Corrections_Today_May_June_2019

Communications & Publications

The various chapters of Seamone’s book discuss many effects of service including military discipline and punishment detailing the differences between military justice and civilian justice; the relationship between military service and crime; manifestations of service to include deployment and combat trauma; a summary of benefits for veterans while confined; problem- solving justice (veteran courts) to divert veterans from confinement; and institutionally-based programs and veteran’s dorms. The history of involvement with incarcerated veterans interested me, such as Colonel Charles R. Forbes of the Veteran’s Bureau who, after WWI, worked with states to transfer those with mental health needs to psychiatric care. Because the laws at that time did not discriminate on benefits as a result of incarceration, Forbes and his staff worked on a project called the Prison Cleanup Campaign. Or when Stanley Rinehart of the bureau advocated incarcerated veterans’ interests beyond the federal level, advocating states to provide relief from prison sentences. Rinehart stated, “The state must see to it that every service man in prison gets an opportunity to have a hearing if he deserves it, or hospital treatment instead of a jail cell, if this is what he needs.” 3

Or when Don Little of the Arthur Kill Confinement Facility in New York established the first veteran’s dorm in the state. But as interesting as all of this is, especially for those who work in either community or institutional corrections, the issues of problem-solving justice and institutional programs probably have more meat. As described by Seamone, there are some notable trends, and many only limit eligibility to those who are not violent. Many also only limit eligibility to those who are convicted of misdemeanors. Drug treatment courts have been around since the late 1980s, starting in Miami-Dade County, and mental health courts emerged in Broward County in 1997, but Judge Robert Russell began a special docket for veterans in 2004 because of the increasing numbers of Iraq and Afghanistan veterans who were appearing on his criminal docket with readjustment issues. From these beginnings,

there are more than 400 veterans treatment courts who are situated throughout the country with almost 8,000 mostly white males, in their 40’s appearing within 2018. With one-third of these veterans having a PTSD diagnosis, the common offenses were DUI, public disorder and substance use violations. 4 As described by Seamone, there are some notable trends, and many only limit eligibility to those who are not violent. Many also only limit eligibility to those who are convicted of misdemeanors. The author indicates that these trends and limitations may prevent those needing the most intervention an opportunity to receive it. The following considerations are considered in making determinations of eligibility: 1. Severity of the crime 2. Type of crime 3. Military experience 4. Military campaign (Global War on Terrorism or earlier)

5. Mental condition type 6. Mental condition origin 7. Veterans administration eligibility 8. Adjudication stage 9. Length of treatment

In many cases, only those who are eligible for benefits are able to participate and, in some fashion, this makes sense as the VA may pay for services rather than the states.

86 — May/June 2019 Corrections Today

Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs