新南威尔士州的毒品法庭:曾经是新奇事物,如今,一切如常

IF 0.5 Q4 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY Journal of Criminological Research Policy and Practice Pub Date : 2022-06-23 DOI:10.1108/jcrpp-12-2021-0066
A. Clarke
{"title":"新南威尔士州的毒品法庭:曾经是新奇事物,如今,一切如常","authors":"A. Clarke","doi":"10.1108/jcrpp-12-2021-0066","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThe purpose of this research is to considers the degree to which drug courts (DCs) in New South Wales (NSW) adhere to the ten key components (TKCs), which were developed by the National Association of Drug Court Professionals, as a model practice for implementing DCs.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nThis study relied upon semi-structured interviews conducted with 21 professionals who work in the DC field from NSW. The sample represented various stakeholders responsible for the delivery of drug court programs (DCPs) in NSW. A qualitative analysis was conducted, this analysis uncovered practices adopted by the DC that go beyond those that were standardised in the closed-ended questions but nevertheless fell within the TKCs. The qualitative analyses added weight to the results determined by the descriptive statistics.\n\n\nFindings\nThe results confirm that DCs in NSW adhere to the TKCs that describe successful DCPs internationally. In spite of this, several key components accomplished higher adherence rates than others. What can be said is that over 60% of the component’s benchmarks achieved the 80% target determined by the writer.\n\n\nResearch limitations/implications\nThe key components that have lower adherence rates are anticipated and must not be interpreted as undesirable results. DCs are encouraged to modify their programme characteristics to ensure further adherence to the specified benchmarks. To this extent, high regard is given to the practices adopted and identified through the qualitative data analysis.\n\n\nPractical implications\nThe recommendations made to DCs in NSW are consistent with implementing model DCPs as defined by the National Association of Drug Court Professionals in 1997.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nThe TKCs are fundamentally standards for implementation and open an opportunity for discussion and are open for opportunity and examination. In theory and practice, each DC may interpret and implement the TKCs differently. In this regard, there is value in gaining an appreciation of pw DCs are interpreting the TKCs and applying them. It is business as usual at DCs; however, this research has demonstrated that there is no lack of innovation when it comes to DC in NSW implementing the TKCs.\n","PeriodicalId":43553,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Criminological Research Policy and Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"New South Wales drug courts: once a novelty – today, its business as usual\",\"authors\":\"A. Clarke\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/jcrpp-12-2021-0066\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nPurpose\\nThe purpose of this research is to considers the degree to which drug courts (DCs) in New South Wales (NSW) adhere to the ten key components (TKCs), which were developed by the National Association of Drug Court Professionals, as a model practice for implementing DCs.\\n\\n\\nDesign/methodology/approach\\nThis study relied upon semi-structured interviews conducted with 21 professionals who work in the DC field from NSW. The sample represented various stakeholders responsible for the delivery of drug court programs (DCPs) in NSW. A qualitative analysis was conducted, this analysis uncovered practices adopted by the DC that go beyond those that were standardised in the closed-ended questions but nevertheless fell within the TKCs. The qualitative analyses added weight to the results determined by the descriptive statistics.\\n\\n\\nFindings\\nThe results confirm that DCs in NSW adhere to the TKCs that describe successful DCPs internationally. In spite of this, several key components accomplished higher adherence rates than others. What can be said is that over 60% of the component’s benchmarks achieved the 80% target determined by the writer.\\n\\n\\nResearch limitations/implications\\nThe key components that have lower adherence rates are anticipated and must not be interpreted as undesirable results. DCs are encouraged to modify their programme characteristics to ensure further adherence to the specified benchmarks. To this extent, high regard is given to the practices adopted and identified through the qualitative data analysis.\\n\\n\\nPractical implications\\nThe recommendations made to DCs in NSW are consistent with implementing model DCPs as defined by the National Association of Drug Court Professionals in 1997.