Abstract Courts and policymakers increasingly emphasize deflection as a preferred response to individuals with behavioral health needs. While deflection plays an important role in reducing unnecessary system entry, it does not replace the legal, constitutional, and institutional functions performed by specialty courts such as mental health courts and drug courts. This article argues that deflection and specialty courts are complementary rather than competing approaches. Drawing on legal history, constitutional doctrine, therapeutic jurisprudence, and empirical research, the analysis demonstrates that specialty…
This content is only available to NACM members
To gain full access to this article you must login, if you are not a member you can start a free trial to access the Court Manager free for the next 7 days and receive access to valuable information relating to your court. After your trial, we encourage you to become a member and take advantage of all that NACM has to offer!
