Reconfiguring Crime Control and Criminal Justice: Governmentality and Problem-Solving Courts

By Sirotich, Frank | University of New Brunswick Law Journal, Annual 2006 | Go to article overview
Save to active project

Reconfiguring Crime Control and Criminal Justice: Governmentality and Problem-Solving Courts


Sirotich, Frank, University of New Brunswick Law Journal


Introduction

Problem-solving courts or special therapeutic courts have proliferated in the last decade. They have emerged across a number of countries such as Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom and the United States. (1) Courts falling under the rubric of problem-solving courts include community courts, drug courts, and mental health courts. Though they vary by case type, they share a number of common elements including the application of judicial authority and the threat of criminal sanctions to compel a defendant's compliance with treatment or a psychosocial intervention over a period of time. Rooted in the principles of therapeutic jurisprudence, a philosophy concerned with producing therapeutic effects for individuals involved in the legal process, these courts link accused to treatment and then supervise this connection to promote treatment compliance. By participating in treatment, accused may forego criminal processing or sentencing or may be accorded a reduction in criminal sanctions. It is expected that treatment engagement will reduce criminal behaviours and the likelihood of future interactions with the criminal justice system. (2)

This article utilizes the concept of governmentality as conceived by Foucault and subsequently developed by others to consider the significance of these courts as emerging practices which define crime control policy and the administration of criminal justice. Governmentality refers to the point of contact between institutional technologies of regulation by state and non-state actors aimed at adjusting the conduct of individuals or populations and techniques of self-regulation through which individuals bring themselves into line with socially accepted aspirations and identities. In the following pages, the concept of governmentality will be employed to track how the regulation of crime has been reproblematized and the governance of criminal justice newly rationalized with the emergence of problem-solving courts. The governmentality analytic will also be employed to examine the emergence of the new technologies of governance utilized by these courts and to consider their significance for the policy areas of crime control and criminal justice. It is suggested that the proliferation of these courts provides evidence of the ascendance of an economic rationality behind the governance of crime and criminal justice. Further, these courts represent a significant permeation of the discourses of human service disciplines into the discourse of criminal justice. Taken together these changes signal a significant alteration in the substance and nature of criminal justice and in the governance of crime.

Problem-solving Courts, Therapeutic Jurisprudence and Crime Control

Problem-solving courts, also known as treatment courts, vary in their organization by jurisdiction, by the type of problem they seek to address and by the type of offender they serve. However, most share five common characteristics: (1) the court concerns itself with a broadened range of non-legal problems such as the psychosocial and treatment needs of accused; (2) the court makes use of its authority to solve these non-legal problems; (3) the court takes into consideration and endeavours to influence outcomes that go beyond the application of the law; (4) the court attempts to advance greater collaboration between state and non-state entities to attain common aims; and (5) the court employs judicial authority to motivate accused to accept treatment and to monitor their adherence to treatment. (3)

Many of these specialty courts are based on the principles of therapeutic jurisprudence, which is an interdisciplinary approach to the application of law. Specifically, therapeutic jurisprudence is concerned with reducing the antitherapeutic effects of legal rules and procedures, and increasing their therapeutic potential. Though therapeutic jurisprudence and problem-solving courts developed separately from one another, (4) they share similar aims and can be seen to have a symbiotic power/knowledge relationship.

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
Loading One moment ...
Project items
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited article

Reconfiguring Crime Control and Criminal Justice: Governmentality and Problem-Solving Courts
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution. We are sorry for any inconvenience.
Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.

Are you sure you want to delete this highlight?