\\n\\n\\nOriginality/value\\nThe TKCs are fundamentally standards for implementation and open an opportunity for discussion and are open for opportunity and examination. In theory and practice, each DC may interpret and implement the TKCs differently. In this regard, there is value in gaining an appreciation of pw DCs are interpreting the TKCs and applying them. It is business as usual at DCs; however, this research has demonstrated that there is no lack of innovation when it comes to DC in NSW implementing the TKCs.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":43553,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Criminological Research Policy and Practice\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Criminological Research Policy and Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/jcrpp-12-2021-0066\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Criminological Research Policy and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jcrpp-12-2021-0066","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究的目的是考虑新南威尔士州(NSW)的毒品法院(dc)遵守由全国毒品法院专业人员协会制定的十个关键组成部分(TKCs)的程度,作为实施dc的示范实践。设计/方法/方法本研究依赖于对来自新南威尔士州的21位在DC领域工作的专业人士进行的半结构化访谈。样本代表了新南威尔士州负责毒品法庭项目(dcp)交付的各种利益相关者。进行了定性分析,该分析揭示了DC采用的做法,这些做法超出了封闭式问题中标准化的做法,但仍属于TKCs。定性分析增加了描述性统计结果的权重。研究结果证实,新南威尔士州的DCs遵循国际上描述成功dcp的TKCs。尽管如此,几个关键的组成部分完成了比其他更高的依从率。可以说,超过60%的组件基准达到了作者确定的80%的目标。研究的局限性/意义具有较低依从率的关键成分是预期的,不能被解释为不希望的结果。鼓励发展中国家修改其方案特点,以确保进一步遵守规定的基准。在这种程度上,高度重视通过定性数据分析采用和确定的做法。实际意义向新南威尔士州的dc提出的建议与1997年全国药物法庭专业人员协会定义的实施模型dcp一致。原创性/价值TKCs是实施的基本标准,并为讨论和审查提供了机会。在理论和实践中,每个DC可能以不同的方式解释和实施TKCs。在这方面,有价值的是获得对pw dc解释TKCs和应用它们的赞赏。dc的业务一切如常;然而,这项研究表明,在新南威尔士州实施TKCs时,DC并不缺乏创新。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
New South Wales drug courts: once a novelty – today, its business as usual
Purpose The purpose of this research is to considers the degree to which drug courts (DCs) in New South Wales (NSW) adhere to the ten key components (TKCs), which were developed by the National Association of Drug Court Professionals, as a model practice for implementing DCs. Design/methodology/approach This study relied upon semi-structured interviews conducted with 21 professionals who work in the DC field from NSW. The sample represented various stakeholders responsible for the delivery of drug court programs (DCPs) in NSW. A qualitative analysis was conducted, this analysis uncovered practices adopted by the DC that go beyond those that were standardised in the closed-ended questions but nevertheless fell within the TKCs. The qualitative analyses added weight to the results determined by the descriptive statistics. Findings The results confirm that DCs in NSW adhere to the TKCs that describe successful DCPs internationally. In spite of this, several key components accomplished higher adherence rates than others. What can be said is that over 60% of the component’s benchmarks achieved the 80% target determined by the writer. Research limitations/implications The key components that have lower adherence rates are anticipated and must not be interpreted as undesirable results. DCs are encouraged to modify their programme characteristics to ensure further adherence to the specified benchmarks. To this extent, high regard is given to the practices adopted and identified through the qualitative data analysis. Practical implications The recommendations made to DCs in NSW are consistent with implementing model DCPs as defined by the National Association of Drug Court Professionals in 1997. Originality/value The TKCs are fundamentally standards for implementation and open an opportunity for discussion and are open for opportunity and examination. In theory and practice, each DC may interpret and implement the TKCs differently. In this regard, there is value in gaining an appreciation of pw DCs are interpreting the TKCs and applying them. It is business as usual at DCs; however, this research has demonstrated that there is no lack of innovation when it comes to DC in NSW implementing the TKCs.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
20.00%
发文量
14
期刊最新文献
A quantitative analysis of gender impact in judgements of offenders with mental illnesses Best practice in sexual offender rehabilitation and reintegration programs What is optimal integrated multi-agency Throughcare? A global e-Delphi consensus study defining core components of effective rehabilitation and reintegration programming A Critical Framework for Analyzing the Impacts of Sub-Federal Immigration Policy in Post 9/11 United States Dangerous, Deserving, or Harmed: Understanding the Formation of Anti-Carceral Policy Attitudes Among Urban, Liberal Voters
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1