Florida's Veteran Treatment Courts.

Chapter 1: Introduction of the Study

Since the Global War on Terror was initiated, following the attacks on the U.S.

homeland in September 2001, numerous veterans who experienced combat and saw

service in forward areas, such as Iraq and Afghanistan, are returning to civilian society.

Unsurprisingly, many veterans are returning to civilian life facing major depression,

substance abuse problems, postraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), traumatic brain injury

(TBI), and other serious mental health issues (American Psychiatric Association, 2013;

Russell, 2015). Since the early 1990s, several specialized “therapeutic courts” have been

developed as part of an effort to address specific populations within the state criminal

justice systems (Melton et al., 2007, p. 39). One of these recent court systems is the

Veteran Treatment Courts (VTC), first created in Buffalo, NY, to mitigate criminal

sentences by considering the experiences the defendant brought to the court that were

influenced by the effects of military service (Ahlin & Douds, 2016; Lennon, 2019).

Currently, there are over 500 such VTCs in 43 states (Baldwin & Brooke, 2019;

Johnson et al., 2015; Rowen, 2020). It is believed that the effectiveness of such a

specialized court is based, in part, on addressing the underlining behavioral causes that

led to criminal charges and its intersection with the shared experiences of a “veteran

culture” (Ahlin & Douds, 2016, p. 93; Frederick, 2014). Although VTCs have been

growing in establishment, little research has specifically centered on their outcomes and

implementations (Shannon et al., 2017). This study helps fill the gap in understanding

how Florida’s VTCs are implemented and the outcomes recorded for military service and

involvement within the criminal justice system. In this study, I focused exclusively on the

existing VTC programs in the state of Florida, which currently has the third-largest

population of veterans within its state (Florida Department of Veteran Affairs, 2020).

Background

To understand VTCs in Florida as an overall topic, its helpful to know how

existing VTCs in Florida are created under existing Florida law, how they operate, and

which court jurisdiction they function under (i.e., the county court of circuit court). There

are 67 counties in the state of Florida, and the state’s various VTCs range from being

created at all levels of court jurisdiction and being created and administered in both

county and circuit court. The only controlling law in Florida is under F.S. §394.47891,

Military Veterans and Servicemembers Court Program (2021), which states that the chief

judge of each of the 20 judicial circuits within the state may establish a VTC within that

circuit under certain conditionssee Figure 1. These conditions include acceptance of

veterans and servicemembers based on, among other things, their military service,

criminal history, substance abuse, mental health treatment needs, defendant ventern’s

agreement to complete the program, and the recommendation of the state attorney and the

victim, if any (Military Veterans and Servicemembers Court Program, F.S. §394.4789,

2021).

Figure 1

Copy of F.S. §394.47891, Military Veterans and Servicemembers Court Program (2021).

Note. From Military Veterans and Servicemembers Court Program, F.S. §394.47891,

2021

(http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_Strin

g=&URL=0300-0399/0394/Sections/0394.47891.html). In the public domain.

As of September 2018, there are 31 VTCs functioning in the state of Florida

(“Florida Courts,” 2020; see Figure 2). The most recent published statewide data from

2016 shows that all VTCs in Florida admitted 1,090 qualified veteran participants with

640 graduating, a total of 58.72% (“Florida Courts,” 2020).

Note. From “Veterans Resource Guide for the Florida State Court System,” by The

Office of the State Courts Administrator/Office of Court

Improvement Florida Courts, 2017

(https://www.flcourts.org/content/download/217060/file/VETERANS_RESOURCE_GUI

DE.pdf.) In public domain, but does not include the updated number of 31 VTCs

provided from in the numbers available from the official Florida Courts website (“Florida

Courts,” 2020).

Map of Active VTCs in Florida

Figure 2

Ahlin and Douds (2016) highlighted the concept of veterans’ culture that is

believed to distinguish it from other specialty courts of similar design. The researchers’

used a qualitative approach to identify the influence of a so-called “veterans’ culture” as a

motivator for veteran enrollment in such a voluntary program. They found that this

shared experience of military service and the support of fellow veterans was a primary

motivating factor for veterans to volunteer for such a program rather than enter the

traditional criminal justice system. This study is different than theirs because I looked at

the implementation and performance of Florida’s VTCs (a state in which no

comprehensive study had been conducted on this topic) rather than rely on the data

analysis of a singular VTC in a northeastern state.

In this study, I collected responses for self-identified implementations and

outcomes from VTC programs as well as any unique processes that highlighted a creation

of the phenomenon of interest in providing an atmosphere specifically designed to meet

the cultural and treatment necessities of veterans, centered on the shared military

experience. This unique project further advances positive social change by highlighting

the results and outcomes of these Florida-based VTC programs that are emerging as a

substitute for traditional processing within the criminal justice system and also offering a

hybrid of other evolving specialty type courts, like mental health or drug courts.

Problem Statement

An increasing number of military veterans are returning to civilian life following

service in active combat zones after the terror attacks on the United States on September

11, 2001 (9/11) in New York City and Washington, DC (Rowen, 2020; Russell, 2015).

Numerous veterans, many returning from combat service, are now suffering from grave

mental health issues from these experiences in conjunction with other injuries that

include major depression, PTSD, and TBI (Russell, 2015). To address the growing needs

of this specialized population within state criminal justice systems, beginning in the early

1990s several specialized therapeutic courts were created (Kieckhaefer & Luna, 2020;

Lee, 2013).

One of these recent court systems is the VTC, first formed in Buffalo, NY, to

mitigate criminal sentences by considering the experiences the defendant brought to the

court that was influenced by the effects of military service (Ahlin & Douds, 2016;

Kieckhaefer & Luna, 2020). Currently, there are over 500 such VTCs in 43 states

(Baldwin & Brooke, 2019; Johnson et al., 2015; Rowen, 2020). As Shannon et al. (2017)

noted, the major purpose of a VTC is to provide rehabilitation and prevent incarceration

of a military veteran for involvement within the criminal justice system. Additionally,

research has shown that there is a positive relationship between mental health issues and

military service (Van Dykel & Orrick, 2016).

The social contract between the general population and service veterans is the

underlying policy rationale for the creation of a specialty treatment court exclusively for

veterans in that their service alone creates a mitigating factor for their criminal infractions

and will make them eligible for entrance into a specialty court program (Baldwin &

Brooke, 2019; Timko et al., 2014). In return for voluntary participation in such a VTC

program and its successful graduation, veterans can earn a reduction of charges and a

possible reduced sentence (Erickson, 2016). The conditions for admission into certain

VTC voluntary programs require actual combat-related service because the nexus for

criminal behavior would potentially limit the number of eligible participants (Shannon et

al., 2017). However, this issue was not addressed in the present study because under

Florida law admission into a VTC program is not conditioned on actual combat service

(Military Veterans and Servicemembers Court Program, 2020). Additionally, little

research exists on the motivating factors that influence veterans who seek treatment in a

VTC program (Ahlin & Douds, 2016; Baldwin, 2015; Erickson, 2016). The current

literature also contains little data on the factors that may have the most influence on the

successful completion of a VTC voluntary program (Lennon, 2019).

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this study was to better understand how Florida’s VTC process is

implemented as a constructive resolution offering rehabilitation for military service

veterans who have committed a criminal offense and find themselves involved in the

state’s criminal justice system. These VTCs are a relatively new addition to the specialty

courts contained within the U.S. criminal justice system; consequently, there is little

empirical data that are specifically centered on their implementation and outcomes

(Baldwin & Brooke. 2019; Shannon et al., 2017). The findings of this study help fill the

gap in understanding how Florida’s VTCs are implemented. The focus of the study was

exclusively on the functioning VTCs in the state of Florida, currently the state with the

third-largest number of veterans (Florida Department of Veteran Affairs, 2020).

Although the data are limited, a recent study showed that VTC programs

nationwide claim a recidivism rate of less than 2% compared to that of almost 70% for

general offenders (Frederick, 2014). The results of this study indicate that VTCs have a

positive social impact in the state of Florida with its large population of veterans. The

shared veterans’ culture was found to be critical in how a VTC offers an effective and

appropriate method of addressing the needs of those who fall into the criminal justice

system due to specific mental health issues that may have developed because of military

service, in particular, service in the post-9/11 conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Research Questions

I designed the following qualitative research questions to fill a gap in the existing

literature:

RQ1: How is a specific veteran’s culture perceived to be a motivating factor in

completing a VTC program by a participant in the state of Florida?

RQ2: How are such VTCs in the state of Florida implemented?

Theoretical and/or Conceptual Framework for the Study

The conceptual framework supporting this study was based on Ahlin and Douds’s

(2016) theory concerning the existence of a veteran’s culture and how immersion into

this culture help separate VTCs from other specialty, problem-solving courts that are

designed to treat similar populations and similar afflictions. The specifically tailored

environment created by a VTC should meet the cultural and treatment needs of military

service veterans by focusing on their shared military experience. In this study, I

employed the theoretical framework of phenomenology, specifically descriptive

phenomenology, which is based on the work of Husserl (see Willis et al., 2016).

Descriptive phenomenology establishes the meaning service veterans give to the

phenomenon of veterans’ culture and the phenomenon of this shared military experience

created by these VTCs on those military veterans who volunteer to be part of a VTC

treatment program. The application of this conceptual framework establishes that a

veterans’ culture is a positive influencer for a successful VTC judicial program

completion and that the VTC judges and court administrators believe that they can create

such a successful veteran’s culture.

Nature of the Study

In this study, I used a qualitative approach. The qualitative data collected involved

questionnaire survey responses from identified court personnel and other VTC program

administrators but not actual veteran participants enrolled in such a program. I analyzed

the collected data throughthematic coding. After reviewing the survey responses, codes

were created that consisted of one or two words to create categories that summarized the

primary topic of that portion of the survey questionnaire or document being analyzed (see

Creswell, 2009). A deductive or concept-driven system was created that allowed for the

narrow focus on the themes highlighted from existing literature (see Linneberg &

Korsgaard, 2019). These codes were based on terms and the use of topics that are

commonly shared and understood among respondents. A final interpretation of the

meaning of the data was then made that consisted of the theory-driven deductive code of

veterans’ culture that reflected the structure of the data (see Creswell, 2009).

Assumptions

There is little extant research on the motivating factors that influence veterans to

seek treatment in a VTC program, but the results of this study confirmed the assumption

that the distinct military and/or veteran culture that such a VTC program provides is an

external motivator for a veteran to volunteer and complete such a program. The findings

of this study further support the assumption that the motivating military culture of

success and group mentality contributes significantly to the low recidivism rate. This

specialized legal process that is tailored to such a select population (i.e., veterans) can

also be viewed through the narrow lens of subtle legal coercion to persuade the offender

to volunteer for the program and participate in such treatment offered or face

incarceration. This research has helped fill the gap in understanding the effectiveness of

Florida’s VTCs and the long-term mental health consequences of exposure to military

service and engagement with the criminal justice system.

Scope and Delimitations

I designed this study to collect data on the implementation and results of VTCs in

treating veterans who have entered into the criminal justice system. Qualitative data were

gathered through survey responses from the population under study, which included

identified court personnel and other VTC program administrators (but not actual veteran

participants) from a selection of varying geographic areas within Florida that currently

operate a VTC.

Unlike Ahlin and Douds’s (2016) study of veterans’ culture in VTCs, which used

self-designed, semistructured focus group interviews with both the VTC participants and

VTC staff, in the current study, I used a survey questionnaire designed similar to

Baldwin’s (2015) that contained hybrid, closed, and open-ended questions designed for

the population frame (i.e., only court personal and other VTC administrators). Baldwin’s

survey design included questions that addressed items such as court description, veteran

eligibility, court process, veteran peer mentors, and court supervision. I used questions

for self-identified implementations and outcomes from their programs as well as any

unique processes that highlight a creation of the phenomenon of interest of providing an

environment that is specifically tailored to meet the emotional, cultural, and needs of

veterans that is centered on their shared military experiences. Additional background

questions were used to gather information to help establish basic data concerning length

and branch of prior military service, exposure to combat while in service, and the

intersection of those veterans with the criminal justice system as well as general

ethnographic trends.

Limitations

The enabling legislation that is used to create Florida’s VTCs themselves is

problematic due to its vagueness. VTCs in the state of Florida, at any judicial level, are

created and formed under Florida state statute F.S.§394.47891, Military Veterans ad

Servicemembers Court Programs (2021). This statute allows the chief judge of each

judicial circuit within Florida (20 in total) to establish a VTC within that circuit under

certain conditions; however, the law does not mandate which court institution (county or

circuit) will operate a VTC within the judicial circuit, if that jurisdiction will even extend

circuit-wide, if it will only be offed in certain counties if the VTC must offer services to

the entire circuit, or if it can be limited to individual counties within that circuit (“Florida

Courts,” 2020). This potential limitation was addressed as it was encountered during the

collection and interpretation of the data.

Although the active VTCs included in this study provided a state-wide geographic

representative sample, using only select VTC programs in one state generally limits the

applicability of such findings for nationwide application. However, such a study has

specific merit because of Florida’s large veteran population. According to the Florida

Department of Veteran Affairs (2020), there are 1,533,306 veterans within the state,

making it the third-largest veteran population in the nation, behind California with

1,755,680 veterans and Texas with 1,670,186 veterans.

Significance

VTCs have emerged as an effective alternative to the traditional processing of

criminal offenders and offer a hybrid of other evolving, problem-solving courts (Shannon

et al., 2017). The enduring mental health outcomes of experiencing military service, in

particular the large number of those who served in post-9/11 conflicts such as Iraq and

Afghanistan, and the consequences of how that service contributes negatively with

interactions in the criminal justice system, must be better understood for a country that

has multiple military incursions worldwide. The findings of this study further positive

social change because they indicate the results and outcomes of these Florida-based VTC

programs that serve as a substitute to conventional offender processing.

Additionally, this research affects positive social change by identifying that

Florida VTC programs provide treatment support under circumstances and in an

environment designed around an understanding of the unique veteran experience and that

is aimed at that specialized population, the military veteran. The findings of this study

provide a greater understanding of how and why such Florida VTC programs are

effectively implemented, and this knowledge can then be replicated for future use in other

VTCs to minimize recidivism among this target population and reduce incarceration costs

for the various state and local criminal justice systems (see Frederick, 2014).

