Rethinking Court‐Sanctioned Reintegration Processes: Redemption Rituals as an Alternative to the Drug Court Graduation
| Author | DAVID MEE‐LEE,IZAAK L. WILLIAMS,JOHN R. GALLAGHER,KATHERINE IRWIN |
| Date | 01 June 2017 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/hojo.12203 |
| Published date | 01 June 2017 |
The Howard Journal Vol56 No 2. June 2017 DOI: 10.1111/hojo.12203
ISSN 2059-1098, pp. 244–267
Rethinking Court-Sanctioned
Reintegration Processes: Redemption
Rituals as an Alternative to the Drug
Court Graduation
IZAAK L. WILLIAMS, DAVID MEE-LEE,
JOHN R. GALLAGHER and KATHERINE IRWIN
Izaak L. Williams is a State-certified substance abuse counselor and
independent researcher; David Mee-Lee is a Board-certified psychiatrist and
Senior Vice President for The Change Companies and Train for Change; John
R. Gallagher is Assistant Professor, School of Social Work, Indiana
University; Katherine Irwin is Associate Professor, Department of Sociology,
University of Hawai’i at Manoa
Abstract: This research-based position paper offers critical examination and critique
of the drug court (DC) graduation model and outlines an alternative approach. To
enhance reconfiguration of the current DC graduation system, we propose a redemption-
oriented framework that we believe is better aligned with the rehabilitation literature and
reintegrative shaming theory. These conceptual underpinnings cohere with restorative
justice and together represent a useful interpretive perspective for examining current DC
practices in the United States. They also align with the goals we believe redemption rituals
should elevate. This is based on four main elements of redemption rituals: achievement;
co-ordination of care; status elevation; and moral inclusion. We operationalise these
elements by identifying two constituent factors of each. The article concludes with a
discussion of the implications for DC practice and recommendations for future research
in this area.
Keywords: drug court (DC); graduation ceremony; recidivism; reintegrative
shaming theory; redemption rituals; substance use disorders
Graduation ceremonies are great opportunities to reinforce success and accomplish-
ment, much as we do when someone graduates high school or college. We need
to take every opportunity to give positive feedback and graduation is a milestone
event. (Edward J. Latessa, personal communication, 22 January 2017)
Drug court (DC) graduation ceremonies were first formally introduced
in the United States in 1989, in Dade County (Miami), Florida. However,
White (2014) describes that the roots of this approach can be traced back
to the Keeley Institute, which in the 19th Century awarded its drug and
244
C
2017 The Howard League and John Wiley & Sons Ltd
Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK
The Howard Journal Vol56 No 2. June 2017
ISSN 2059-1098, pp. 244–267
alcohol treatment graduates with a pamphlet which described the nature
of addiction, its belief that it was cured (thus allowing for graduation),
and subsequent requirement of moral fortitude to remain in that semi-
permanent state of resolution:
Youare now numbered among thousands of men and women who have broken the
shackles of alcohol and drug addictions by the Keeley method of treatment. Your
cure will be as permanent as your life, you will never have any craving for alcohol
or other sedative drugs as long as you live, unless you create it by returning to their
use, thus re-poisoning your nerve cells. (White 2014, pp.74–5)
Present-day graduation ceremonies are similarly intended to signify actual
or symbolic change in participants’ attitudes, thinking, and behaviours,
and to create ‘a sense of [validation and] accomplishment that too many
clients and patients have rarely experienced in their lives’ (Mee-Lee 2014b,
para. 4). On DC graduation day,participants receive a certificate signifying
completion of treatment for their substance use disorders and compliance
with DC requirements. Having satisfied the conditions of DC by staying
drug free and not engaging in criminal behaviour,graduation signifies suc-
cessful compliance. While graduation ceremonies may operate differently
from court to court, the following examples provide some insight into the
format and processes.
In Tarrant County (Fort Worth), Texas, for example, graduation cer-
emonies are held each week, assuming that there is a participant ready
to graduate, and according to Cynthia Velazquez, programme manager,
over 150 people attend the ceremony to show support for the participant
(personal communication, 27 August 2015). The graduation ceremony in-
volves the programme manager introducing the participant by discussing
the progress he or she has made throughout the programme, and then
the judge presents the participant with the graduation certificate. At that
point, the participant is invited to share his or her thoughts and experi-
ences with the audience (C. Velazquez,personal communication, 27 August
2015).
Graduation ceremonies in St Joseph County (South Bend), Indiana, are
similar to those in Texas. According to Tara Paiano, programme manager,
the graduation ceremony is held at the end of court and the judge comes
down from her bench to greet the participant with a handshake or even
a hug (personal communication, 1 September 2015). At this point, the
judge provides an overview of the participant’s progress throughout the
programme, praises him or her for graduating the programme, and then
presents the participant with a graduation certificate, a letter noting that
the criminal case(s) has been dismissed, and an incentive for completing the
programme, usually a gift card (for example, $5 to Starbucks) (T. Paiano,
personal communication, 1 September 2015). The DC in Indiana is similar
to that in Texas, as graduates are invited to have their support system,
which may be family members, employers, or members of recovery support
groups (for example, Alcoholics Anonymous (AA)) attend the ceremony.
While there are qualitative studies that capture the lived experiences of
DC participants, these studies are focused mainly on the key components
245
C
2017 The Howard League and John Wiley & Sons Ltd
To continue reading
Request your trial