE NEW SOUTH WALES DRUG COURT EVALUATION: A PROCESS EVALUATION
PREFACE Over the past three years drug courts have been adopted in several Australian jurisdictions to deal with drug-dependent offenders. The first specialist drug court to be piloted in Australia commenced in 1999 after the New South Wales parliament passed legislation governing the NSW Drug Court Trial. The NSW Drug Court was broadly modelled on the drug courts which had been operating in the United States of America since the late 1980's. The present report is part of a series of studies conducted by the NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research evaluating the NSW Drug Court Trial. Other reports in this series monitor key aspects of the Drug Court's operation, examine its cost-effectiveness in reducing re-offending compared with conventional criminal justice sanctions and investigate changes in the health and well-being of Drug Court participants. This report presents the results of a process evaluation of the Drug Court Trial designed to describe the operation of the Court, identify any problems it encountered and describe how these problems were resolved. Process evaluations are, by definition, not directly concerned with outcomes. They are, nonetheless, generally invaluable in understanding the results of outcome studies. This is no less true in the present case. The study provides a wealth of useful information on the operation of the Drug Court obtained from interviews with members of the Drug Court Team, offenders participating on the Program, and professionals associated with various aspects of the Program. While it was not possible to canvas the views of all persons associated with the Program, most of the key players were interviewed. The results of these interviews should be of general interest to policy makers, the legal fraternity and health workers within the alcohol and other drugs field. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Valuable time and the information on which this report is based was contributed by the interviewees. Their contributions are greatly appreciated. Ms Lily Trimboli significantly contributed to the early development and design of the project. Ms Trimboli also documented a large proportion of the background information and details of the Drug Court's policies and procedures. Thanks are also due to Jonathan Nichol for desktop publishing the report.