Summary

I conducted this qualitative study to explore the implementation and results of

VTCs in treating military veterans who have become involved as offenders within

Florida’s criminal justice system. Using a convenience selection of representative VTCs

spread geographically throughout the state of Florida, survey responses were collected

the identified court or VTC personnel. Gathered responses highlighted self-identified

implementations and outcomes from each VTC program selected to participate in

addition to any unique processes within that program that showing the creation of the

phenomenon of interest at the center of this study, which was providing an environment

specifically customized to meet the treatment needs of military veterans that is centered

on their shared military experiences. Additional data from the respondents included some

basic data concerning length and branch of prior military service, exposure to combat

while in service, and the intersection of those veterans with the criminal justice system. .

Although VTCs have been growing in establishment, little research has been published

that specifically looks at their outcomes and implementations.

Chapter 2: Literature Review

Following the terror attacks on the United States in Washington, DC and New

York City on 9/11, an increasing number of veterans are returning to civilian life after

having experienced service in active combat zones (Russell, 2015). As a result, many of

these veterans are returning from their military service suffering from serious mental

health issues as well as other wounds such as major depression, PTSD, and TBI (Russell,

2015). Since the early 1990s, several specialized therapeutic courts have been developed

as part of an effort to address a specific population within the state criminal justice

systems (Lee, 2013; Rowen, 2020). These specialized courts, which are often referred to

as problem-solving courts, were designed to specifically address the theorized underlying

causes of behavior that may make it likely for an individual to become involved within

the criminal justice system and have been created in various judicial provinces to address

specific social ills, such as substance abuse, mental health issues, and domestic violence,

among others (Baldwin, 2015).

VTCs are the latest evolution within the criminal justice system designed

specifically to address a population that faces difficulties resulting from their military

service (Russell, 2015). They were first created in Buffalo, NY to mitigate criminal

sentences by considering the experiences the defendant brought to the court that was

influenced by the effects of military service (Ahlin & Douds, 2016; Kieckhaefer & Luna,

2020; Rowen, 2020). Currently, there are over 500 such VTCs in 43 states (Johnson et

al., 2015; Rowen, 2020). As Shannon et al. (2017) noted, the main purpose of a VTC is to

provide rehabilitation and prevent incarceration of a military veteran for involvement in a

criminal justice system. Additionally, data has shown that there is a positive correlation

between military service and mental health issues (Van Dykel & Orrick, 2016).

The presumption for establishing such specialty treatment courts exclusively for

veterans is the underlining social contract that military service mitigates some level of

responsibility for minor infractions of the law or other criminal behavior by performing

that military service for the greater community good (Timko et al., 2014). In return for

voluntary participation in the program and agreeing to complete it, the veterans may

receive reduced charges and/or a reduced sentence (Erickson, 2016). For some VTC

programs, the price for admission to this specialty treatment court is much higher,

requiring actual combat-related causation to participate within such a program, which

drastically limits the number of veterans eligible for participation (Shannon et al., 2017).

The current literature shows a lack of understanding of which factors may have

the most influence on the successful participation and completion of a VTC program and

the motivating factors that influence veterans to seek treatment in a VTC program (Ahlin

& Douds, 2016; Baldwin, 2015; Erickson, 2016). Although there is little scholarly

research related to the implementation and results of VTCs, there is a great deal of data

available on other courts of specialization, particularly mental health and drug courts

(Baldwin, 2015). Additionally, much empirical data are available that highlight the

underlining causes, such as substance abuse and mental health issues, that trigger

interactions between veterans and the criminal justice system (Ahlin & Douds, 2016).

Because a VTC is a specialized court that seeks to treat similar issues facing the veteran

population as drug or mental health courts, the literature on specialized courts, VTCs, and

veterans’ issues faced by these VTCs is reviewed in this chapter.

Literature Search Strategy

Using the databases accessible through the Walden University Library, I

conducted a search for relevant scholarly articles concerning VTCs. In particular, the

databases of ProQuest, EBSCO, and SAGE were searched. Additionally, combined

database searches were completed through Psychology Databases Combined Search and

Thoreau Multi-Database Search. A narrowed focus on specific veteran-related topics

produced more relevant searches. The keyword terms and phrases searched were mental

health, treatment needs, substance abuse, veterans, veteran treatment needs,

psychological treatment needs, specialty courts, veterans’ treatment courts, problem-

solving courts, veterans and mental health issues, veterans and substance abuse, veterans

and incarceration, veterans and crime, mental health courts, and drug courts. The

Boolean operators “and” and “or” were used to increase the potential literature retrieved

while still retaining relevant focus to the topic of VTCs; the term “veteran” was included

with most of those searches. A search of the ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global

database produced a total result of six relevant dissertations that were of use for reference

to the topic of VTCs; however, as noted earlier, there was little published research on this

particular topic, and almost none on the structure and implementation of VTCs across the

state of Florida, which further necessitated the need for this study.

Theoretical/Conceptual Foundation

In this study, I used the theoretical framework of phenomenology, specifically

descriptive phenomenology, which is based on the work of Husserl (1913-1962) and “has

as its aim the description of the essence or essential structure of an experience focusing

on what is essential and meaningful” (Willis et al., 2016, p. 1187). Phenomenology refers

to the theoretical concept of a phenomenon that conceptualizes how objects and articles

play a role in human consciousness (Willis et al., 2016). Descriptive phenomenology

helped establish what meaning veterans give to the phenomenon of veterans’ culture and

the phenomenon of the shared impact of military experiences and military culture created

by these VTCs on the veterans who volunteer to be treated there. This theoretical

framework also helped establish that military or veterans’ culture is a positive indicator

of successful completion of a VTC program and that the VTC judges and court

administrators believe that they can create such a successful culture. The conceptual

framework supporting this study was Ahlin and Douds’s (2016) theory concerning the

existence of a veterans’ culture and how immersion into this culture helps separate VTCs

from other specialty, problem-solving courts created to treat similar populations and

similar afflictions. VTCs provide conditions specifically designed toward the treatment

and cultural requirements of veterans that are centered on the shared military experiences.

Problem Solving/Specialty Courts

Specialized courts, including mental health and drug courts, developed into a

major element of the U.S. criminal justice system in the latter part of the 20th century.

There are currently over 3,000 specialty treatment courts within the United States that

center on a problem-solving methodology, the majority of which deal with

individuals who find themselves charged with criminal offenses stemming from

drug or other substance abuse issues (Boldt, 2014; Kaiser & Rhodes, 2019).

Specialized courts have also been created to address other areas that are believed

to be especially amenable to treatment of the underlining issues that brought the

offenders within the criminal justice system (Kaiser & Rhodes, 2019). These

additional specialty courts include juvenile, mental health, homelessness,

domestic violence, and veterans, among others (Boldt, 2014; Kaiser & Rhodes,

2019). The seminal work on specialty courts was published by Berman and

Feinblatt (2001) who described the rise of such courts as “a response to the

frustrations engendered by overwhelmed state courts” and “an attempt to achieve

better outcomes while at the same time protecting individual rights” (p. 131).

Although noting that all such specialty courts are designed to address different

problems, to be effective, they all share the same five common elements:

1. A tangible concern for case outcomes. This includes a reduction in recidivism,

successful treatment for the offenders, and a reduction in crime within the

community.

2. Successful system change. An examination and adoption by authorities of

learned best practices concerning addiction and mental illness treatment.

3. Greater judicial monitoring. The continued involvement and supervision of

the same judge throughout the process.

4. Greater collaboration between the criminal justice system and other

public/private entities and the community.

5. An expansion of nontraditional roles for the legal advisors and other court

administrators. (Kaiser & Rhodes, 2019).

Although noting at the time that such specialty courts were relatively new as a

matter of practice and study, Berman and Feinblatt (2001) observed that such courts were

having a palpable positive influence on numerous victims, offenders, and their

communities. Of particular concern to the current study of VTCs was the high

intersection of drug and mental illness issues that affect the veteran population who are

charged as criminal offenders and the work that the creation of mental health and drug

courts have offered in the past. This comparatively new creation of VTCs is the direct

evolution of the past work of both drug and mental health courts and are modeled after

these judicial treatment models (Baldwin, 2015).

Drug Courts

Drug courts were created to address certain behaviors that are associated with

interactions with the criminal justice system. Drug courts, in general, were introduced as

a form of specialized treatment court to deal with the increasing number of felony drug

cases facing the nation’s criminal justice system in the 1980s and 1990s (Olson et al.,

2001). The nation’s first drug court was created in Dade County, Florida, in 1989 and

was intended to combine a therapeutic approach to the behavioral issue of drug

abuse/addiction with that of enforceable legal punishments (Olson et al., 2001). Since

that time over 3,000 drug courts have been created in the United States and

internationally (Kaiser & Rhodes, 2019; Zierk, 2019).

The creation of drug courts is intended to help reduce drug offenders from having

to be to serve a period of incarceration and to use what is known as “therapeutic

jurisprudence techniques” to provide treatment to solve the undelaying issues that cause

criminal behavior triggered by drug abuse and/or drug addiction (Kaiser & Rhodes, 2019,

p. 2). Therapeutic jurisprudence holds that the court system can offer treatment processes

to the offender and not compromise its traditional role as the arbitrator of fair and equal

due process of justice (Baldwin, 2015). Such drug courts are also evaluated via the

concept of “restorative justice,” which calls for the offender, victim, and the community

to be made whole again in the course of the usual criminal justice system process and the

treatment offered through that system (Baldwin, 2015, p. 713). Both concepts embrace

the premise that the criminal justice system itself has a place in providing treatment to

those with drug offenses within that system to restore their place within a society

(Baldwin, 2015).

Although no specific model for all drug courts has been created, Kaiser and

Rhodes (2019, as cited in Kaiser & Holtfreter, 2016) found that the original model used

for drug courts contained the key components of a “non-adversarial structure, team

decision making, use of non-incarcerative sanctions and incentives, and increased judicial

involvement to provide support for offender rehabilitation in a court setting” (p. 2).

Today, drug courts continue to operate in much the same way and are designed to give

nonviolent offenders with drug addiction issues the opportunity for specifically tailored,

judicially supervised treatment; drug testing; and additional social support within the

community rather than a prolonged period of incarceration (Zierk, 2019). Reduced

recidivism has been one result of such drug courts when compared to standard criminal

justice practices of incarnation for similar offenses (Zierk, 2019). Like VTCs, the goals of

drug courts are to reduce incarceration within the criminal justice system by providing

this specific population with specialized supervised treatment options (Baldwin, 2015).

Mental Health Courts

Mental health courts, similar to drug courts, were first created in the late 1990s to

be a form of a specialized court that seeks to integrate the legal process while offering

clinical and community-based treatment instead of standard criminal sentencing and

possible incarceration for the offender (Castellano, 2017). These mental health courts

also follow the model of therapeutic jurisprudence and were initiated by judges within the

criminal justice system who continued to see an increase in offenders whose criminal

culpability was often a result of some form of mental disability (Castellano, 2017). While

only 2% of the general population is afflicted with some form of serious mental illness,

that percentage rises dramatically, up to10%–15%, for those who are in some form of

incarceration (Lamb et al., 1999; Teplin, 1990; Teplin et al., 1996). As such, these mental

health courts attempt to offer a collaborative model that incorporates the criminal justice

system while offering specifically tailored mental health treatment options as part of an

effort to reduce overall incarceration numbers of those who suffer from a mental

disability (Canada et al., 2019).

On the limited research reflecting the success of these specific mental health

courts, most reflect on their effectiveness by measuring reduced recidivism and the

meeting of predetermined treatment goals (Castellano, 2017; Hiday et al., 2016). After

almost a decade of monitoring the practice of existing mental treatment courts, the

Bureau of Justice Assistance established 10 critical recommendations that should be

included in the formation, implementation, and practice of any specifically designed

mental health treatment court, including:

1. A broad-based collaborative planning process for a wide variety of

shareholders and agreement in the administration of such a court.

2. Define the eligibility requirements of the target population.

3. Participants are identified as early as possible and provided services.

4. Terms of participation are identified and understood by stakeholders.

5. Terms of participation and with addressed and understood by the offender.

6. Individualized treatment plan and services are made available that is evidence-

based.

7. Protection of legal rights and confidentiality of participant is observed.

8. Selection and proper training of the court administration team.

9. Continuous review and monitoring of the program to ensure effectiveness.

10. Ensure the program’s sustainability over time (Castellano, 2017; Thompson et

al., 2007).

As mental health courts have developed, they have followed a model that includes

the above-mentioned 10 critical and they were subsequently adopted by the National

Association of Drug Professionals (“Florida Courts,” 2020). These 10 steps are also the

same 10 essential components that Florida’s VTCs are suggested to follow and are

outlined below. However, because of the great variability in mental health courts

construction and composition over various state and local jurisdictions, including the

ability in some jurisdictions not to include these 10 components, there is no single model

to empirically evaluate (Castellano, 2017; Erickson et al., 2006). This creates a challenge

for any uniform evaluation of mental health courts because evidence suggests that the

impact of an offender’s participation in such a court may be influenced but certain

variables like specific psychiatric diagnosis and how the level (felony vice misdemeanor)

of how certain offenses are charged by authorities (Comartin et al., 2015; Ray et al.,

2015).

Veteran’s Treatment Courts

A recent addition to the specialty courts is the VTC, first created in Buffalo, NY,

to mitigate criminal sentences by considering the experiences the defendant brought to

the court that were influenced by the effects of military service (Ahlin & Douds, 2016).

VTCs are currently active in 43 states and have over 500 such programs operating in the

United States today (Baldwin & Brooke, 2019; Johnson et al., 2015; Rowen, 2020). As

previously noted (Shannon, et al., 2017), one of the primary functions of a VTC program,

like other specialty courts, is to provide rehabilitation and prevent incarceration of

military veterans once they become involved in the criminal justice system. Part of the

underlining social contract for the establishment of such a specialty treatment court, with

exclusive jurisdiction over veterans, is that their military service in some way mitigates

their level of responsibility for minor infractions of the law or other criminal behavior by

performing that military service for the greater community good (Timko et al., 2014).

