Missoula Treatment Courts Got Jenks’d

by lizard

Last December, Kathleen Jenks replaced Donald Let ‘Em Go Louden as head judge for Missoula’s Municipal Court. Now, instead of a judge with an appropriate street handle for being notoriously lenient, we have a judge with a last name that’s become a sort of verb to those facing a more vigorous degree of accountability for their actions—getting Jenks’d.

More accountability for repeat offenders is welcomed by some, and not necessarily seen by this blogger as being a net negative.

But not every repeat offender is effectively dealt with through purely punitive measures.

Fortunately, Missoula has been at the innovative forefront with treatment courts, or co-occurring courts.

Unfortunately, that effort got recently Jenks’d.

Missoula Municipal Court no longer refers offenders to treatment courts designed to help people with substance abuse and mental health issues get their lives back on track before their behavior gets too out of control.

Municipal Court Judge Kathleen Jenks said she made the decision a couple of months ago after realizing that only a single person from Municipal Court was assigned to the last session of the treatment court, formally known as Missoula Co-Occurring Treatment Court.

Among other issues, Jenks said, the city just doesn’t have the resources to devote that much time and money to one person.

“It’s like the Cadillac” of court systems, she said, lauding the goals of treatment courts. “But I don’t know that we can right now, given our volume, afford the Cadillac.”

In response, a recent Missoulian editorial put it like this:

Calling the Missoula Co-Occurring Treatment Court a “Cadillac” option, Jenks explained in a Missoulian news story last Sunday that the city doesn’t have the resources to devote to such a small number of offenders.

These are for the most part non-violent offenders who have agreed to follow a detailed plan to receive a reduced or deferred sentence. These are people whose run-ins with the law stem from their struggles with substance abuse or mental illness. These are people who, given the right kind of help regaining control over their lives, will not commit the same offenses again.

So it’s a matter of devoting sufficient resources now to prevent recurring offenses – or devoting them on an exponential scale in the future. Drug courts, veterans courts and mental health courts will not be the best option for every offender – that doesn’t mean they should be eliminated as options altogether.

I whole-heartedly agree. And so does Theresa Conley, who coordinated the treatment courts until this year. Yesterday, her op-ed was published in the Missoulian. You can read it in full, below the fold.



It is disheartening to read of Judge Kathleen Jenks’ unwillingness to help some of those most vulnerable of society: those who are mentally ill. Her lack of understanding is a disservice to anyone entering Municipal Court. The criminal justice system realized back in the ’90s that you cannot punish mental illness and addiction out of a person. Hence, the development of treatment courts and therapeutic jurisprudence.

In responding to the several points made in the (Sept. 23 Missoulian) article, I will first explain two terms. Co-occurring illness is the presence of two mental illness disorders: an addictive disorder and a mental disorder or a traumatic brain injury. These must be treated simultaneously to facilitate recovery. Treatment courts are designed to help folks whose offense is directly related to their co-occurring illness and who often repeatedly appear in court by linking them to case management and treatment. This linkage is designed to help prevent recidivism. Herein the term treatment court is used in reference to the Missoula Co-Occurring Court as well as the Veterans Treatment Court. Jenks has stopped referrals to both courts.

Jenks’ belief that treatment court costs too much takes a narrow perspective if you total the financial consideration of someone repeatedly cycling through Municipal Court. If Jenks were to tally the repeated costs involved in these cycles – a city attorney, a public defender, the court clerks, the police, the judge’s time and the cost of incarceration – she would easily calculate the cost savings of a person in treatment court is significant. What cannot be tallied, in financial terms, but which should be the driving force behind jurisprudence, is the alleviation of human suffering.

Whether there is one person or 10 in treatment court, referrals from Municipal Court to the treatment court cost the city very little time and money. Most cases are sentenced by the time they enter treatment court; they have worked with their attorney to include it as part of their sentence. The time in treatment court often starts with sentencing, allowing the treatment court jurisdiction for the full six months, oftentimes a year because there is often more than one charge. Instead of being given the usual judicial admonishment of “don’t get into trouble for the rest of your suspended sentence,” these folks agree to participate in the treatment court. That means they are accountable to weekly appearances in treatment court as well as attending various appointments designed to stabilize and treat the person’s co-occurring illness. The referring court doesn’t pay for these services; they are services available in the community.

I did enjoy a sad chuckle at the comparison of the treatment court with a Cadillac. Considering the shoestring budget we have worked with, it is more like a moped. The only paid position is the coordinator/case manager (through the state’s Office of Court Administration). A federal grant is funding a part-time case manager for the next 18 months. The treatment court team members volunteer their lunch hour every Monday because they believe in affecting change in the lives of the folks on their caseloads. Judge Marie Andersen did not spend a “full day in treatment court;” she came in on her day off, approximately three hours once a month.

If Jenks and city officials are truly concerned about folks with co-occurring illness and seek to reduce recidivism then I challenge them: apply for one of the numerous grants designed to increase resources to jurisdictions which feel they are strapped financially yet wish to affect change in their jurisdiction.

