The Strength of the Participant-Judge Relationship Predicts Better Drug Court Outcomes

1 This paper was presented at the Australasian Professional Society on Alcohol and other Drugs conference in Melbourne on 19 November 2012.

Abstract

This article explores mechanisms underpinning the impact of the drug court judge on participant outcomes. There were 93 participants taking part in a randomized controlled trial of intensive judicial supervision (IJS) at the Parramatta Drug Court, Sydney, Australia. IJS participants appeared before the judge twice weekly and the supervision as usual (SAU) participants appeared once weekly. A questionnaire assessed the extent to which participants formed a strong relationship with the judge, their understanding of programme requirements and perceived deterrence. IJS participants were more likely than SAU participants to indicate that they have a good relationship with the judge (73.9% vs. 44.7%, p = .004). Participants who formed a closer bond had lower odds of substance use (odds ratio = 0.46, p = .004). The drug court judge appears to be crucial to the drug court rehabilitation process. The formation of strong interpersonal bonds that appears to underpin this effect is consistent with the therapeutic jurisprudential principles upon which drug courts are based.

Key words:

• celerity
• deterrence
• drug court
• education
• judicial alliance
• judicial supervision
• therapeutic jurisprudence

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge Dr Don Weatherburn, Judge Roger Dive, other members of the Parramatta Drug Court team and our reviewers for comments on earlier versions of this manuscript. Particular thanks to Pat Mendham, Filiz Eminov and Jaklin Naimi for assistance with data collection and, of course, to the Parramatta Drug Court participants for giving up their time to complete our questionnaire.

Note

Notes

1 This paper was presented at the Australasian Professional Society on Alcohol and other Drugs conference in Melbourne on 19 November 2012.