Editing Failure to appear (section)

=== Definitional problems ===
Critics argue that policymakers define "failure to appear" too broadly, conflating people who intentionally flee the jurisdiction with those who miss their court dates due to forgetfulness or logistical difficulties.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Gouldin |first=Lauren P. |date=2018 |title=Defining Flight Risk |url=https://lawreview.uchicago.edu/sites/lawreview.uchicago.edu/files/02%20Gouldin_ART_SA%20%28JPM%29.pdf |journal=University of Chicago Law Review |volume=85 |pages=687}}</ref> Risk-assessment tools tend to treat all FTAs the same when calculating a defendant's risk score.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Gouldin |first=Lauryn P. |date=2018 |title=Defining Flight Risk |url=https://lawreview.uchicago.edu/sites/lawreview.uchicago.edu/files/02%20Gouldin_ART_SA%20%28JPM%29.pdf |journal=University of Chicago Law Review |volume=85 |pages=684}}</ref> One scholar has proposed breaking FTAs into three categories: "true flight" (intentionally fleeing the area); local absconding (remaining in the jurisdiction but refusing to come to court even if reminded); and low-cost non-appearance (failing to appear for reasons besides avoiding justice).<ref name=":2">{{Cite journal |last=Gouldin |first=Lauryn P. |date=2018 |title=Defining Flight Risk |url=https://lawreview.uchicago.edu/sites/lawreview.uchicago.edu/files/02%20Gouldin_ART_SA%20%28JPM%29.pdf |journal=University of Chicago Law Review |volume=85 |pages=683}}</ref> Critics say these types of FTAs may warrant different interventions.<ref name=":2" />