Objectives Of Veterans Court And Why/Why Not It Should Be Introduced In Australia?

Introduction to Veterans Court

There are a number of organizations that that involved in veteran courts. These include the judge, prosecutor, defense counsel and the department of veterans affairs as well as some other community based support organization. The Objective of establishing veteran courts is to rehabilitate and restore veterans as the contributing an active members of the community.
The focus of veteran Courts program is on the veterans entered the criminal justice system. Therefore, the veteran court supervises the treatment plan for dealing with causes of the behavior of veterans and substance abuse. Some of the issues that are generally handled by the treatment programs are:

Post traumatic stress disorder,
Anger issues,
Traumatic brain injury,
Drug abuse,
Alcohol abuse,
Domestic violence

In this way, the veteran courts provide a chance to the veterans for returning to the community in a more beneficial and advantages manner. For this purpose, these courts focus on the basic problems that play a role in the involvement with the criminal justice system and provide particular rehabilitation programs (Ahlin and Douds, 2018).
The veteran courts have been allowed to operate differently, according to the needs of individual jurisdiction. The veterans who have their cases in the jurisdictions that do not have a veterans court, are required to address the case within the court and eligible for a hearing by the veterans court. At the same time, each Court establishes it’s own eligibility rules. However, in general, a veteran is required to make a request for being based on the veteran Court program. The judge comma prosecutor and defense counsel are all required to agree that veteran court is the most appropriate forum to manage the particular case.

A veteran remains eligible for a hearing by the veteran’s court if satisfactory progress has been made under the treatment program ordered by the court and also by complying with the other requirements mentioned by the veteran’s court. In this regard, it needs to be noted that the veterans do not have a right according to which there case should be assigned to the veteran’s court. Therefore once case has been assigned to the veterans court, it is required that the veteran should continuously earn the privilege to be heard by the Veterans Court by complying with all the requirements of the court (Douds and Ahlin, 2015).

Eligible veterans can take part in the court by making a voluntary request that their case should be transferred to the veteran’s court. This court meets as a separate court docket. Each case is evaluated by the prosecutor and the defense counsel. Both of them are required to agree that the case is appropriate for being heard by the veteran’s court. Then the case is presented before the judge for final approval. Then the veteran’s justice outreach specialist of the Department of Veterans Affairs verifies the eligibility of the veteran for the veteran’s benefits and an initial evaluation of the treatment requirements of the veteran is conducted. If found eligible for VA benefits, the veteran is then directed to the local VA medical facility so that more in-depth evaluation can be conducted. On the basis of this evaluation, the parties agree regarding a treatment plan that is going to be presented to the judge. After the judge approves the plan, the veteran starts the treatment program that has been described in the plan (Blue-Howells, Clark, Berk-Clark and McGuire, 2013).

Objectives of Veterans Court

The progress that has been made in the treatment program is closely monitored by the court. In case of any non-compliance with the treatment program, sanctions can be imposed. These include incarceration, community service or reprimand by the judge. On the other hand, if there is continuous non-compliance, it is possible to remove the veteran from the veteran’s court. In such a case, any favorable terms of a plea agreement can be revoked and a sentence can be imposed (Cavanaugh, 2011). In case of the SSO completion of the veteran court program, the divergent eligible veterans can have the case against them dismissed. On probation, the veterans may have the probation terminated successfully. The veterans, whose cases are being hired by the veteran’s court can expect to be subject to more frequent reviews by the court for monitoring the progress made by the veteran in the treatment program. The veterans who have made satisfactory progress are recognized by the court. They are also offered words of encouragement by the Judge. On the other hand, the veterans who have not made satisfactory progress may expect encouragement of completely different nature and it is also possible to impose sanctions against them (Clark, 2015).

At this point, it needs to be mentioned that significant differences are present between the mental health courts, drug courts and the veterans treatment courts. There are certain key components that provide the basis for successful operation of the veterans treatment court. The veterans treatment court promotes recovery, sobriety and stability with the help of a coordinated response to the dependency of the veterans on drugs, alcohol or the management of their mental illness. In order to achieve these objectives, a team approach needs to be adopted. Under this approach, there is collaboration and cooperation of traditional partners who are present in the veteran treatment courts and also in the mental health treatment courts along with the Veterans Administration Healthcare network, the family support organizations for the veterans and the veteran volunteer mentors.

In order to facilitate the progress made by the veterans in treatment, the prosecutor as well as the defense counsel is required to give up their traditional adversarial relationship in the courtroom and work jointly as a team. When a particular veteran has been accepted in treatment court program the focus of the team should be on ensuring the recovery and law-abiding behavior of the veteran and they should not concentrate on the merits of the case pending.

The early identification of the veterans who have entered the criminal justice system is also a significant part of the process of placement in veteran’s treatment court program. It is widely recognized that arrests can have traumatic effect on the life of a person. It results in an immediate crisis. It can also compel the recognition of an offence inappropriately and into the open, which makes the denial for the need for treatment by the veteran more difficult.

