They Fight For Us, Can We Show the Same Respect? A Call for Veterans Courts in Maryland

      

            In 2012, there were over 1 million American soldiers in active duty across the world.[1] Luckily this number has dramatically decreased in the recent years, but that leaves the United States with a growing number of veterans returning from war trying to readjust to civilian life. Veterans have to deal with the tragedies that they witnessed while serving their country, and most fail to seek any help to deal with what they experienced. Issues such as posttraumatic stress disorder and substance abuse are common problems faced by these returning veterans. These problems have been linked to increased criminal behavior, landing a number of our veterans in our criminal justice system. The men and women who were brave enough to fight for our country now face time in prison.

To combat this threat of prison, Judge Robert Russell developed the first Veterans Court in Buffalo, New York, in 2008.[2] Veterans Courts are problem-solving courts aimed at helping veterans deal with psychological problems resulting from war, while still holding the veteran accountable for the criminal behavior. In areas that have Veterans Courts, veterans who enter the criminal justice system have the option to accept treatment from Veterans Courts. Once accepted into the VC treatment program, the adversarial roles of the attorneys dissolve, and the parties become a team focused on helping the veteran. The team develops a plan of treatment, including mental health counseling, substance abuse counseling, and help with employment, housing, and education. The veteran is also paired with a peer mentor who can help the veteran deal with problems that are unique to serving in active combat. The judge leads the treatment team and ensures that the veteran is following the treatment. The whole process is individualized for each veteran and looks for a holistic approach incorporating a wide array of services.[3] Everyone on the team is focused on helping the veteran succeed through the program and get the necessary help he/she needs.

While the concept of Veterans Courts is still relatively new, the impact of the courts has been favorable. For example, in Pennsylvania, those participating in the Veterans Court program had a recidivism rate of one percent.[4] Similarly in New York, veterans had a recidivism rate of 40 percent when not in a veterans treatment program, and that number dropped to 6 percent for those veterans who completed the treatment program.[5]

Maryland has approximately 476,000 veterans residing in the state today.[6] In 2012, Governor Martin O’Malley approved a task force to research the effectiveness of Veterans Courts.[7] The task force strongly recommended a pilot program for Veteran Courts in Maryland, and a Veterans Court should start in 2015 in Prince George’s County.[8] Unfortunately, this is all dependent upon funding. While funding is a problem for all programs across the state, I believe that this program is so beneficial for the veterans across Maryland that this program needs to get started so veterans can get the help they deserve. These people have put their lives on the line to protect our freedoms.  We should be able to provide necessary services to help veterans return to civilian life.

---

[1] https://www.vetfriends.com/us-deployments-overseas/index.cfm

[2] Hon. C. Phillip Nichols Jr., Veterans Courts: A New Concept for Maryland, 47 Md. B.J. 43, 44 (2014)

[3] See generally Nichols, supra note 2; http://justiceforvets.org/sites/default/files/files/Ten%20Key%20Components%20of%20Veterans%20Treatment%20Courts%20.pdf

[4] Nichols, supra note 2, at 49.

[5] Id.

[6] Id. at 44.

[7] Beth Totman, Seeing the Justice System Through a Soldier’s Eyes: A Call to Action for Maryland to Adopt a Veterans Treatment Court System, 16 J. Health Care L. & Pol’y 431, 434 (2013).

[8] Nichols, supra note 2, at 46.

 

Dealing with Feelings of Inadequacy in the Truancy Court Program

Each week, law students involved in the University of Baltimore School of Law Sayra and Neil Meyerhoff Center for Families, Children and the Courts Truancy Court Program (TCP) discuss at the weekly team meeting each of our TCP student’s cases and the deeper issues that students may be experiencing that result in truancy.  This past week one of my fellow law school classmates bravely expressed that he feels inadequate to help the TCP students.  We see these students once a week for an hour, and we talk about their goals, problems, and possible solutions, but is it helping?  My classmate’s comment struck me because it’s a feeling I have from time to time.  Some of the TCP students have issues that are hard to find solutions to, including illnesses in the family, poverty, and overcrowded houses.  In these situations, what can we as law students do?  One of my TCP student’s mothers was diagnosed with cancer, which required the student to miss school a few times last year.   Situations like that are problematic because there is no quick and easy solution.  Even with the “simpler” issues, such as being disruptive in class or poor grades, we direct the TCP students to coach classes and encourage them to get help.  Nonetheless, there is always the lingering feeling that the work we do for the TCP students is not helping them.

I find myself not only wanting the TCP students to end their truant behavior, but I also want them to become scholars and leaders in their community--especially with the group of TCP students I have at Reginald F. Lewis High School.  I see so much potential in these students and would love to see them achieve their short-term and long-term goals.  Realistically, however, I understand that the students face so many hurdles, some of which are beyond the reach of my ability to assist.   It’s a good feeling when we see the TCP students absorbing what we say in our one-on-one meetings at the TCP sessions, but I struggle with the thought, what happens when we leave?