The exchange for the individual veteran to agree to the terms and conditions of program

completion is the opportunity for a reduction in the original charges or possible criminal

sentence (Erickson, 2016).

As an alternative to a more traditional criminal intake process, VTCs offer a

hybrid of other evolving specialty courts such as Driving Under the Influence (DUI)

mental health, or drug courts (Shannon et al., 2017). Shannon et al. (2017) provided

information on the history and justifications for the creation of VTCs within state

criminal justice systems, possible areas of improvement, and the possible limiting

requirement for actual combat-related causation to participate within a VTC program.

Baldwin (2015) recognized the deficit of empirical data collected and published on the

fairly recently created specialty VTC courts. Ahlin and Douds (2016) provided

information on the key variable of veterans’ culture that is believed to distinguish it from

other specialty courts that are designed to treat similar populations and similar afflictions,

such as mental health and/or drug courts. Ahlin and Douds utilized a qualitative study

approach to directly gather their data using semistructured interviews and focus groups

composed of veterans, court-ordered veteran mentors, and court staff involved in a single

veterans’ treatment court located in central Pennsylvania. Their goal was to identify the

influence of such a veterans’ culture as a motivating influence for veteran enrollment in

such a voluntary program.

Shannon et al. (2017) noted that despite the pervasiveness of VTCs throughout

the state criminal justice systems, there is little empirical evidence that is centered on

their implementation and outcomes as compared to other mental health or problem-

solving courts, further highlighting the need for this proposed research study. Baldwin

(2015) found several similarities as well as wide diversity and variability in the structure

and policies of VTCs across the county. In creating the population to be studied, Baldwin

recognized 114 VTCs across the United States, with the majority of the states (64%)

establishing at least one VTC. Baldwin collected this data for the first comprehensive

national study VTCs and produced explanatory findings concerning the structure,

establishment, policy, and specific processes of these specialized courts within state

criminal justice systems. Baldwin’s national survey was administered in 2012 and of the

114 recognized VTCs that were contacted, 79 responded (69%) to the 70 questions

divided into five sections concerning eligibility, process, court description, court

supervision, and the use of peer mentors. In their research, Shannon et al. (2016)

established that the types of military service for participants, their police and court

records, and additional data on individual recidivism, produced results that suggested that

the variety of rehabilitative services offered, and personal accountability are critical

components of success for a VTC participant. Noting that the main objective of the VTCs

researched was to provide the veterans with services and that would result in a reduction

in the rate of recidivism, Erickson (2016) found that all three VTCs in his study did have

a reduction in recidivism in the veterans that were admitted and completed the program.

Smith (2016) found that within the U.S. prison system, veteran demographics

currently make up 9% of that population, making them disproportionately

overrepresented in prisons while only 7% of the general U. S. population are veteran.

While two and half million men and women have served in the military in Afghanistan

and Iraq since 9/11, Smith also observes that the reason for veteran overrepresentation in

the incarcerated population has not been properly studied. Smith suggests that that the

influence of a PTSD diagnosis, status as a veteran, and crime type, influence jurors’

decisions, in conjunction with verdict options. Brooke and Gau (2018) and Lee (2013)

found a connection between incarcerated veterans and the potential influence that prior

military service has on criminal issues, including the various social justifications for

allowing veterans to mitigate punishment due to prior military service. Ahlin and Douds

(2016) found that this shared experience of military service, and the support of fellow

veterans, was a primary motivating factor for veterans to volunteer for such a program

vice entering into a more traditional criminal justice process and face possible

incarceration. Ahlin and Douds found that a veteran’s culture increases the motivation for

an individual to participate and complete such a VTC program.

Erickson (2016) did research on three currently operating VTCs to establish if

they met their stated mission goals and identified the critical gap in understanding the

role of professional prosecutors in the VTC process. Erickson stated that these VTCs

were established with the recognition that the military veteran should be treated

differently if their non-violent crimes were committed due to mental illness or mental

conditions that developed through the conditions of their military service. Shannon et al.

(2017) noted that despite the growing pervasiveness of VTCs throughout the state’s

criminal justice systems, there is little empirical evidence that is centered on their

implementation and outcomes as compared to other mental health or problem-solving

courts, further highlighting the need for further research in this growing specialty court.

Existing VTCs in the state of Florida are created under Figure 1. However, little

statutory guidance has been promulgated concerning the appropriate level of judicial

jurisdiction for such a specialty court in the state of Florida. The appropriate state statute

that creates such a specialty court, Figure 1, only establishes that the chief judge of each

judicial circuit within Florida (20 in total) may establish a VTC within that circuit under

certain conditions. As of September 2018, there are 31 VTCs functioning within the state

of Florida (“Florida Courts,” 2020). Additionally, guidance provided to Florida’s VTCs

by the National Association of Drug Court Professionals are modeled after drug courts

and suggest 10 key components (“Florida Courts,” 2020):

1. The integration of mental health/substance abuse treatment and services into

the judicial process.

2. Create a nonadversarial process.

3. Identify those participants that are eligible early in the process.

4. Services continue throughout the process and afterward.

5. Regular alcohol/drug testing for compliance.

6. The coordinated method between all parties.

7. Continued judicial oversight and interaction.

8. Continued evaluation to monitor the effectiveness of the program.

9. Interdisciplinary education.

10. Full partnering with all shareholders in the process.

Specific Veteran Issues

Although the experiences of every war are unique, the results of those experiences

cause veterans, especially if they were exposed to the stresses of combat, to face certain

issues that are not equivalent in the civilian. Most of the research available focuses on the

experiences of Vietnam era service veterans, however, with the vast numbers of returning

veterans who served in Operation Noble Eagle, Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF), and

Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF), greater research on these military individuals after

September 11, 2001 is emerging (Baldwin, 2015; Kieckhaefer & Luna, 2020). In order to

understand how such VTC programs can provide judicially supervised treatment, it's

crucial to grasp the impact of lasting mental health issues that post-9/11 military service

members are facing and their subsequent contribution to negative experiences in the

criminal justice system. In particular, suicide is a rising problem, but as Baldwin (2015)

noted there is no consensus among the research as to its causation, other than it is

increasing within the veteran community at a rate that is 2.5 times higher than that of the

general population in the United States (Matarazzo et al., 2017; Rozanov & Carli, 2012).

Alcohol and substance abuse are also a continuing issue that leads to behavioral problems

resulting in veterans entering into the criminal justice process. There is also a high

correlation between military veteran alcohol use disorder nd PTSD (Schumm & Chard,

2012; Schumm et al., 2015). Kline et. Al (2009) also found a high correlation between

substance/alcohol abuse and mental illness among the military veteran population.

Veteran’s Mental Health

Research supports that between 25% - 40% of those veterans returning from

deployments in support of post-9/11 military operations have some form of psychological

and/or neurological impairment in conjunction with PTSD and/or TBI, with

approximately 300,000 returning veterans reporting a TBI since 2001 (Baldwin, 2015;

Miles, 2017; Slatore et al, 2018). Recent instances of TBI for OIF/OEF/OND veterans

have been found to be that of nearly twice the rate of Vietnam era veterans (Baldwin,

2015). Additionally, approximately 20% of these post-9/11 veterans report having

histories of both a TBI and suffering from PTSD (Miles, 2017). Depressive disorders and

anxiety are also common with those veterans who have a history of suffering from a TBI

(Miles, 2017). A recent study, using a relatively large sample size of OEF/OIF veterans,

found that those veterans with a history of a TBI (n= 1,746) used greater mental health

services than those veterans without a reported TBI (Maguen et al., 2013).

Veterans are a population that face many interconnected issues, many that affect

their reintegration into society on their return to civilian life. Baldwin (2015) reported

that returning service members have a higher percentage of specific behavioral problems,

such as drug addiction, substance abuse, and/or mental health issues, which have been

associated with violent behavior (Greenberg & Rosenheck, 2009). This puts veterans at a

higher risk for committing criminal acts and risk incarceration than the population in

general (Greenberg & Rosenheck, 2009). This may be directly linked to the higher rate of

PTSD and TBI contained within this veteran population, with aggressive behavior being

a hallmark of this diagnosis (Sreenivasan et al., & Woehl, 2013). Specifically,

Sreenivasan et al. (2018), noted that “[u]nemployment, homelessness, social

disconnection, drug, and/or alcohol abuse are factors associated with an increased risk of

veterans returning to criminal behaviors” (p. 163). Sreenivasan et al. (2018) observed that

higher rates of incarceration from returning combat veterans are identified as a

specific result of multiple and prolonged tours in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Conclusion

Florida’s VTCs are implemented as a positive solution to reduce

recidivism and offer the chance at rehabilitation to veterans who have become

involved within the state’s criminal justice system. Although VTCs have been

growing in establishment, little research has been published that specifically looks

at their outcomes and implementations (Shannon et al., 2017). This study fills the

gap in understanding how Florida’s VTCs are operated and implemented

concerning the individual veterans who have entered into the state’s criminal

justice system. This study used a research method that gained a better

understanding of how existing VTC programs in the state of Florida, which

currently has the third largest number of veterans within its state population

(Florida Department of Veteran Affairs, 2020), are impliemented to offer an

effective and appropriate method of addressing the needs of theses veterans.

Chapter 3: Research Method

VTCs are emerging as an accepted judicial alternative to more conventional

criminal processing and offer a hybrid of other evolving specialty treatment courts

including mental health, DUI, or drug courts (Kieckhaefer & Luna, 2020; Shannon et al.,

2017). Following the terror attacks of 9/11 on the U.S. homeland, numerous U.S.

veterans are returning home from their military service suffering from serious injuries

that include a host of mental health issues, including major depression, TBI, and PTSD

(Rowen, 2020; Russell, 2015). The lasting mental health significance of military service,

in particular, the large number of those who served in post-9/11 conflicts, such as Iraq

and Afghanistan, and the consequences of how that service contributes negatively with

interactions in the criminal justice system must be better understood for a country that has

multiple military incursions worldwide.

I conducted this study to gain a better understanding of how Florida’s VTCs are

implemented as a positive solution to reducing recidivism and offering rehabilitation for

veterans who have fallen into the state’s criminal justice system. Although the growth of

VTCs has been dramatic nationwide, little specific research has centered on their

outcomes and implementations (Shannon et al., 2017). The findings of this study bridge

the gap in understanding how VTCs are implemented within the existing programs

operating in the state of Florida, which currently houses the nation’s third largest

population of veterans (see Florida Department of Veteran Affairs, 2020).

Research Design and Rationale

There is little extant research regarding how nonlegal motivators, such as

veterans’ culture, support veteran participation in volunteering and completing a VTC

program. A greater understanding of the influence that this veteran’s culture has on

participants within a VTC could be used to help address the gap found in other recent

studies of VTCs conducted by Clark et al. (2014), Baldwin (2015), Crawford (2016),

Erickson (2016), and Shannon et al. (2017). This concept of a shared veterans’ culture is

critical in how a VTC offers an effective and appropriate method of addressing the needs

of those who fall into the state’s criminal justice system specifically due to mental health

or other issues that may have developed because of service in the military, particularly in

the Iraq and Afghanistan post-9/11 conflicts. I developed the following qualitative

research questions to fill this gap in the literature:

RQ1: How is a specific veteran’s culture perceived to be a motivating factor in

completing a VTC program by a participant in the state of Florida?

RQ2: How are such VTCs in the state of Florida implemented?

For the purposes of this study, I used the definition of VTCs given in the Florida

state statute that controls the creation of all VTCs in Florida: F.S.§394.47891, Military

Veterans and Servicemembers Court Programs (2021). Therefore, the identified

population for this study was drawn from the 31 VTCs in Florida (Florida Courts, 2020).

I chose five active VTCs, from five separate judicial circuits, to provide a geographically

representative sample dispersed throughout the state of Florida.

Using a survey design following the guidelines presented by Dillman’s et al.

(2014) fourth edition of Internet, Mail, and Mixed-Mode Surveys: The Tailored Design

Method, I administered a survey instrument using the online, internet-based platform,

SurveyMonkey, which allowed me to have great flexibility with the data when coding,

interpreting, and displaying the results. This survey instrument was primarily based

primarily on Baldwin’s (2013) national VTC survey design, which included 70 hybrid

and open-response items, including several questions that used a 5-point Likert scale

(never, almost, never, sometimes, almost always, always). Like Baldwin’s survey, the

questions asked contained the eight following areas: court description (13 items),

eligibility (five items), process (nine items), veteran peer mentors (six items), court

supervision (three items), participant demographics (11 items), dynamics and outcomes

(five items), and other outcomes and opinions (15 items). Unlike Baldwin’s survey

instrument, which was designed to collect and analyze data from across a national

spectrum on VTCs, the current research was specific to the state of Florida. In Florida, all

VTCs are created under the same state statute, making the redesign of certain questions

necessary to limit jurisdiction to the state, not the federal judiciary, andto use the correct

administrative definitions for Florida’s court and state prosecutorial system. Like

Baldwin’s survey instrument, the survey used in this research study was still limited to

under 70 items (i.e., 67 items; see Appendix A).

Once the final VTC population had been identified, I sent a notice of study to the

chief judge of each judicial circuit to obtain their permission to conduct such research.

The chief judge was then asked to forward the enclosed Participation Agreement to

whomever they deemed appropriate from their pool of VTC administrators to complete

the survey instrument. This Participation Agreement also contained an open link to the

internet-based platform, SurveyMonkey, for access to complete the survey. Only one

executed survey was accepted for analysis in this study from each of the VTCs selected.

The first question of the survey instrument contained the statement of informed consent.

If the respondent refused to consent to the terms of the informed consent for this study,

they were redirected to the end of the survey and were unable to participate in the study.

Once participation had been secured, the respondents were able to access the survey, with

substantive data being collected starting with Survey Question #2. This internet-based

survey helped to elicit superior responses than from more traditional, open-ended, written

questions (see Dillman et al., 2014). Some basic introductory and ethnographic data were

also gathered from respondents, such as length and branch of prior military service,

exposure to combat while in service, and the intersection of those veterans with the

criminal justice system, which was useful in placing the study results in a greater context.

