adjudication, and corrections. This trend has three corollaries in recent history: (1) more offenses are seen to be ''caused'' by drugs; (2) drug and drug-related offenses, as such, are contributing more and more clients to the justice system; and (3) drug treatment is increasingly being sought as an adjunct or alternative to conventional punishment. Whereas public concern over drug-generated offenses has led to a stiffening of sentencing practices and contributed to the crowding of courts and detention facilities, programs that provide treatment and education for addicts and other users are often substituted for regular detention.
This paper offers a preliminary look at the overlap and connections between the criminal justice system and publicly supported drug treatment, assessing at the county level the appropriateness of the relationships between the justice system, drug users, and treatment programs. Although the two systems often work in parallel to handle drug-using persons, choosing from a complex set of alternative responses to particular circumstances, the two systems diverge in orientation and mission: one is designed to render judgment and due punishment according to a moral and legal code, the other to provide diagnostic and therapeutic services for a quasi-medical condition using scientific and clinical principles. The result is tension: political, philosophical, ethical, and instrumental. The recent "drug wars" increase the pressure on both systems to provide winning solutions. There is confusion as to how a person and a problem are to be defined; it is unclear how and when the definition (and thus, solution) changes from a criminal to a therapeutic one. There are different standards applied in different jurisdictions and even within jurisdictions at different administrative levels. Mandates to treatment, like many other judicial mandates, are subject to much local discretion and variability, in terms of selection criteria, sanction patterns, procedures, and the balance between the civil liberties of the individual and the prerogatives of the state (Kittrie, 1971; Wexler, 1973; President's Commission on Mental Health, 1978; Weissman and DuPont, 1982; Brown et al., 1987).
This paper seeks to provide a level of historical perspective to set the stage for a detailed case study analysis. It discusses the statutes that guide the criminal justice/drug treatment interface, the typical practices of the personnel within the systems, and the larger criminal justice and drug treatment ecologies in which they operate. There is reference to the drug treatment literature, the criminological literature on the emergence of alternatives to incarceration, discussions in both literatures on the specifics of the involvement of the two systems, and federal policy-setting documents, such as the papers from the Second National Commission on Marihuana and Drug Abuse (1973a,b,c), the task panel reports to the President's Commission on Mental Health (1978), and the report from the White House Conference for a Drug Free America (1988).