In response to my classmate’s comment in our meeting, one of the TCP staff members simply stated, “We help the students more than we know.”  It is so easy to feel as though you are not doing enough because some of the tougher problems are not solved immediately.  I didn’t take time to consider, however, that my presence is helpful.  For some of these students, the TCP provides the support and attentiveness they do not receive anywhere else.  That statement put things in perspective for me.  Nothing great is achieved overnight, and you never know how your actions may be positively affecting another person.  Naturally, I still want the TCP students to end their truancy and achieve their goals, but I understand that things take time and that my help is not in vain.  I look forward to continuing my work with the TCP because it is a huge step in the right direction for the students involved.

The Story of George Trevino: A Lesson that the Holistic Approach Employed by Family Courts Requires a Concerted Effort by All

           

           This semester I have graciously served as a Student Fellow for the Sayra and Neil Meyerhoff Center For Children, Families, and the Courts. Throughout my involvement with this program, I have had the pleasure of interacting with enthusiastic Baltimore City students, classmates that share a similar passion for family and the law, and multiple professors and professionals that challenge each of us to think independently and reach reasonable, well-grounded solutions. Though my experiences with this program have been exceptional, I find that the common perception regarding family law, for the most part, holds true: individuals that practice this area of law must be inherently stoic, for the challenges presented are mentally taxing. Few things, if any, have moved me like the story of George Trevino.[1]

George Trevino was presumably born to a family less fortunate, living in a van with his mother and two siblings until age six. At this time, George entered the child welfare system as a neglected child, resulting in separation from each family member. Despite the fact that George bounced from home to home, enduring years of foster care drift, he eventually thrived when given the chance to remain in a placement for one full year. In what became an axiomatic failure by the welfare system, the State removed George from this stable environment and assumed that his best interests were suited elsewhere. He was subsequently placed with his uncle and aunt, one a drug dealer, the other a substance abuser. George regressed and exhibited traits he never had before. His plummeting grades and truant behavior culminated in street gang involvement and eventually criminal behavior. As a result, his welfare case was terminated, and he was moved to the delinquency court system.  

Not only does the story of George Trevino represent a failure by the welfare system, but it is also a failure by legal personnel involved in the process, as well. His Juvenile Court Judge was never apprised of the fact that he had been raised in foster care, and apparently no one, not even his lawyer, the social worker, or the case manager, acknowledged the fact that when George was provided with a positive environment, he thrived. Because his situation was handled in such a horrid manner, George Trevino was deprived the privilege of life. In fact, he expressed this helpless feeling in a poem he wrote while incarcerated, with a passage that read, “there’s no way out, my screams have no voice no matter how loud I shout.” George Trevino could have been you or I. The sad truth is that there are presumably hundreds of George Trevinos, each falling victim to challenging life circumstances. And yet, as gut wrenching as his story is, it can be used as a learning tool to foster the holistic approach to family law cases that should be employed by judges, lawyers, social workers, and other figures in the family court system.  

Throughout the course of this semester, we have explored concepts that include therapeutic jurisprudence and preventive law, among others. Both theories share a relationship essential to the holistic approach. The concept of preventive law ensures that client contact with the court system, if at all, is minimal. The concept of therapeutic jurisprudence expresses the belief that the law ought to affect individuals in a beneficial manner. Essentially, preventive law can be thought of as the task, while therapeutic jurisprudence is the guiding hand. Yet, despite the promulgation of such theories, family related matters appear before the court system at alarming rates. Data suggest that these matters comprise more than half of the complaints filed in state trial courts. And although this figure is astronomically high, indicating that these cases need proper attention, family disputes are still perceived as the “stepchildren” of the justice system. In order to ensure that the story of George Trevino becomes less common, this perception must change.

Key figures have taken important steps to minimize this perception through the establishment and implementation of the unified family court system. These courts feature several crucial qualities that include, but are not limited to, a user-friendly atmosphere, a vast array of services, and specialized case management. The mere existence of these court systems, standing alone, however, does not guarantee that they will be effective. Each participant and component within this system, ranging from judges to various medical personnel, must challenge each other and strive for great results. We live in a society premised on the concept of family, and with every positive intervention, a life could be improved. It is no stretch of the imagination to suggest that the story of George Trevino could have been different had his case been handled in a unified family court system rather than the fragmented court system he endured. Had key issues been raised to the judge or had the individuals assigned to George’s case displayed a higher degree of care, his outcome could have, and likely would have, been different. The case of George Trevino suggests that in order for the unified family court system to avoid similar outcomes and rid itself of its “stepchild” stigma, all personnel must exercise their best judgment through a thoughtful, concerted effort, leaving no detail, no matter how slim, unnoticed.    