Role of the Researcher

Using a phenomenological approach for this study meant that the role of the

researcher was to analyze, consolidate, and collect the perceptions of individuals who

have experienced a specific phenomenon (see Ryan et al., 2015). In this case, the

perceptions of the individuals that were collected were those who maintain and

administer the treatment court and are, therefore, in the best position to have experienced

the specific phenomenon of whether the court has created a veterans’ culture and how

that is implemented. Use of a qualitative research design is often considered the

appropriate standard for comprehending an individuals’ phenomenon experience

(Wadams & Park, 2018). The potential for bias existed because of the intimate

knowledge I possessed and that of the clients of VTCs being studied regarding their

similar military backgrounds. Bias was minimized through recognition of its potential.

Where the formation of a familiar unit can “have a powerful influence on shaping the

attitudes, cultural values, and behavioral patterns of the entire community,” so often

values and morals of a particular society are similar in reflecting a consistent pattern of

what is considered right and wrong, which can produce bias in the analysis of the

researcher (Allen, 2015, p. 290). Additionally, many similar experiences between

veterans affect the types of influences on the formation of personal characteristics, such

as education, social and cultural upbringing, and other psychological factors, which will

all influence the formation of personal values and can produce bias within the researcher

who may have had similar influences.

The qualitative research process, like the data collection methods and analysis,

reflects the values and opinions of the researcher. The possibility of such bias was

recognized in this study. I was transparent and reactive concerning the collection,

analysis, and presentation of all data (see Galdas, 2017). It was crucial to recognize the

potential for researcher bias in this study and to implement a strategy to minimize its

potential (see Wadams & Park, 2018). The issue of researcher bias in qualitative research

often lies in the tendency for the researcher to anticipate the desired outcome presented in

the data (Morse, 2015). Anticipated outcome bias was recognized to be the most serious

potential researcher bias faced in the present study due to the specifics detailed above.

The strategy used to minimize this potential bias is known as bracketing (see

Richards & Morse, 2013). Bracketing is a way that the researcher develops through the

research process that provides for prior knowledge and personal beliefs about the subject

to be excluded from any influence in the study (Richards & Morse). Use of this

bracketing strategy was effective because it brought to the forefront any potential, prior-

held beliefs highlighting the obvious influence and effect they may have on the research

data. I executed this strategy through keeping a journal and field notes that documented

my “personal assumptions or beliefs about the study, possible findings, the nature of

participant relationships, remedial attitudes, or what role personal experiences may play”

(see Wadams & Park, 2018, p. 75). Although the bracketing strategy may not have

eliminated all anticipatory outcome bias, it minimized such bias to the extent possible in

the current research process (see Wadams & Park, 2018).

Methodology

In this study, I used a qualitative phenomenological approach and employed a

descriptive survey to collect the underlying data. Data were collected on the

implementation and outcomes of VTCs in treating veterans who have entered the state of

Florida’s criminal justice system. Qualitative data were gathered using survey responses

from the theoretical population, which included identified chief judges of every judicial

circuit selected, or their designee, such as other VTC program administrators (but not

actual veteran participants) that currently operate a VTC created under F.S.§394.47891,

Military Veterans and Service Members Court Programs (2021). This generated data

provided insight into how a veterans’ culture is created by those that establish and

administer the treatment courts because they are in the best position to gauge the courts’

success in creating a viable treatment atmosphere for their veteran participants.

Because one of this study’s primary purposes was to establish a thorough

description of Florida’s VTC programs, most of the results generated were based on the

data being descriptive. To describing this existing phenomenon as precisely as feasible, I

used surveys to collect such data (see Atmowardoyo, 2018).

A coding process was used as a method of analysis to produce a summary of the

empirical material on which conclusions were made and then verified (see Linneberg &

Korsgaard, 2019). I used a deductive coding system, also known as concept-driven

coding, that was created and used to focus the themes or theoretical concepts that are

known to exist from the literature (see Linneberg & Korsgaard, 2019). This coding

process allowed me to summarize the content of the data and highlight the emerging

themes that offered insight reflective of the creation of a veterans’ culture, as evidenced

by the literature, to enhance the operation of a VTC Florida program (see Ahlin & Douds,

2016). Once the qualitative data were coded, content analysis was used to methodically

quantify the implications of the textual data (Gummer et al., 2019). In the final

interpretation of the data, I identified how immersion into this culture helped separate

VTCs from other specialty treatment courts designed to treat similar populations and

similar afflictions.

Issues of Trustworthiness

The issue of trustworthiness in this qualitative study is illuminated by the

confusing statutory underpinnings that create the VTC process within the state’s judicial

system. Florida’s VTCs are statutorily created and formed under F.S.§394.47891,

Military Veterans ad Servicemembers Court Programs (2021). Under this state statute,

the chief judge of each 20 judicial circuits within Florida can establish a VTC within that

circuit. However, the law does not mandate at which court level, either the county or

circuit, that such a VTC will operate within that judicial circuit. There is also no

legislative guidance on if or when such a VTC is to be established, if it is to have circuit-

wide jurisdiction, or if it will only be offered in certain counties within that circuit

(“Florida Courts,” 2020). As a result, the loose statutory requirements for the creation and

running of a VTC program within a judicial circuit of Florida may cause an issue in the

future with transferability because no two VTC programs in Florida are required to be

statutorily identical in creation, staffing, or funding.

However, this statutory confusion has not caused an issue with the credibility of

this study. The credibility of this study is formed through the congruent results of the data

that establish how the reported findings “hang together” or agree with each other (Stahl &

King, 2020, p. 26). The 5 respondent VTCs represent 5 separate judicial circuits, out of

20, and covered 13 out of the 67 total counties in Florida. However, the responses

provided from these five separate VTCs establish remarkably similar results in both the

implicit creation of a veterans’ culture as well as the services provided and successful

completion rates. Confirmability of the results is also possible, as the data collected

establish that a similar pattern of the creation of a veterans’ culture is an objective reality

created within each VTC that was the subject of this study (Stahl & King, 2020). The

dependability of this study was mitigated through the recognition of the potential for

anticipated outcome bias the researcher faced, as noted above, and utilizing a strategy of

bracketing that was used to minimize such potential bias (Richards & Morse, 2013). I

kept a journal and field notes that documented his personal assumptions about possible

findings and the nature of participants to help eliminate or minimize such anticipated

outcome bias to the extent possible in the research process (Wadams & Park, 2018).

Additionally, although the active VTCs included for this study give a

representative geographic sample dispersed throughout the state of Florida, using only

select VTC programs in one state generally limits the applicability of such findings,

however, such a study has specific merit because of Florida’s large veteran population.

According to the Florida Department of Veterans Affairs (2020), approximately

1,533,306 veterans are residing in the state of Florida. The state ranks third in the total

veteran population, behind California with 1,755,680 and Texas with 1,670,186 veterans,

respectively. With the state of Florida home to the third-largest veterans’ population in

the nation, behind California and Texas, this study has merit for other state jurisdictions

due to the large concentration of the veteran population contained within.

Summary

The nature of this present study used a qualitative approach. Qualitative data were

generated using a questionnaire survey with responses provided from identified court

personal other than actual veteran participants enrolled in such a program. This research

highlights the positive social impact effectuated by identifying that such treatment

support given through a Florida VTC program is provided under conditions tailored to

the distinctive social and cultural understanding of Florida’s specialized population, the

military veteran. This dissertation study provided a greater understanding of how and

why such Florida VTC programs are effectively implemented and this knowledge can

then be replicated for future use in other VTCs to implement the positive social change

and minimization of recidivism among this target population and reduced incarceration

costs for the various state and local criminal justice systems (Frederick, 2014). The

results generated from the the data collected for this study support a positive response to

the research question that the creation of a specific veterans’ culture is a motivating factor

in an individual successfully completing a VTC program in the state of Florida.

Chapter 4: Results

The United States has seen a growing number of servicemen and women return

from military service, particularly since the attacks of 9/11, and become involved in the

criminal justice system. Problem-solving courts were introduced into the criminal justice

system in the 1990s and offer specialty treatment designed for a specific population to

directly address specific issues that brought the individual into the criminal justice system

(Kaiser & Rhodes, 2019). One such problem-solving court that has evolved from this

judicial evolution has been the creation of the VTCs. The purpose of this study was to

better understand how Florida’s VTC process is implemented as a constructive resolution

offering rehabilitation for military service veterans who have committed a criminal

offense and find themselves involved in the state’s criminal justice system.

In this study, I concentrated on answering the qualitative research questions of

how is a specific veteran’s culture perceived to be a motivating factor in completing a

VTC program by a participant in the state of Florida and how are those same such Florida

VTCs implemented. In this chapter, I present the results of the qualitative data collected

through an online SurveyMonkey survey given between July and September 2020, with

100% participation from those asked to respond (see Appendix A). The qualitative data

presented will indicate that the success of such VTC programs in Florida can partially be

attributed to a shared veterans’ culture that has been shown to be a positive method of

addressing the needs of those who fall into the criminal justice system due to specific

mental health issues that may have developed because of military service.

Setting

Within the state of Florida, there are currently 20 judicial circuits (“Florida

Courts,” 2020). I chose respondents from five active VTCs that were contained within

five separate judicial circuits. Each respondent VTC was created in 2013 or later. Sixty

percent of these VTCs were created and maintained at the county level, and 40% were

created and operated at the circuit level. While 80% of respondent VTCs meet in court

weekly, 20% do so monthly. While 100% stated that they meet as a VTC treatment team

to discuss cases weekly butnot during court (see Table 1). Respondents indicated that

only 40% of their operational budget comes from what the state legislature allocates in its

yearly balanced budget, while 40% comes from other local, state, and federal funding,

such as grants, and the remaining 20% from donations. Respondents indicated that all

their current judges are male and that 80% are military veterans, with 40% being over the

age of 60. Additionally, the participants of the VTC court sessions always include the

judge, the veteran offender, the public defender, state attorney, Veterans Affairs (VA)

justice outreach specialist, veteran peer mentor, court reporter, and a representative from

the Florida Department of Corrections. Occasionally, circumstances depending, other

entities or individuals will join the proceedings, including private counsel (if engaged),

family members, and some community treatment providers.

Table 1

Respondent Courts Characteristics

Circuit Level

60%

County Level

40%

No. of counties covered

13 out of 67

Year VTC established

40% in 2013

20% in 2014

40% in 2015

Characteristics of VTC judge

100% male

80% veteran

40% over 60 years of age

Court funding

40% state budget

40% from other local/state/federal funding

20% donations

Frequency of VTC meetings

80% weekly

20% monthly

Frequency of VTC meetings to discuss

cases (not during court)

100% weekly

Demographics

The respondents indicated the specific eligibility criteria for all veterans who

volunteer for participation in a Florida VTC. Although the data collected indicate that

20% of those that responded specifically exclude from their program those veterans who

received a dishonorable discharge (DD) or a bad conduct discharge (BCD) for their

military service, the law in Florida was changed in October of 2019 to specifically

include in VTC eligibility veterans who were discharged or released under any condition

(F.S. §394.47891, as amended by Senate Bill No. 910, 2019). A BCD and a DD are both

considered forms of punitive discharges that can only be imposed by a military court-

martial; a general court-martial can impose a DD or a BCD, but a special court-martial

can only authorize a BCD (Wherry, 2020). Forty percent of respondents did have further

restrictions on eligibility that could possibly be related to discharge status (i.e., to exclude

those who are not currently VA health care qualified; see Table 2).

Table 2

Eligibility Exclusions

Type of discharge

Bad conduct discharge = 20%

Dishonorable discharge = 20%

Individuals that are not VA health care

qualified are excluded

40%

Types of offenses

Violent felonies = 100%

Nonviolent felonies = 80%

Traffic violations = 60%

Drug charges = 80%

Repeat offenders = 60%

Domestic violence offenses

100% (with 40% requiring the consent of

the victim to proceed with the program)

Diagnosis for mental illness

20% mental health or substance abuse

diagnosis related to military service

Note. Governor Ron DeSantis has signed SB 910- Court-Ordered Treatment Programs,

which expands eligibility for Veterans Treatment Courts to include veterans who were

discharged or released under any condition, as well as former U.S. Department of

Defense (DOD) contractors and individuals who are current or former military members

of a foreign allied country. The bill was effective as of October 1, 2019.

All VTCs responded (100%) that they exclude violent felonies from participation

in their programs; however, there are variations on the types of nonviolent felonies that

are allowed into each VTC program and other nonfelony offenses, such as traffic

violations (60%), drug offenses (80%), and repeat offenders (60%) (see Table 2). In

further breaking down the types of charges an individual veteran may have that will be

accepted into a Florida VTC program (i.e., Question 17), 100% of respondents stated

they specifically accepted DUI offenses but limit other criminal traffic offenses

depending on their severity (i.e., felony or misdemeanor). Additionally, although 100%

of VTC respondents allow defendant veterans that have been charged with a domestic

violence offense (unless it is charged as a violent felony), 40% specifically require that

the victim of such domestic violence agree to allow the veteran to participate in such a

program to resolve the charges. Similarly, 20% of respondents stated that a diagnosis for

mental health, substance abuse, or TBI relating to service in the military must be

established for enrollment in their VTC program.

Of the veterans active in these VTCs themselves, an average of the demographical

data provided shows that majority of those who volunteered for a Florida VTC program

are male (89.8%) and self-identify as White (65%). The highest number of offenders who

volunteer for a Florida VTC program is found within the age range of 31–40 years old.

By far, the highest number of veterans who volunteer for a VTC program are veterans of

the U.S. Army (45%) who served in a post-9/11 Global War on Terror conflict, such as

OEF (i.e., Afghanistan) or OIF or Operation Afghanistan (57%). Additionally,

appropriately 75% of these veterans who volunteer for such a Florida VTC come into

such a program already suffering from some form of mental health issue (see Table 3).