Even if the veteran treatment court team is really concerned with criminal activity, mental illness and AOD use, it may also be required to consider co-occurring problems like primary medical problems, homelessness, transmittable diseases, unemployment, basic educational deficits and poor job preparation along with spouse and family troubles, including domestic violence as well as the continuous effects of wartime trauma. Veteran peer mentors a necessity for the veteran treatment court team. It is also necessary that there should be continuous interaction between the ongoing veteran peer mentors and the Court. The need is to maintain an active and supportive relationship with the help of treatment which increases the chances that the veteran is going to remain in treatment and at the same time it also improves the chances for law-abiding behavior and sobriety by the veteran (Holbrook and Anderson, 2011).

How Veterans Court Works

Another matter that is essential is court ordered AOD testing. The reason is that an accurate testing program proves to be most efficient and objective method of establishing a framework for accountability and to measure the progress made by each participant. The progress made by the veteran through the treatment court experience has to be measured by the compliance of the veteran with the treatment regimen. The veteran’s treatment courts reward cooperation and also respond to noncompliance. For this purpose the Courts have established a coordinated strategy. This includes a continuum of graduated responses towards the ongoing drug abuse and other behavior that is noncompliant.

In response to the question if Australia should or should not consider specialist veterans courts, it has been claimed that the specialists courts are more likely to consider the significant treatment beach that are present in case of the veterans. Therefore it is important that the government in Australia considers introduction of specialist courts for the defendants want war veterans. The reason is that experts have found post traumatic stress disorder and other significant mental health issues related with serving the military are considered by the courts, as these issues sometimes weigh more strongly in favor of the defendants and sometimes they fail to do so. It has also been informed that there has been a change in court treatment of the veterans who have the time as there has been a change in social perceptions regarding the war. After the Vietnam War, which was the longest war in which Australia was involved and which was marked by significant controversy, the veterans are still generally treated as special cases but for different reasons. It can be stated that after the war of Vietnam, the veterans were considered as special and distinct on the basis of their diminished status and were wrapped up in the notion of trauma, incapacity and the miniature atomic and as a result, diminished responsibility. The experts also point out towards the fact that being a veteran is not always helpful for the case of the defendant (Friedman, 2006). For example in the case in South Australia, the court considered if the fact of military service alone resulted in special treatment or if serving as part of dangerous mission was also a consideration. Illustrated by the court that there was not any concrete and specific submissions made regarding the war record of the defendant because it may help in justifying special treatment. Therefore, the experts found out that these are the types of calculation that take place while trying to evaluate a person, that is based on the social attitudes to service. In view of the complexity and sensitivity of these cases it can be said that Australia needs to consider the establishment of specialist veterans Court’s as are present in the US. The reason is that these courts will be in a better position to consider the significant act requirements of the veteran that cannot be provided by the prisons (Blodgett, Fuh, Maisel and Midboe, 2013).

Another point that can be highlighted in favor of the veteran treatment courts in Australia is the significance of providing content as opposed to the people who have returned from war or military service and to really see causes of serious offenses that have been allegedly committed by them, if the goal was rehabilitation. The specialists courts that have been pioneered in the United States were Drugs Courts and Domestic Violence Courts and these operate on the rational of treatment instead of retribution. The sentences in the United States are very severe as they go up to death penalty and at the same time, these courts also provide a method of stepping beyond that trajectory and allow the adoption of a different rationale towards sentencing.

Another point that can be highlighted in favor of the veteran treatment courts in Australia is the significance of providing content as opposed to the people who have returned from war or military service and to really see causes of serious offenses that have been allegedly committed by them, if the goal was rehabilitation. The specialists courts have been pioneered in the United States were drugs courts and domestic violence courts are also present and these operate on the rational of treatment instead of retribution. The sentences in the United States are very severe as they go up to death penalty and at the same time, these courts also provide a method of stepping beyond that trajectory and allow the adoption of a different rationale towards sentencing.

References

Ahlin, E. M., & Douds, A. S. (2018). Military socialization: A motivating factor for seeking treatment in a veterans’ treatment court. American Journal of Criminal Justice.

Blodgett, J. C., Fuh, I. L., Maisel, N. C., & Midboe, A. M. (2013). A structured evidence review to identify treatment needs of justice-involved veterans and associated psychological inter-ventions. Menlo Park, CA: Center for Health Care Evaluation, VA Palo Alto Health Care System

Blue-Howells, J. H., Clark, S. C., van den Berk-Clark, C., & McGuire, J. F. (2013). The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs Justice programs and the sequential intercept model: Case examples in national dissemination of intervention for justice-involved veterans. Psychological Services, 10, 48-53

Cavanaugh, J. M. (2011). Helping those who serve: Veterans treatment courts foster rehabilita- tion and reduce recidivism for offending combat veterans. New England Law Review, 45, 463-487

Clark, S. (2015). VA programs for justice-involved veterans. Presented at Veteran’s Needs: The Current State of Veterans in Our Courts, School of Law, University of Baltimore, MD

Douds, A. S., & Ahlin, E. M. (2015). Untapped resources: What Veteran Service Officers can provide for probation and parole. Federal Probation, 79, 17-20

Friedman, M. (2006). Posttraumatic stress disorder among military returnees from Afghanistan and Iraq. American Journal of Psychiatry, 163, 586-593

Holbrook, J., & Anderson, S. (2011). VTCs: Early outcomes and key indicators for success (Widener Law School Legal Studies Research Paper Series No. 11-25). Wilmington, DE: Widener Law School