Somebody's going to emergency, somebody's going to jail: pre-booking diversion and officer discretion.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The opioid use epidemic has resulted in dramatic increases in drug overdoses and deaths. Traditional criminal justice approaches to drug use focus on making arrests to deter individuals from engaging in criminal behavior. To reduce the negative impacts generated by criminal justice system involvement for individuals with substance use disorders, police departments have begun turning to pre-booking diversion programs. Unlike traditional diversion programs, where individuals are diverted from the criminal justice system after an arrest, these programs authorize police officers to exercise discretion in referring individuals to treatment resources in lieu of arrest. This study uses a conjoint survey experiment administered to 329 officers in five agencies that were implementing pre-booking diversion programs. Officers are presented with five forced-choice tasks involving individuals eligible for a pre-booking diversion program to assess the factors officers use to decide which individuals they encounter should be referred to treatment. RESULTS: The findings from this study indicate that officers consider a variety of demographic and legal characteristics when determining which individuals they are most likely to refer to treatment in a pre-booking diversion program. Officers indicated a preference for referring younger individuals (age=35, AMCE=-0.095, p<0.001; age=45, AMCE=-0.099, p<0.001), females (AMCE =0.033, p=0.042), and Black individuals (AMCE =0.056, p=0.007). Officers were also more likely to refer individuals with less serious criminal histories (drug convictions only, AMCE=-0.099, p<0.001; violent crime convictions, AMCE=-0.317, p<0.001), individuals possessing smaller amounts of drugs (AMCE=-0.070, p<0.001), and individuals who had not committed a crime other than drug possession (shoplifting, AMCE=-0.083, p<0.001; burglary, AMCE=-0.185, p<0.001). Finally, officers were more likely to refer individuals whose current drug of choice involved opioids (fentanyl, AMCE=0.114, p=0.001; oxy, AMCE=0.102, p=0.002; heroin, AMCE=0.099, p=0.003) as compared to marijuana. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates considerable promise for pre-booking diversion programs. The success of pre-booking diversion programs hinges on officers’ willingness to refer individuals with serious substance use issues to treatment. Our study provides experimental evidence that officers are more likely to make treatment referrals for opioids as compared to marijuana, demonstrating promise for pre-booking diversion’s potential to address the opioid epidemic.