Table 3

Veteran Demographics

Sex

Male 89.8%

National origin

White (non-Hispanic) = 65%

African American = 30.2%

Hispanic = 9%

Asian, Pacific Islander = 1.2%

Age

18-20 years = 3.4%

21-25 years = 3.4%

26-30 years = 10.6%

31-40 years = 31.2%

41-50 years = 29.8%

51-60 years = 13.8%

60+ years = 10.2%

Status

Active duty = 3%

Reserves = 3.2%

Army veteran = 45%

Navy veteran = 19.8%

Marines veteran = 20.6%

Air Force veteran = 10.4%

Coast Guard veteran = 2.4%

National Guard veteran = 1.8%

Post-9/11 conflict = 57%

Vietnam = 10.2%

First Gulf War = 20%

Trauma experience = 68%

Substance abuse issues = 77%

Homeless/risk of homelessness = 24%

Current enrollment numbers of the five participant VTCs who provided

responsive data for this study (through September 3, 2020, when data collection was

completed) indicated that throughout their existence (with 40% of those who responded

being created in 2013 [see Table 1]) they have had 1,417 cases administered before their

respective VTCs. Of those, respondents state that 952 veterans successfully graduated

from their respective VTC, which is approximately a 67% graduation rate. Additionally,

another 495 veterans are estimated by the respondents to have been eligible for a VTC

but chose to go into the more traditional criminal justice system of the state of Florida.

Another 33 were estimated to have later decided to opt out of a VTC once accepted to

return to a traditional court setting for their case, while 199 were either terminated by

court staff or were unable to complete the program at the original VTC (i.e., died while in

the program, transferred to another VTCs jurisdiction, etc.). These same respondents

stated that they have 248 active cases currently on their dockets (again, through

September 3, 2020).

Data Collection

The convenience sample of five active VTCs that were contained within separate

judicial circuits represents one fourth of the 20 judicial circuits in the state of Florida,

which houses the third-largest state veteran population in the nation (see Florida

Department of Veterans Affairs, 2020). Each VTC was geographically dispersed as a

representative sample throughout the state and drawn from the 31 active VTCs operating

therein. Data were collected through an online SurveyMonkey survey between the dates

of July 20, 2020, and September 3, 2020. All of the VTCs asked to participate do so, and

all answered 100% of the questions asked (Appendix A).

The total service area for these five respondent VTCs covered 13 out of the 67

counties in Florida. When using a phenomenological methodology, it is possible to

achieve data saturation from a single participant, depending on their expertise and

knowledge, however, depending on the research question involved, a minimum of 3 to 10

participants is suggested (Dukes, 1984; Wertz, 2005). Because the number of VTCs is

steadily increasing, and with it increased variability of their composition and makeup, the

five respondents chosen for convenience represent appropriate data saturation of the VTC

surveyed for this study (“Florida Courts,” 2020).

The survey was designed using 67 questions with a series of questions asking the

respondents how they perceived certain factors, circumstances, and issues that affect the

effectiveness in providing treatment to veterans who participate in their VTC programs.

Several of these questions were designed using a 5-point Likert scale, from greatest to

least great effectiveness, always present to never present, or definitely yes to definitely

no. Additionally, 32 of the questions asked within the survey (Questions 7-9, 13-15, 18-

25, 27-28, 39-40, 54-55, 57, 59, 61-63, 65-68, see Appendix A) contained the option for

the respondents to provide open-ended comments designed to solicit qualitative responses

that would offer data reflective of a veterans’ culture and insight into the creation of a

veterans’ culture that would enhance the operation of a VTC program.

A coding process on these open-ended comments was used to summarize their

content and to highlight the emerging themes. This process is explained in greater detail

further in this chapter. In summary, this coding process is a method of analysis that

produced a summary of the empirical material on which conclusions can be made and

then verified (Linneberg & Korsgaard, 2019). In this case, a deductive coding system, or

concept-driven coding, was used that would allow for the narrow focus of the themes and

theoretical concepts that are known to exist from the literature (Linneberg & Korsgaard,

2019). Using this thematic analysis as a method of analyzing this qualitative data, the

theme veterans’ culture as evidenced by the literature (Ahlin & Douds, 2016), was used

as the deductive predetermined coding method in creating a codebook to guide the data

processing gathered from the respondents. No variations from the collection process

proposed in Chapter 3 were necessary, and there were no unusual circumstances

encountered or observed during the data collection for this study.

Data Analysis

Past research indicates that there is much reporting on the creation of VTCs,

nationwide and only limited nationwide studies on the effectiveness of such courts (Ahlin

& Douds, 2016; Erickson, 2016; Russell, 2015);. Such research contains specific data

concerning statistics on treatment and judicial results, but little on the non-legal

motivations for volunteering for a VTC program (Baldwin, 2015; Shannon et al., 2017).

Although no precise and single definition of the term veterans’ culture exists, the

literature supports the conceptual theory that veterans’ culture is a form of identity.

Identity is a social and political definition, which may be changeable and fluid over time,

but shared military service creates a distinctive culture that retains its unique features of

soldiers’ cooperative situation that transcends traditional national borders (Christensen,

2020). Veterans of the U.S. military have been identified as a distinct and specific

cultural group (Shari, 2017, p. 438). Although diverse in make-up, this population is

unified by the influence of past military service as the defining experience in their

individual lives (Shari, 2017). Constructed of both implicit and explicit components that

contain their own rituals, symbols, customs, and norms, that separate it from other

organizations, the single most important theme of camaraderie is being often identified as

the essence of past military service (McCormick et al., 2019). This is reinforced by social

identity theory (Tajfel, 1972) where an individual’s social identity is a function of their

sense of belonging to an associated group (Russell & Russell, 2018). Therefore, veterans’

culture is defined as shared military experience that produces a sense of responsibility for

cooperation, regardless of cultural or personal differences, to accomplish mission

objectives. This social identity of group identification through association with a

veteran’s community or veterans’ culture can play a positive role in mental health

outcomes (Russell & Russell, 2018).

Thirty-two of the questions asked within the survey (Questions 7-9, 13-15, 18-25,

27-28, 39-40, 54-55, 57, 59, 61-63, 65-68, Appendix A) contained the option for the

respondents to provide open-ended comments designed to solicit qualitative responses

that would offer data reflective of a veterans’ culture and insight into the creation of a

veterans’ culture that would enhance the operation of a VTC program. This veterans’

culture is created from a sense of shared military experience and produces a sense of

responsibility for cooperation, regardless of cultural or personal differences, to

accomplish mission objectives (McCormick et al., 2019; Shari, 2017). Specifically, the

significance of a successful program appears to be in creating an agenda that creates this

sense of veterans’ culture, such as using specific tools like veteran peer mentors, as noted

above. This data was collected contained open-ended comments that contained

qualitative data reflective of a veterans’ culture (Appendix A). A qualitative analysis of

these participant perceptions responses was conducted to identify themes consistent with

the concept of the creation of a veterans’ culture. The predetermined thematic code of a

veterans’ culture is supported by past research on VTCs (Ahlin & Douds, 2016). This

qualitative research method, including this survey data that involved these subjective

descriptions, assisted in compiling the complex and layered character of the individuals

involved and social influences of such a VTC program (Miner-Romanoff, 2012).

This use of interpretive phenomenological analysis in this data was specifically

explained by Miner-Romanoff (2012), who stated that “Although many qualitative

research methods provide rich and detailed personal accounts of particular problems and

societal issues, phenomenological studies are particularly appropriate for addressing

specific knowledge and participants’ detailed subjective experiences” (p. 7). An

interpretive phenomenological analysis in the instant case, using this qualitative survey

design, provided an examination of the veteran shared experience of the volunteers for a

VTC program in Florida (Miner-Romanoff, 2012; Smith et al., 2009). This qualitative

research method, including this data that involved these subjective descriptions, assisted

in compiling the complex and layered character of the individuals and social influences

of creating a culture responsive to the specific treatment of veterans.

A coding process on these open-ended comments was used to summarize their

content and to highlight the emerging themes. The process of coding is a method of

analysis that will produce a summary of the empirical material on which conclusions can

be made and then verified (Linneberg & Korsgaard, 2019). In this case, a deductive

coding system, or concept-driven coding, was used that would allow for the narrow focus

of the themes and theoretical concepts that are known to exist from the literature

(Linneberg & Korsgaard, 2019). Using this thematic analysis as a method of analyzing

this qualitative data, the theme veterans’ culture as evidenced by the literature (Ahlin &

Douds, 2016), was used as the deductive predetermined coding method in creating a

codebook to guide the data processing gathered from the respondents. The final codebook

consisted of the theory-driven deductive code of veterans’ culture that reflected the

structure of the data collected from the respondents. This data supports a positive

response to the research question that the creation of a specific veterans’ culture is a

motivating factor in an individual successfully completing a VTC program in the state of

Florida. Table 4 displays a summary of the results once the code label and definition were

established with selected example quotes to best illustrate the theory-driven deductive

code chosen.

Table 4

Theory Driven Deductive Code of Veterans Culture, Descriptions, Examples, and Themes

Deductive code

“Veterans Culture” as evidenced by Ahlin & Douds

(2016); Shannon et al. (2017).

Description

Shared military experience that produces a sense of

responsibility for cooperation, regardless of cultural or

personal differences, to accomplish mission objectives

(McCormick et al., 2019; Shari, 2017).

Positive support

examples

“Veteran Peer Mentors are essential to the VTC program.”

“[S]upportive team to encourage them along the way.”

“We have been blessed with a team that sees the value in

treatment and works well together to help the Veteran get

needed help.”

“A strong support system from the VTC team.”

Negative support

examples

“Veterans that want to get out and go back to the trial

division because they don’t like all the requirements.”

“Lessons learned: Some of the mentors we initially

identified talked a good game but didn’t engage. Prior

VTC graduates do not always make a good mentor.”

Theme

The creation of a “Veteran Culture” within the VTC was a

major component of what court administrators believed

made the program successful.

Table 5 displays a further breakdown of the coding that was done in support of

establishing the theme from the predetermined deductive code of veterans’ culture that its

creation was a positive and key reason, at least from the court administrators and VTC

judges, for the success of their program. Words or fragmentary phases were drawn out

from within each separate comment, where they were located, that were similar in theme

in their narrative support for the concept of a veterans’ culture. These words or

fragmentary phrases provided by VTC court administrators were overwhelmingly

positive in their support of the theme that the creation of a veterans culture within a VTC

is a major component of what court administrators’ believed made the program

successful.

Table 5

Deductive Code Support of the Theme that the Creation of a Veterans’Culture within a

VTC is a Major Component of What Court Administrators’ Believed Made the Program

Successful.

Number of narrative questions

Number of individual comments

123

Number of words or fragmentary phases found to

have positive support deductive code of veterans’

culture to support theme

Number of words or fragmentary phases found to

have negative support on deductive code of

veterans’ culture to support theme

Additionally, a separate narrative question (Q27) concerning the creation by each

VTC of phased justice approach to treatment. Each of the respondents to the survey was

asked specifically to describe the reward and/or sanction ladder or system of treatment

phases that their VTC uses in delivering specifically tailored treatment for individual

veteran participants. Shannon et al. (2017) found that one of the hallmarks of a successful

VTC in reducing recidivism was the use of a reward system for individual participants.

These rewards could be as simple as verbal praise from the veterans’ court team to a

reduction in the number of times a drug screen needs to be complied with (Shannon et al.,

2017).

In this study, the respondents provided data that show all have established a form

of incremental system that offers rewards and sanctions that differ based on where each

veteran is in the program and their performance in meeting the program requirements.

Respondents offered forms of a sanction program that ranged from no formal phases, but

rather a continuous graduated sanctions/incentive program until graduation to a formal

four or five phased program that offered specific treatment and program targets before an

individual could advance to the next phase. Using the same coding process that was

created and highlighted above, the deductive predetermined thematic code of a veterans’

culture found further in support of the theme that the creation of a veterans’ culture

within a VTC is a major component of what court administrators’ believed made the

program successful, overwhelmingly so (see Table 6).

Table 6

Reward/Sanction Ladder or System of Treatment Phases VTC Uses

The data collected for this study support a positive response to the research

question that the creation of a specific veterans’ culture is a motivating factor in an

individual successfully completing a VTC program in the state of Florida. This data

offers insight into the creation of a veterans’ culture that would enhance the operation of

a VTC program. These results highlight that those judges and other court administrators

that run such Florida VTC programs feel that this shared veterans’ culture is created from

a sense of shared military experience and produces a sense of responsibility for

Deductive code

“Veterans Culture” as evidenced by Ahlin & Douds

(2016); Shannon et al. (2017).

Description

Shared military experience that produces a sense of

responsibility for cooperation, regardless of cultural or

personal differences, to accomplish mission objectives.

(Shari, 2017; McCormick et al., 2019).

Positive support examples

“We give certificates out at each Phase change, verbal

applause.”

“They receive incentives such as being called earlier,

leading the court in the Pledge of Allegiance, reduced

court appearances.”

Negative support examples

“The sanctions and incentives are graduated and

increase in severity with the frequency of the

positive/negative behavior.”

Theme

The creation of a “Veterans Culture” within the VTC

was a major component of what court administrators

believed made the program successful.

cooperation, regardless of cultural or personal differences, to accomplish mission

objectives (McCormick et al., 2019; Shari, 2017).

Although past research has centered the creation of VTCs nationally, there is only

limited research in the literature on the effectiveness of such courts (Ahlin & Douds,

2016; Erickson, 2016; Russell, 2015), with little analysis on the nonlegal motivations for

volunteering for a VTC program (Baldwin, 2015; Shannon et al., 2017). The present

study offers data reflective of a veterans’ culture and insight into the creation of a

veterans’ culture that would enhance the operation of such a Florida VTC program, but

certainly has implications for such programs nationwide. Although lacking in precise

definition, research shows that veterans’ culture exists and that it is found to be a form of

culture of identity that displays the cooperative nature of U.S. military veterans identify

as a distinct and specific “cultural group” (Shari, 2017, p. 438). This group identification

through association with a veteran’s community or veterans’ culture can play a positive

role in mental health outcomes, particularly in the instant case, that of VTCs in Florida

(Russell & Russell, 2018).