---

[1] Catherine J. Ross, The Failure of Fragmentation: The Promise of a System of Unified Family Courts, 52 Family Law Quarterly 3 (1998).

Applications of Human Development to Truancy

In administering the Truancy Court Program (TCP), the Sayra and Neil Meyerhoff Center for Families, Children and the Courts (CFCC) applies one of its founding philosophies, the ecology of human development, to a real-world setting. The ecology of human development focuses on four different systems that effect affect a child’s daily routine, though children may not be aware of all of them. Those four systems are:

            • the microsystem: where children have contact with those influential in their lives (siblings,
               parents, teachers)
            • the mesosystem: relationships and connections between microsystems (home-school, etc.)
            • the exosystem: where children don’t participate but where significant decisions are made 
               affecting child and adult (choice of employment)
            • the macrosystem: the blueprints for organizing the institutional life of a society

TCP is uniquely suited for such a philosophy, as both its in- and out-of-school components factor into at least one of the above systems. The ecology of human development complements CFCC’s other underlying philosophy, therapeutic jurisprudence, to achieve goals across all system levels.

CFCC Student Fellows and staff join faculty from participating TCP schools to interact with program participants at the micro level. In weekly meetings, they assess problems occurring between the home-school relationship (mesosystem) that cause students to arrive late to school or not at all. These problems frequently involve a lack of communication at the micro level between parents, students, and teachers. A deficiency in communication can lead to misunderstandings between participants, which eventually blossoms into distrust of the school system at the meso level. Events at the micro level, therefore, greatly affect what goes on up the chain, which is why the TCP’s on-the-ground approach is so important. The home-school relationship is quintessential to what the TCP does, but there are other important relationships? Can you think of anything else?

The data-gathering component of the TCP can influence policymakers in the exosystem to make changes that attempt to eliminate the types of barriers to school attendance over which children have little control, such as transportation. Lack of site-specific transportation and reliance by children on general public transit systems is a good example of an early exosystem problem the TCP has encountered.  A parent’s choice of employment is another, more private example of an exosystem issue that can affect a child, as a parent who works far away from the school, or who also needs to take public transportation, may be unable to ensure that their child gets to school on time.

Finally, the macrosystem is the farthest we can pull back from the TCP table, and, thus, it is what the program has the least power to influence. Participation in the TCP by local judges and its public funding may relate to the program’s impact at this level. While the TCP has its greatest influence at the microsystem and mesosystem levels, it is at the macrosystem level where aggregate change begins to build up, and where, hopefully, the seeds of change planted at the other system levels will be nurtured by policymakers as well as by parents.

Drug Treatment Court’s Effect on Recidivism Rates

Drug treatment courts are a source of therapeutic jurisprudence as problem-solving courts.  Their purpose is to resolve underlying issues that may be the source of crimes that are being committed with a holistic and big-picture approach.  In Baltimore City, the Drug Treatment Court was created in 1994 due to a study relating 85% of crimes back to substance abuse and addiction.  It is a way of preventing incarceration by providing an alternative.  Four main goals of Baltimore City’s Drug Treatment Court are to:

·         “Provide pretrial, drug-dependent detainees with close supervision

·         Allow judges to use a cost-effective sentencing option by providing a fully integrated and comprehensive treatment program

·         Reduce recidivism rates of street crime committed by drug-motivated offenders

·         Facilitate the academic, vocational, and prosocial skill development of offenders”[1]

Because of the many actors involved in achieving these goals, the whole court system is essentially working together to reduce the overall recidivism rates, especially when substance driven crimes are being committed.  The systems that are provided for offenders are supervision, status hearings through judicial monitoring, drug testing, and drug treatment.  In order to graduate from the program, participants must have employment, “completed 20 hours of community service, have participated in the program for a minimum of 12 months, and have at least 9 months of clean urine samples.”[2]

 

Research has found that the offenders involved in drug treatment courts have a lower recidivism rate than those who are not.  It has been generally proven that “[t]he average effect of participation is analogous to a drop in recidivism from 50% to 38%; and, these effects last up to three years.”[3]  Although by only about 10%, the re-arrest rates had decreased, but new arrests had significantly decreased.  The Baltimore City Drug Treatment Court not only has the effect of reducing recidivism rates while a person is in the program, but also persists even after the program is completed.[4]  Drug treatment courts as a problem-solving court has proven to be successful and continues to be implemented.

 

---

[1] https://www.crimesolutions.gov/ProgramDetails.aspx?ID=69

[2] https://www.crimesolutions.gov/ProgramDetails.aspx?ID=69

[3] http://www.courtinnovation.org/sites/default/files/documents/Assessing_Efectiveness.pdf

[4] http://www.ccjs.umd.edu/sites/ccjs.umd.edu/files/pubs/Gottfredson_etal_2006.pdf