U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

Another Permanency Perspective

NCJ Number
170516
Journal
Juvenile and Family Court Journal Volume: 48 Issue: 4 Dated: (November 1997) Pages: 65-67
Author(s)
C M McGee
Date Published
1997
Length
3 pages
Annotation
The establishment of a family drug court in Nevada is allowing parents involved in child abuse and neglect cases to benefit from the juvenile justice system's social service mode of rehabilitation.
Abstract
The drug court recognizes a person's ability to become a productive citizen rather than focusing on punishment as the goal of a criminal action. The Nevada program was prompted by the success of the drug court for criminal cases. In the family drug court the potential consequence of the parents' failure was the loss of their children. Participants in the family drug court program are one or both parents who are dealing with both criminal prosecution for drug law offenses and the potential for permanent loss of children due to chemical dependency problems. The program is voluntary. Accepted families enter a 1-year program of intensive intervention. The goal is to reunify participants and their children as a healthy, stable, productive family unit. The program includes a comprehensive assessment, an individualized case plan, the use of an integrated services case manager, bi-weekly court monitoring, and frequent drug tests. Monthly follow-ups often take place for 6 months after successful completion of the program. Nearly all cases need to develop a permanent external support system such as a 12-step program, a therapist, or a probation officer until the children are grown. Important components of the family drug component are the judge's belief that people can make major changes, an integrated case manager with flexible funding resources and authority, collaboration with the criminal court and the community, services available as needed, a CASA program, aftercare and an external support system, family involvement in decision-making, involvement of appropriate personnel, and teamwork. The author is a judge who implemented a family drug court program. Author's address