Evidence of Trustworthiness

As noted in Chapter 3, the issue of trustworthiness for such a qualitative study on

Florida VTCs has the potential to prove problematic. Primarily, this is due to the statutory

underpinnings that create the VTC process within the judicial framework within the

state’s judicial system. As previously noted, Florida’s VTCs themselves are created and

formed under Florida state statute F.S.§394.47891, Military Veterans and

Servicemembers Court Programs (2021). Under this state statute the chief judge of each

judicial circuit within Florida, 20 in total, can establish a VTC within that circuit.

However, the law does not mandate at which court level, either the county or circuit

level, will such a VTC will operate within the judicial circuit or even if that jurisdiction

will even extend circuit-wide, or will only be offed in certain counties within that circuit

(“Florida Courts,” 2020). As a result, the loose statutory requirements for the creation and

running of a VTC program within a judicial circuit of Florida may cause an issue in the

future with transferability, as no two VTC programs in Florida are required to be

statutorily identical in creation, staffing, or funding.

This statutory confusion did not caused an issue with the credibility of this study.

The credibility of this study was formed through the congruent results of the data that

established how the reported findings “hang together” or are in agreement with each

other (Stahl & King, 2020, p. 26). Using triangulation in the data collection, the

responses provided from five separate Florida VTCs in five separate judicial circuits

establish remarkably similar results in both the implicit creation of a veterans culture as

well as the services provided and successful completion rates. Confirmability of the

results is also possible, as the data collected establish that a similar pattern of the creation

of a veterans’ culture is an objective reality created within each VTC that was the subject

of this study (Stahl & King, 2020). The dependability of this study was mitigated through

the recognition of the potential for anticipated outcome bias the researcher faced in the

present study, noted in Chapter 3, in which a strategy of bracketing was used to minimize

such potential bias (Richards & Morse, 2013). I kept field notes that documented my

personal assumptions about possible findings and the nature of participants to help

eliminate or minimize such anticipated outcome bias to the extent possible in the research

process (Wadams & Park, 2018).

Additionally, as also noted in Chapter 3, potential trustworthiness is raised by the

geographic limitations presented by the study that contains only data generated from one

U.S. state. This is mitigated by the convenience sample representing appropriate data

saturation chosen from five separate VTCs with a service area covering 13 out of the 67

counties in Florida. With the state of Florida home to the third-largest veterans’

population in the nation, behind California and Texas, this study has merit for other state

jurisdictions due to the large concentration of the veteran population contained within.

Results

The data collected for this study support a positive response to the research

question that the creation of a specific veterans’ culture is a motivating factor in an

individual successfully completing a VTC program in the state of Florida. In answering

the research question concerning the implementation of Florida’s VTC, one aspect of a

problem-solving court is offering the specialty treatment that is designed for that specific

population to directly address issues that brought the individual within the criminal

justice system (Kaiser & Rhodes, 2019). As discussed in greater detail in Chapter 2, one

common element of all specialty or problem-solving courts is an expansion of

nontraditional roles for the legal advisor and other court administrators (Kaiser &

Rhodes, 2019). VTCs, such as the ones in the present study offer such specifically

designed nontraditional treatments that, in return for voluntary participation and

completion may result in reduced charges or a reduced sentence (Erickson, 2016). The

respondents, the VTC court administrators, offered a variety of treatments and services

made available to veterans who volunteer to participate in such a program in the Florida

criminal justice system (see Table 7). These services included the expected treatment in

mental health services, as well as both inpatient and outpatient substance abuse

treatments (100%), but also expands the more non-traditional roles of the court

administrators to allow them to offer other treatments in the hope to reintegrate the

individual veteran to society and prevent incarceration or further involvement in the

criminal justice system (Shannon et al., 2017). Such treatments include educational or

other community assistance (60%) as well as housing and/or transportation assistance

(60%), but also the more specific offering of peer mentoring (100%) that also reinforces

the supposition that VTCs are different from other problem-solving courts because of the

creation of a veterans’ culture within the immersion of their own VTC administration

(Ahlin & Douds, 2016).

Table 7

Treatments and Services Available

Along with the specific services and treatments offered for VTC veteran

participants, a hallmark of specialty or problem-solving courts like VTCs is to strive for

objectives for their participants’ additional medical and mental health treatments made

available (Shannon et al., 2017). Such VTC objectives include jail/prison diversion

(100%), charges dropped (100%), a reduction in charges (80%), and/or a withholding of

adjudication of criminal charges (80%). Additionally, specific respondents commented

that they seek to assist in reducing possible fines and fees and to provide individual

veterans with information concerning their possible VA benefits (see Table 8).

Mental health services

100%

Substance abuse treatment (detox)

100%

Substance abuse treatment (inpatient)

100%

Substance abuse treatment (outpatient)

100%

Peer mentoring

100%

Vocational training/services

100%

Various outside agencies who work with

VTCs to provide aid

100%

Educational assistance, other community

assistance

60%

Housing/transportation assistance

60%

Table 8

VTC Objectives (Other Than Treatment)

Note. Additional comments from respondents also include a reduction in fees/fines and

the desire that veterans get information on possible VA benefits and a “Connection to

necessary therapeutic, medical, and community services as needed.”

For the VTC to understand and make advancement forward on each veteran’s

case toward completion and graduation the court must rely on a variety of sources to

receive that information. VTCs provide several supervising agents who provide the court

with periodic status reports of the progress each veteran is making in the treatment

program. This variety of supervision agents, both formal and informal, reports status

and/or progress to the court on a weekly or monthly, including the state attorney (60%),

the public defender (80%), private defense counsel (60%), VA veterans justice outreach

(100%), VA benefits (60%), other VA representatives (40%), treatment

providers/counselors (100%), social workers (60%), veteran peer mentors (100%), and

others (80%). These additional supervising agents include such as representatives from

the pretrial supervision staff, county Veterans Service Officer, and other program or case

managers. Means by which more formal supervision techniques are administered are

contained in Table 9.

Jail/prison diversion

100%

Charges dropped

100%

Reduced charges

80%

Withhold adjudication

80%

Table 9

VTC Formal Supervision Process

Note. The 20% described as “other” was not further explained.

Respondents indicate that individuals are initially introduced to the possibility of

entering a VTC program at several stages, depending on the circumstances of the arrest

or entry into Florida’s criminal justice system. Veteran status is attempted to be identified

with the individual at the earliest level possible, with 60% being identified at the arrest

and 100% being identified as a veteran by at the time of their first court appearance or

arraignment. Shortly into the criminal justice process individuals are introduced by a

variety of methods to determine if they are elidable to have their case taken by their

applicable VTC within their jurisdiction. Of the VTC administrators who participated in

this study, 40% indicate that veterans are informed about the possibility of volunteering

for a VTC to dispose of their criminal charges by a private defense attorney, while 80%

Drug screening

100%

Medication screening

60%

Housing checks

100%

Curfew checks

40%

Employment checks

60%

Electronic monitoring

60%

GPS monitoring

60%

Reporting to an agency on a regular basis

60%

Verify treatment attendance

80%

Other

20%

state that veterans are originally determined to be eligible for such a program from either

the state attorney (80%), VTC administrators and/or coordinators (80%) or another VA

representative (80%).

Once determined to be eligible for an appropriate VTC program the veteran is

then screened by an evaluator to determine the appropriate services and treatments

needed to be provided to have the potentially best results. 40% of VTC court

administrators state that the responsibility for this initial evaluation treatment screening is

done equally by a VA treatment provider, other VA representatives, or another

community treatment provider. This initial screening establishes the specific services and

treatment areas that are discussed with the incoming VTC participant (see Table 10).

Table 10

Initial Screening Areas Explored

It is also during this initial screening process the individual veterans are informed

of their obligations and responsibilities if they are accepted into such a program. In return

for voluntary participation in such a program they could receive reduced charges and/or a

criminal sentence (Erickson, 2016). This voluntary acceptance of these special rules for

acceptance into a VTC further underscores the importance of the creation of a veterans’

culture and the presumption that such a specialty treatment court exclusively for veterans

is part of the underlying social contract that military service may mitigate the level of

criminal responsibility for minor criminal infractions for the greater social good (Timko

at al., 2014). These participation requirements are contained in Table 11.

Mental health

100%

Substance abuse

100%

Housing

80%

Trauma experience

100%

Domestic relations

80%

Social support

80%

Physical health

100%

Employment

80%

Education

60%

Military service history

20%

Table 11

Participation Requirements

Note. Contract includes a release of information for all medical and treatment providers.

Like the participation requirements that a veteran must agree to before entering a

VTC program are the specific program requirements that must be completed before

completion or graduation once the court treatment program has begun (see Table 12).

Additionally, 100% ofVTCs use a form of reward or sanction progressive ladder system

of treatment phases that the veteran passes through on his or her way toward graduation.

The actual termination of a veteran from such a VTC program, before completion or

graduation is done for a variety of reasons. These terminations by the VTC may be

triggered by; a violation of probation (100%), nonparticipation in treatment (100%),

failure to appear in court (60%), a commission of a new criminal offense (80%), re-arrest

for a different offense (60%), re-arrest for the same offense (20%), and various

undisclosed reasons for termination (20%).

Agree to participate in treatment

100%

Agree to regular drug/alcohol testing

100%

Sign a contract

100%

Frequently appear in court

100%

Check-in regularly with a member of the

veterans’ court outside of scheduled

treatment

100%

Table 12

Graduation Requirements

Note. Some treatments cannot be completed (like mental health medications), but should

be compliant with appointments.

All respondent VTC’s utilize paid veteran peer mentors (100%), with 40% stating

that they also utilize volunteers, which include the additional use of veteran peer mentors

provided by the VA. These volunteer peer mentors are enlisted through various

community outreach programs and other recruitment methods, and pending background

screening and training participate in the VTC program. The respondents’ use various

means to assigns those veteran peer mentors to individual veteran defendants, the

majority (60%) through a screening process that is determined entirely by a court staffer

administrator, such as the veterans’ treatment mentor coordinator or court coordinator,

Complete terms of probation (for those who are placed on

probation)

40%

Complete court mandates (restitution, fines/fees, get driver’s

license, etc.)

80%

Achieve stable housing situation

40%

Complete treatment requirements

100%

Treatment evaluation state improvement

20%

ALL members of the VTC team (judge, attorneys, VA

representative, etc.) agree the veteran has completed all

requirements

20%

MOST (a majority) of the members of the VTC team (judge,

attorneys, VA representative, etc.) agree the veteran has completed

all requirements

80%

the remainder (40%) through a court team collaboration process that looks at a variety of

factors to try and create a workable and favorable match.

All respondents made positive comments (Q34) concerning the creation and use

of the veteran peer mentor program. However, several respondents (40%) made

comments concerning the quality of the peer mentors that they had used in the past,

specifically lamenting that stating that “[p]rior VTC graduates do not always make a

good mentor.” Additionally, the very specific complaint was noted from 20% of the VTC

respondents that providing and maintaining the availability of female veteran mentors has

been a difficult challenge.

Additionally, a series of questions were asked to the respondents concerning how

they perceived certain factors, circumstances, and issues affect the effectiveness in

providing treatment to veterans who participate in their VTC programs. Several of these

questions were designed using a 5-point Likert scale, from greatest to least great

effectiveness, always present to never present, or definitely yes to definitely no. These

responses indicate that the respondents felt overall their programs were “very effective”

(80%) in their overall treatment of the veterans in their charge, as well as in operating

their veteran peer mentoring programs. Additionally, it was the opinion of those who

responded, the judges or court administrators of the VTC programs themselves, that they

were less effective in completing their overall mission than that of the individual success

they feel were delivered for the program participants (see Table 13).

Table 13

VTC Administrators Opinions on Outcomes

Summary

The instant study was specifically designed to highlight the dynamics of VTCs in

the state of Florida only, which currently possesses the third largest population of

veterans within the country (Florida Department of Veteran Affairs, 2021). This study

helps establish that the effectiveness of such a specialized court is based, in part, on

addressing the underlining behavioral causes that led to criminal charges and its

intersection with the shared experiences of a veteran culture (Ahlin & Douds, 2016, p.

93; Frederick, 2014). This research has helped in understanding how Florida’s VTCs are

implemented through the perceived creation of a veterans’ culture and the outcomes

recorded for military service and involvement within the criminal justice system in

Florida. The data collected for this study support a positive response to the research

Overall treatment of veterans

Very Effective 80%

Effective 20%

Veterans mentoring program

Very Effective 20%

Effective 80%

Achieving its mission

Very Effective 60%

Effective 40%

Communication between VTC court team members

Very Effective 60%

Effective 40%

Communication between VTC and outside agencies

Very Effective 40%

Effective 60%

Past military service caused issues for VTC placement

Definitely Yes 20%

Probably Yes 60%

Maybe 20%

question that the creation of a specific veterans’ culture is a motivating factor in an

individual successfully completing a VTC program in the state of Florida.

Chapter 5: Implications/Conclusions/Discussion

Particularly since the attacks of the United States on 9/11, the country has seen a

growing number of servicemen and women return from service and become involved in

the criminal justice system. Since the 1990s, problem-solving courts have been

introduced into the criminal justice system in the United States that offer specialized

treatment that is designed for a specific population to directly address issues that brought

the individual within the criminal justice system (Kaiser & Rhodes, 2019). One such

problem-solving court that has evolved from this judicial transformation is the creation of

the VTC. VTCs offer such specifically designed, nontraditional treatments that, in return

for voluntary participation and completion, may result in reduced charges or a reduced

sentence (Erickson, 2016). I conducted this study to determine how such VTCs were

implemented and how a specific veteran’s culture is perceived to be a motivating factor

in completing such a VTC program. It is believed that the effectiveness of such a

specialized court is based, in part, on addressing the underlining behavioral causes that

led to criminal charges and its intersection with the shared experiences of a veterans’

culture (Ahlin & Douds, 2016, p. 93; Frederick, 2014).

The state of Florida currently houses the third-largest number of veterans (Florida

Department of Veteran Affairs, 2020). The criminal justice system in the state utilizes a

VTC program that was created under the statutory authority of F.S. §394.47891, Military

Veterans and Servicemembers Court Program (2021). This statute states that the chief

judge of each of the 20 judicial circuits within the state may establish a VTC within that

circuit under certain conditions, including acceptance of veterans and servicemembers

based, among other things, on their military service, criminal history, substance abuse,

mental health treatment needs, the veteran defendant agreeing to participate in such a

program, and the recommendation of the state attorney and the victim, if any.