“Lock ’em up” is no longer the prevailing attitude of the criminal justice system. Lest you think treatment courts are “soft on crime,” it is an evidence-based practice utilized throughout the criminal justice system in the United States, from city courts to federal courts; except in the Missoula Municipal Court.

I urge city officials and organizations, such as the National Alliance on Mental Illness, the Montana Mental Health Association, veterans’ organizations and Montana Disability Rights, to voice your concerns regarding the decision of this appointed judge.

As one mother stated: treatment court gives me hope that my child will receive treatment instead of criminalizing their mental illness.

—Theresa Conley

  1. Daniel Geary

    Granting that the funds are from different designated purses, it is still gemane to note that Missoula has a “BMW” baseball stadium (three months; non-participatory; middle-income males mostly) for 4.2 million. Three people spoke at the city council meeting where these funds were moved from redevelopment to bailout. Only one outspoken (Republican) alderperson suggested this be put to a public vote. Yet Democrat Dave Strohmaier wears the liberal-man’s thinking crown in Missoula. This liberal masquerade had come to define and diminsh Missoula. I’m not one damned bit surprised we will have no treatment referrals. Hope more 4&20 folks will start taking the microphone on Monday nights at 7 p.m. It can make a difference.

    • lizard19

      I think there are ways of being critical of how resources are allocated without affixing a political label, Daniel.

      • Rook

        Strohmaier should not be allowed with chewing gum. Any asshole, with 8 grand can work around city court. Unless you run up against a bad cop like Mark………

  2. lizard19

    Jenks Jenks’d judge Marie Anderson, according to a Missoulian article in today’s paper.

    it appears Jenks doesn’t like the push-back she’s received after her bad decision to stop referrals to treatment courts.

    In the past couple of months, Jenks has been under scrutiny for her decision to no longer refer offenders to treatment courts designed to help people with substance abuse and mental health issues get their lives back on track. She earlier told the Missoulian she appreciated the courts’ goals, but said she wasn’t sure the city could afford the “Cadillac” programs.

    Andersen, on the other hand, has been active in treatment court, according to county Standing Master Brenda Desmond, who launched what was once known as Mental Health Court. She said it would be fair to say Andersen, who has presided over drug court, was an advocate of the program as well.

    On Thursday, the Missoulian published a guest column by Theresa Conley criticizing Jenks’ position on treatment courts. According to a source in City Hall, the opinion piece upset the head judge, and Jenks dismissed Andersen and cited her involvement in the column.

    Conley, however, said she wrote the piece herself, and Andersen wasn’t involved and didn’t know she was working on it. Conley coordinated the treatment courts from 2006 through this year.

    Jenks confirmed she and the assistant judge clashed on the use of treatment court, but she said their disagreement wasn’t the impetus for the decision against rehiring Andersen.

    “You know, I can say that we don’t agree on treatment court, but there are a lot of issues that I’ve considered in making that decision. That is one. It’s not the only one,” Jenks said.

  1. 1 Missoula Lock Up « 4&20 blackbirds

    […] problematic her unipolar, hammer/nail approach to judicial accountability is, in practice. After Jenks’ing treatment courts and effectively scorching the earth of that decision by firing Marie Anderson, it’s now the […]

  2. 2 Judge Orders Muncipal Court to Impose NO Jail Time for Violating City Ordinances | 4&20 blackbirds

    […] October, I wrote about how Jenks is not supportive at all of treatment court options for repeat offenders who have co-occurring mental health and addiction […]

  3. 3 How About Some Good News? | 4&20 blackbirds

    […] October, Missoula’s new top municipal judge, Kathleen Jenks, stopped all municipal referrals to the treatment courts, also known as co-occurring courts. Jenks also halted the work program, […]

  4. 4 Judging the Judicial Judgement of Montanan Judges | 4&20 blackbirds

    […] Missoula Treatment Courts Got Jenks’d […]

  5. 5 Welcome to the Mental Illness Conversation, Missoulian Editorial Board | 4&20 blackbirds

    […] and health insurance, and co-occurring substance abuse barriers, and judge’s who think treatment courts are cadillac programs we can’t afford (don’t vote for Jenks!). Let’s talk about why more officers don’t have crisis […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

  • Pages

  • Recent Comments

    Miles on A New Shelter for Vets or an E…
    success rate for In… on Thirty years ago ARCO killed A…
    Warrior for the Lord on The Dark Side of Colorado
    Linda Kelley-Miller on The Dark Side of Colorado
    Dan on A New Shelter for Vets or an E…
    Former Prosecutor Se… on Former Chief Deputy County Att…
    JediPeaceFrog on Montana AG Tim Fox and US Rep.…
  • Recent Posts

  • Blog Stats

    • 1,691,415 hits
  • Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

    Join 2,734 other followers

  • October 2012
    S M T W T F S
  • Categories

%d bloggers like this: