Browsing Justice by Subject "Drunk driving"
Now showing items 1-2 of 2
DUI courts: the need for standardized DUI court evaluationsThere have been numerous evaluations of driving under the influence (DUI) treatment courts. The evaluation process and tools vary widely. This research project reviewed seven individual courts' evaluations, including process evaluations and outcome evaluations to determine the strength of each court's evaluation. The research goal was to better understand how these courts are evaluated, the strength of those evaluation processes, and to determine what, if any, changes can and should be made to strengthen them. Presently, there are not any standardized evaluations tools for DUI treatment courts. This research concludes that evaluations should be standardized and such standardization will allow for a stronger evaluation and the ability to uniformly compare courts and court processes.
Preventing recidivism by using the theory of reintegrative shaming with conferencesDriving while intoxicated in the United States is a major problem with more than 31 percent of national driving fatalities caused by intoxicated drivers. The purpose of the present study is to identify the possibility between the use of reintegrative shaming with conferences and the likelihood that it will reduce the recidivism of driving while intoxicated. The study explores John Brathwaite's theory on reintegrative shaming and how that theory applies in conferences. The emerging theory o f Storylines from Robert Agnew is also explored in its importance when conducting these conferences. Studies conducted in Australia, Pennsylvania, Kansas and Alaska have all suggested that the use of conferences, especially those which utilize reintegrative shaming and reintegrating offenders back into the community reduces the recidivism rates. The research found in this article helps point future studies to examine offenders in a longer term after they have completed reintegrative shaming programs and conferences.