The data collected in this qualitative study indicate that the creation of a specific

veterans’ culture is a motivating factor in an individual successfully completing a VTC

program in the state of Florida. The findings of this study also offer insight into the

creation of a veterans’ culture that would enhance the operation of a Florida VTC

program, further supporting the effective implementation of such programs. These results

highlight that those VTC hudges and other court administrators that run Florida VTC

programs feel that this shared veterans’ culture is created from a sense of shared military

experiences and produces a sense of responsibility for cooperation, regardless of cultural

or personal differences, to accomplish mission objectives (see McCormick et al., 2019;

Shari, 2017).

Interpretation of Findings

In the state of Florida, there are 20 judicial circuits in the state. In this study, I

chose respondents from five active VTCs that were contained within separate judicial

circuits. This convenience sample represented one fourth of all the judicial circuits in the

state of Florida (see Florida Department of Veterans Affairs, 2018). Each VTC was

geographically dispersed as a representative sample throughout the state and drawn from

the 31 active VTCs operating therein. Data were collected through an online

SurveyMonkey survey instrument between the dates of July 20, 2020, and Auust 31,

2020. All of the VTCs asked to participate responded, and all answered 100% of the

questions asked (see Appendix A). Each respondent VTC was created in 2013 or later.

Sixty percent of these VTCs were created and maintained at the county level, and 40%

were created and operated at the circuit level.

The current literature shows a lack of understanding of which factors may have

the most influence on the successful participation in and completion of a VTC program.

Although there is little scholarly research on the implementation and results of VTCs,

there is a great deal of data available on other courts of specialization, particularly mental

health and drug courts (Baldwin, 2015). One common element of all specialty or

problem-solving courts is an expansion of nontraditional roles for the legal advisor and

other court administrators (Kaiser & Rhodes, 2019). This is also the case for VTC

programs; however, there is little research on the motivating factors that influence

veterans to specifically seek treatment in a VTC program (Ahlin & Douds, 2016;

Baldwin, 2015; Erickson, 2016). The respondents in the current study, the VTC court

administrators, offered a variety of treatments and services made available to veterans

who volunteer to participate in a VTC program in the Florida criminal justice system.

Additionally, data from respondents in this study showed that a successful program

appears to be produced through an agenda that creates this sense of veterans’ culture,

such as using specific tools like veteran peer mentors and other specific tools, as

discussed in Chapter 4.

In this study, I carried out a qualitative, interpretive, phenomenological analysis

using a survey design to explore the shared experience of the volunteers for a VTC

program in Florida (see Miner-Romanoff, 2012; Smith et al., 2009). The results showed

that such a program can be successful through the creation of this veterans’ culture.

Treatments that successfully create and maintain such a veterans’ culture within these

VTCs are different from other problem-solving courts and include veteran peer

mentoring, educational/community assistance, housing, and/or transportation assistance.

As discussed in Chapter 4, such programs and treatments require voluntary compliance to

special rules for acceptance into a VTC, which further underscores the importance of the

creation of a veterans’ culture and the presumption that such a specialty treatment court

exclusively for veterans is part of the underlying social contract that military service may

mitigate the level of criminal responsibility for minor criminal infractions for the greater

social good (see Timko at al., 2014). This is further established by the high completion

and graduation rates evidenced in the results; of the estimated 1,417 cases administered

before these respective VTCs, 952 individuals successfully graduated from their

respective VTC, which is approximately a 67% graduation rate.

Limitations of the Study

The enabling legislation that creates Florida’s VTCs is problematic due to its

vagueness. In the state of Florida, VTCs at any judicial level are created and formed

under F.S.§394.47891, Military Veterans and Servicemembers Court Programs (2021).

This statute allows the chief judge of each judicial circuit within Florida (20 in total) to

establish a VTC within that circuit under certain conditions; however, the law does not

mandate which court institution (i.e., county or circuit) will operate a VTC within the

judicial circuit, if that jurisdiction will extend circuit-wide, if it will only be offed in

certain counties, if the VTC must offer services to the entire circuit, or if it can be limited

to individual counties within that circuit (“Florida Courts,” 2020). I explain this statutory

limitation in greater detail in the following section as a potential recommendation for

further changes to increase the potential effectiveness and reach of Florida’s VTCs.

The qualitative data were generated using a survey instrument specifically

designed to solicit personal accounts of subjective experiences (see Miner-Romanoff,

2012). A qualitative survey can be used to study diversity and vice distribution in each

population (Jansen, 2010). However, Jansen (2010) also noted that the actual term

qualitative survey is seldom referenced as a research tool in textbooks on qualitative

research methods or in those related to general social research methodology . A

qualitative survey was utilized as appropriate to gauge the phenomenology from the point

of view of the judges and court administrators from each VTC while also preserving

confidentially because each respondent was selected by the chief judge of each judicial

circuit invited to participate in the study. The data submitted were subjective, coming

directly from the chief judge or their direct delegate to complete the survey instrument, so

it represents the point of view of “if” veterans’ culture was created, not whether they

specifically realized it or not, and the term veterans’ culture appeared nowhere in any of

the survey responses. The responses generated were not from how veterans themselves

viewed the program. Additionally, these responses may have been limited in gender

diversity because the data generated established that all judges who currently preside over

these VTC programs are all male (100%).

Additionally, although the active VTCs participants for this study gave a state-

wide geographic representative convenience sample, using only select VTC programs in

one state generally limits the applicability of such findings for nationwide application.

However, such a study has specific merit because of Florida’s large veteran population.

According to the Florida Department of Veteran Affairs (2020), there are 1,533,306

veterans within the state, making it the third-largest veteran population in the nation

behind California with 1,755,680 veterans and Texas with 1,670,186 veterans.

Recommendations

One major problem with the uniform implementation of a VTC created under

Florida state law is the lack of legislative and judicial guidance, regulation, and oversight

once a VTC has been constructed in a particular judicial circuit. The enabling legislation

that creates Florida’s VTCs themselves is problematic due to its vagueness. The simple

solution would be to make VTCs mandatory for all judicial circuits in the state of Florida,

but further study is necessary to determine if VTCs should be housed at the circuit-level

of court or in a hybrid method to ensure the greatest availability to the state’s veterans

who qualify for such a specialty court.

In conjunction with the issue of statutory creation of Florida VTCs is the question

of funding and oversight for such programs. Currently, under F.S.§394.47891, Military

Veterans and Servicemembers Court Program (2021), no additional funding is provided

by the Florida Legislature to the Florida judicial system to create and operate Florida

VTC programs (HB 5001, Florida General Appropriations Act, 2020). This lack of

appropriate funding was noted by more than one of the respondents in response to

Question 68: “What challenges do you see the veteran’s treatment court team currently

facing?” Because the statute creating Florida’s VTCs is so vague in oversight,

implementation, and funding, further research is needed to determine how best the

Florida Legislature can amend the current law to provide more specific guidance on the

creation of such programs and determine the appropriate level of funding needed to

establish such VTCs in all 20 judicial circuits at a minimum.

Additionally, greater gender diversity is needed in VTC administration and peer

mentoring to create a veteran’s culture that also encompasses the growing gender

diversity within the U.S. military forces. VTCs across the nation have reported increases

in their female veteran population (Kelber et al., 2021). By 2010, 11.7% of deployed U.S.

service members were women, with more than 250,000 women being specifically

deployed in support of military interventions in Afghanistan and Iraq (Kelber et al.,

2021). Since the military interventions in Afghanistan in 2001 and Iraq in 2003, 161

women have been killed and over 600 have been wounded in action (Department of

Defense, 2020). Further, the research on gender difference for such issues traditionally

addressed as part of a treatment plan for a VTC, such as PTSD prevalence among

veterans, has been limited (Crum-Cianflone & Jacobson, 2014; Street et al., 2009).

Women veterans may face different challenges than their male peers when confronting

obstacles within the Florida criminal justice system, and further research is needed to

establish these specific needs. With the increasing number of women serving in the

military, the issues of these female veterans need further exploration to design

appropriate gender-specific services and treatments (if found necessary) for this specific

veteran population. This lack of gender diversity was addressed by the respondents in the

current study and reflected in such comments as the need to obtain more female veteran

mentors (in response to Question 63).

Finally, as noted earlier, the study design limited the collection of data to those

that were not considered a vulnerable population (i.e., the veterans themselves). Instead, I

collected data through a qualitative survey to gauge the phenomenon from the point of

view of the judges and court administrators from each participating VTC. Future studies

are needed to determine if the information gathered is also reflected by the veteran

population themselves regarding what role a real or perceived veterans’ culture plays in

the successful completion of a Florida VTC program.

Implications

Since the early 1990s, several specialized “therapeutic courts” have been

developed as part of an effort to address specific populations within the state criminal

justice systems (Melton et al., 2007, p. 39). Since their creation, the U.S. government

initiated the Global War on Terror following the attacks on the U.S. homeland in

September 2001. This precipitated the increasing number of U.S. veterans returning to a

civilian society facing major depression, substance abuse problems, PTSD, TBI, and

other serious mental health issues (Russell, 2015). In response to the increasing number

of military veterans entering the criminal justice system, in 2008 the first specialty

problem-solving court specifically intent on mitigating criminal sentences for veterans by

considering their experiences by the effects of military service was created in Buffalo,

NY (Ahlin & Douds, 2016). Such VTCs are quickly gaining support in various criminal

justice jurisdictions in the United States.

One of the underlying concepts for the creation of a VTC, as opposed to other

problem-solving courts, is the underlying social contract between the general population

and military service veterans that the policy rationale for the creation of a specialty

treatment court exclusively for veterans is because their service alone creates a mitigating

factor for their criminal infractions and this makes them eligible for entrance into a

specialty court program (Timko et al., 2014). In return for voluntary participation in the

program and agreeing to complete it, the veterans may receive reduced charges and/or a

reduced sentence (Erickson, 2016). These findings indicate that Florida VTCs have a

positive social impact, with a 67% graduation rate. The success of such VTC programs in

Florida can partially be attributed to this shared veterans’ culture that has been shown to

be a factor as an appropriate method of addressing the needs of those who fall into the

criminal justice system due to specific mental health issues that may have developed

because of military service. Such VTCs are effective and should be supported and funded

as appropriate by the Florida Legislature to continue the positive social change that has

begun since their first implementation in the state in 2013.

Conclusions

One aspect of this study was to determine how such VTCs in the state of Florida

are implemented, and more specifically, how they were assisted in their execution

through the creation of a veterans’ culture. As has been discussed previously, currently,

there are over 300 such VTCs in 35 states (Johnson et al., 2015). It is believed that

although VTCs have been growing in establishment, there has been little research

concerning outcomes and their implementations (Shannon et al., 2017) or on the

motivating factors that influence why veterans seek treatment in a VTC program (Ahlin

& Douds, 2016; Baldwin, 2015; Erickson, 2016).

The instant study was specifically designed to highlight the dynamics of VTCs in

the state of Florida only, which currently possesses the third largest population of

veterans within the country (Florida Department of Veteran Affairs, 2021). The specific

recommendations that were highlighted, above, establish that the effectiveness of such a

specialized court is based, in part, on addressing the underlining behavioral causes that

led to criminal charges and its intersection with the shared experiences of a veteran

culture (Ahlin & Douds, 2016, p. 93; Frederick, 2014). This research has helped in

understanding how Florida’s VTCs are implemented through the perceived creation of a

veterans’ culture and the outcomes recorded for military service and involvement within

the criminal justice system in Florida.

References

Ahlin, E. M., & Douds, A. S. (2016). Military socialization: A motivating factor for

seeking treatment in a veterans’ treatment court. American Journal of Criminal

Justice: AJCJ, 41(1), 83-96. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12103-015-9332-4

Allen, D. F., Carroll, M. A., Allen, V. S., Bethell, K. Y., & Manganello, J. A. (2015).

Community resocialization via the installation of family values through a novel

group therapy approach: A pilot study. Journal Of Psychotherapy Integration,

25(4), 289-298. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0039563

American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental

disorders (5th ed.). American Psychiatric Publishing.

Atmowardoyo, H. (2018). Research methods in TEFL studies: Descriptive research, case

study, error analysis, and R & D. Journal of Language Teaching &

Research, 9(1), 197–204. https://doi.org/10.17507/jltr.0901.25

Baldwin, J. M. (2013). Veterans treatment courts: Studying dissemination,

implementation, and impact of treatment-oriented criminal courts (Order No.

3583509). ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.

Baldwin, J. M. (2015). Investigating the programmatic attack: A national survey of

veterans’ treatment courts. Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 105(3), 705-

751.

Baldwin, J. M., & Brooke, E. J. (2019). Pausing in the wake of rapid adoption: A call to

critically examine the veterans’ treatment court concept. Journal of Offender

Rehabilitation, 58(1), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/10509674.2018.1549181

Berman, G., & Feinblatt, J. (2001). Problem-solving courts: A brief primer. Law &

Policy, 23(2), 125–140. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9930.00107

Boldt, R. C. (2014). Problem-solving courts and pragmatism. Maryland Law

Review, 73(4), 1120–1172.

Brooke, E. J., & Gau, J. M. (2018). Military service and lifetime arrests: Examining the

effects of the total military experience on arrests in a sample of prison inmates.

Criminal Justice Policy Review, 29(1), 24-44.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0887403415619007

Canada, K., Barrenger, S., & Ray, B. (2019). Bridging mental health and criminal justice

systems: A systematic review of the impact of mental health courts on individuals

and communities. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 25(2), 73–91.

https://doi.org/10.1037/law0000194

Castellano, U. (2017). The politics of benchcraft: The role of judges in mental health

courts. Law & Social Inquiry, 42(2), 398–422. https://doi.org/10.1111/lsi.12266

Christensen, C. B. (2020). National identity and veteran culture in a border region: The

Danish minority in the German Army during the First World War. War in

History, 27(1), 57–80. https://doi.org/10.1177/0968344517750946

Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods

approaches (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications, Inc.

Crum-Cianflone, N. F., Jacobson, I. (2014). Gender differences of postdeployment post-

traumatic stress disorder among service members and veterans of the Iraq and

Afghanistan conflicts. Epidemiologic Reviews, 36(1), 5–18.

https://doi.org/10.1093/epirev/mxt005

Comartin, E., Kubiak, S. P., Ray, B., Tillander, E., & Hanna, J. (2015). Short- and long-

term outcomes of mental health court participants by psychiatric diagnosis.

Psychiatric Services, 66(9), 923–929. http://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ps.201400230

Department of Defense. (2020). Defense casualty analysis system: Conflict casualties.

https://dcas.dmdc.osd.mil/dcas/pages/casualties.xhtml.

Dillman, D. A., Smyth, J. D. & Christian, L. M. (2014). Internet, mail, and mixed-mode

surveys: The tailored design method (4th ed.). John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Dukes, S. (1984). Phenomenological methodology in the human sciences. Journal of

Religion and Health 23, 197–203. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00990785

Erickson, J. W. (2016). Veterans’ treatment courts: A case study of their efficacy for

veterans’ needs. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 49(part B), 221-

225. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijlp.2016.10.009.

Erickson, S. K., Campbell, A., & Lamberti, S. J. (2006). Variations in mental health

courts: Challenges, opportunities, and a call for caution. Community Mental

Health Journal, 42(4), 335–344. https://doi.org/10 .1007/s10597-006-9046-7

Frederick, A. (2014). Veterans treatment courts: Analysis and recommendations. Law &

Psychology Review, 38, 211-230.

Florida Courts. (2020). Veterans courts: Background. http://www.flcourts.org/resources-

and-services/court-improvement/problem-solving-courts/veterans-court.stml#

Florida Courts. (2020). Florida courts. https://www.flcourts.org/Florida-Courts

Florida Department of Veterans Affairs. (2020). Our veterans: Fast facts.

http://floridavets.org/our-veterans/profilefast-facts/

Galdas, P. (2017). Revisiting bias in qualitative research: Reflections on its relationship

with funding and impact, 16(1), 1-2. International Journal of Qualitative

Methods.. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917748992

Gill, S. L. (2020). Qualitative sampling methods. Journal of Human Lactation, 36(4),

579–581. https://doi.org/10.1177/0890334420949218

Greenberg, G. A., & Rosenheck, R. A. (2009). Mental health and other risk factors for

jail incarceration among male veterans. Psychiatric Quarterly, 80(1), 41–53.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11126-009-9092-8

Gummer, T., Blumenberg, M. S., & Roßmann, J. (2019). Learning effects in coders and

their implications for managing content analyses. International Journal of Social

Research Methodology, 22(2), 139–152.

HB 5001, Florida General Appropriations Act. (2020).

https://www.myfloridahouse.gov/Sections/Documents/loaddoc.aspx?FileName=C

RA_.pdf&DocumentType=Amendments&BillNumber=5001&Session=2020

Hiday, V. A., Ray, B., & Wales, H. (2016). Longer-term impacts of mental health courts:

Recidivism two years after exit. Psychiatrist Services, 67(4), 378–83.

https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ps.201400569

Johnson, R. S., Stolar, A. G., Wu, E., Coonan, L. A., & Graham, D. P. (2015). An

analysis of successful outcomes and associated contributing factors in veterans’

court. Bulletin Of The Menninger Clinic, 79(2), 166-173.

https://doi.org/10.1521/bumc.2015.79.2.166

Kaiser, K. A., & Holtfreter, K. (2016). An integrated theory of specialized court

programs: Using procedural justice and therapeutic jurisprudence to promote

offender compliance and rehabilitation. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 43, 45–

62. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854815609642

Kaiser, K. A., & Rhodes, K. (2019). A drug court by any other name? An analysis of

problem-solving court programs. Law and Human Behavior, 1-12.

https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000325

Kelber, M. S., Liu, X., O’Gallagher, K., Stewart, L. T., Belsher, B. E., Morgan, M. A.,

Workman, D. E., Skopp, N. A., McGraw, K., & Evatt, D. P. (2021). Women in

combat: The effects of combat exposure and gender on the incidence and

persistence of posttraumatic stress disorder diagnosis. Journal of Psychiatric

Research, 133, 16–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychires.2020.12.010

Kieckhaefer, J. M., & Luna, S. (2020). Do you think some veterans are receiving a “get

out of jail free” card? Examining support for veterans treatment court as a

function of mental health and offense type. Journal of Experimental

Criminology, 16(1), 141–170. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-019-09395-w

Kline, A., Callahan, L., Butler, M., St. Hill, L., Losonczy, M., & Smelson, D. (2009). The

relationship between military service eras and psychosocial treatment needs

among homeless veterans with a co-occurring substance abuse and mental health

disorder. Journal of Dual Diagnosis, 5(3/4), 357–374.

https://doi.org/10.1080/15504260903175882

Lamb, R. H., Weinberger, L. E., & Gross, B. H. (1999). Community treatment of

severely mentally ill offenders under the jurisdiction of the criminal justice

system: A review. Psychiatric Services 50(7), 907-913.

Lee, Y. (2013). Military veterans, culpability, and blame. Criminal Law and Philosophy,

7(2), 285-307. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11572-013-9207-z

Lennon, C. (2019). The growth and need for veterans treatment courts. Touro Law

Review, 35(4), 1171–1194.

Linneberg, M. S. & Korsgaard, S. (2019). Coding qualitative data: A synthesis guiding

the novice. Qualitative Research Journal, 19(3), 259–270.

https://doi.org/10.1108/QRJ-12-2018-0012

Maguen, S., Madden, E., Lau, K. M., & Seal, K. H. (2013). Service utilization among

Iraq and Afghanistan veterans screening positive for traumatic brain injury.

Journal of Neurotrauma, 30(13), 1123–1128.

https://doi.org/10.1089/neu.2012.2744 P

Matarazzo, B. B., Farro, S. A., Billera, M., Forster, J. E., Kemp, J. E., & Brenner, L. A.

(2017). Connecting veterans at risk for suicide to care through the HOME

program. Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior, 47(6), 709–717.

https://doi.org/10.1111/sltb.12334

McCormick, W. H., Currier, J. M., Isaak, S. L., Sims, B. M., Slagel, B. A., Carroll, T. D.,

Hamner, K., & Albright, D. L. (2019). Military culture and post-military

transitioning among veterans: A qualitative analysis. Journal of Veterans

Studies, 4(2), 288–298. https://doi.org/10.21061/jvs.v4i2.121

Melton, G. B., Petrila, J., Poythress, N. G., & Slobogin, C. (2007). Psychological

evaluations for the courts: A handbook for mental health professionals and

lawyers (3rd ed.). The Guilford Press.

Miles, S. R., Harik, J. M., Hundt, N. E., Mignogna, J., Pastorek, N. J., Thompson, K. E.,

Freshour, J. S., Yu, H. J., & Cully, J. A. (2017). Delivery of mental health

treatment to combat veterans with psychiatric diagnoses and TBI histories. PLoS

ONE, 12(9), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0184265

Miner-Romanoff, K. (2012). Interpretive and critical phenomenological crime studies: A

model design. Qualitative Report, 17(54), 1-32.

http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR17/miner-romanoff.pdf

Morse, J. M. (2015). Critical analysis of strategies for determining rigor in qualitative

inquiry. Qualitative Health Research, 25(9), 1212–1222.

https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732315588501

Olson, D. E., Lurigio, A. J., & Albertson, S. (2001). Implementing the key components of

specialized drug treatment courts: Practice and policy considerations. Law &

Policy, 23(2), 171-196.

Ray, B., Kubiak, S. P., Comartin, E. B., & Tillander, E. (2015). Mental health court

outcomes by offense type at admission. Administration and Policy in Mental

Health and Mental Health Services Research, 42(3), 323–331.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10488-014-0572-2

Richards, L., & Morse, J. (2013). Read me first for a user's guide to qualitative methods

(3rd ed.). Sage.

Rowen, J. (2020). Worthy of justice: A veterans treatment court in practice. Law &

Policy, 42(1), 78–100. https://doi.org/10.1111/lapo.12142

Rozanov, V., & Carli, V. (2012). Suicide among war veterans. International Journal of

Environmental Research & Public Health, 9(7), 2504-2519.

https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph90725042504.

Russell, R. T. (2015). Veterans treatment courts. Touro Law Review, 31(3), 385-401.

Russell, C. A., & Russell, D. W. (2018). It’s not just showing up: How social

identification with a veterans service organization relates to benefit-finding and

social isolation among veterans. Psychological Services, 15(2), 154–162.

https://doi.org/10.1037/ser0000176

Ryan P., M., Lily F., H., Michael, N., Lewis R., G., & Elizabeth M., N. (2015). Voices of

homeless alcoholics who frequent bellevue hospital: A qualitative study. Annals

of Emergency Medicine, (2), 178.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annemergmed.2014.05.025

Schumm, J. A., & Chard, K. M.. (2012). Alcohol and stress in the military. Alcohol

Research, 34(4), 401-407.

Schumm, J. A., Monson, C. M., O’Farrell, T. J., Gustin, N. G., & Chard, K. M. (2015).

Couple treatment for alcohol use disorder and posttraumatic stress disorder: Pilot

results from U.S. military veterans and their partners. Journal of Traumatic

Stress, 28(3), 247.

Shannon, L. M., Birdwhistell, S., Hulbig, S. K., Jones, A. J., Newell, & J., Payne, C.

(2017). Examining implementation and preliminary performance indicators of

veterans treatment courts: The Kentucky experience. Evaluation and Program

Planning 63, 54-66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2017.03.003

Shari, H. (2017). Self-stigma and veteran culture. Journal of Transcultural

Nursing, 28(5), 438–444. https://doi.org/10.1177/1043659616676319

Slatore, C. G., Falvo, M. J., Nugent, S., & Carlson, K. (2018). Afghanistan and Iraq war

veterans: Mental health diagnoses are associated with respiratory disease

diagnoses. Military Medicine, 183(5/6), e249–e257.

https://doi.org/10.1093/milmed/usx108

Smith, B. A. (2016). Juror preference for curative alternative verdicts for veterans with

PTSD. Military Psychology, 28(3), 174-184. https://doi.org/10.1037/mil0000115

Smith, J. A., Flowers, P., & Larkin, M. (2009). Interpretative phenomenological

analysis: Theory, method, and research. Sage.

Sreenivasan, S., Garrick, T., McGuire, J., Smee, D. E., Dow, D., & Woehl, D. (2013).

Critical concerns in Iraq/Afghanistan war veterans—Forensic interface. Combat-

related post-deployment criminal violence. Journal of the American Academy of

Psychiatry and the Law, 41(2), 263–273.

Sreenivasan, S., Rosenthal, J., Smee, D. E., Wilson, K., & McGuire, J. (2018). Coming

home from prison: Adapting military resilience training to enhance successful

community reintegration for justice-involved Iraq-Afghanistan

veterans. Psychological Services 15(2), 163–71.

https://doi.org/10.1037/ser0000206.

Stahl, N. A., & King, J. R. (2020). Expanding approaches for research: Understanding

and using trustworthiness in qualitative research. Journal of Developmental

Education, 44(1), 26–28

Street, A. E., Vogt, D., & Dutra, L. (2009). A new generation of women veterans:

Stressors faced by women deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan. Clinical Psychology

Review, 29(8), 685-694. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2009.08.007

Tajfel, H. (1972). La categorisation sociale [Social categorization]. In S. Moscovici (Ed.),

Introduction a` la psychologie sociale [Introduction to social psychology] (Vol. 1,

pp. 272–302). Larousse.

Teplin, L. A. (1990). The prevalence of severe mental disorders among male urban jail

detainees: A comparison with the Epidemiological Catchment Area program.

American Journal of Public Health 80(6), 663-669.

https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.80.6.663

Teplin, L. A., Abram, K. M., & McClelland, G. M. (1996). Prevalence of psychiatric

disorders among incarcerated women. Archives of General Psychiatry 53(6), 505-

512. https://doi.org/10.1001/archpsyc.1996.01830060047007

Thompson, M., Osher, F., & Tomasini-Joshi, D. (2007). Improving responses to people

with mental illnesses: The essential elements of a mental health court. Council of

State Governments Justice Center. https://www.bja.gov/Publications/

MHC_Essential_Elements.pdf

Timko, C., Midboe, A. M., Maisel, N. C., Blodgett, J. C., Asch, S. M., Rosenthal, J., &

Blonigen, D. M. (2014). Treatments for recidivism risk among justice-involved

veterans. Journal Of Offender Rehabilitation, 53(8), 620-640.

https://doi.org/10.1080/10509674.2014.956964

Van Dykel, K., & Orrick, E. A. (2016). An examination of the influence of veteran status

on offense type among an inmate sample. American Journal of Criminal Justice

42(2), 426–442. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12103-016-9373-3

Vaughn, P., & Turner, C. (2016). Decoding via coding: Analyzing qualitative text data

through thematic coding and survey methodologies. Journal of Library

Administration, 56(1), 41–51. https://doi.org/10.1080/01930826.2015.1105035

Wadams, M., & Park, T. (2018). Qualitative research in correctional settings: researcher

bias, western ideological influences, and social justice. Journal Of Forensic

Nursing, 14(2), 72–79. https://doi.org/10.1097/JFN.0000000000000199

Wertz, F. J. (2005). Phenomenological research methods for counseling

psychology. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52(2), 167–

177. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.52.2.167

Wherry, J. L. (2020). Kicked out, kicked again: The discharge review boards’ illiberal

application of liberal consideration for veterans with post-traumatic stress

disorder. California Law Review, 108(5), 1357-1420.

https://doi.org/10.15779/Z38SNO1496

Willis, D. G., Sullivan-Bolyai, S., Knafl, K., & Cohen, M. Z. (2016). Distinguishing

features and similarities between descriptive phenomenological and qualitative

description research. Western Journal of Nursing Research, 38(9), 1185–1204.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0193945916645499

Zierk, K. A. (2019). The real antidote: A critical review of U.S. and Canadian drug

treatment courts and a call for public health prevention tools as a solution to the

opioid epidemic. Indiana International & Comparative Law Review, 29(1), 185–

217. https://doi.org/10.18060/7909.0068

Students also viewed