Probation and Probationers: History, Philosophy, Goals, and Functions

1
Chapter 5

• Probation and Probationers History, Philosophy,
  Goals, and Functions

2
Introduction

• Probation is unique to the United States and its
  origins date to the 1830s
• Prosecutors have several pretrial options when
  low level, nonserious types of offenders commit
  crimes
• Two of the options that do not involve charges to
  the defendant are pretrial diversion and
  alternative dispute resolution

3
Probation and Probationers History, Philosophy,
Goals, and Functions

• Probation defined
• Probation is releasing convicted offenders into
  the community under a conditional suspended
  sentence, avoiding imprisonment, showing good
  behaviour, under the supervision of a probation
  officer
• It is derived from the latin word probatio which
  means a period of trial and forgiveness
• Those who prove themselves during the trial
  period by complying with the conditions are given
  forgiveness and released

4
History of Probation in the United States

• Judicial reprieves and releases on an offenders
  recognizance
• During the late 1700s and early 1800s. English
  judges exercised their discretion in numerous
  case by giving judicial reprieves
• Judicial reprieves basically suspended the
  incarcerative sentence
• These were demonstrations of judicial leniency,
  especially where defendants had no priors
• Judges in Massachusetts during the 1800s used
  discretionary power to suspend sentences as well

5
History of Probation in the United States

• John Augustus, the father of probation in the
  United States
• Probation in the United States was conceived in
  1841 by a cobbler and philanthropist named John
  Augustus
• Augustus attempted to rehabilitate alcoholics by
  supervising them and guaranteeing their
  appearance in court
• Augustus attracted several other philanthropists
  to volunteer to perform similar probation
  services for juveniles as well as adults

6
History of Probation in the United States

• The ideal-real dilemma philosophies in conflict
• Probation was a true correctional innovation in
  1841
• Before Augustus work convicted offenders were
  either fined, imprisoned or both
• Between 1790 and 1817, sentences in the United
  states had to be served in their entirety
• Currently, the get tough movement is pressing for
  a return to sentencing policies that were
  practiced in the early 1800s

7
History of Probation in the United States

• Public reaction to probation
• Many citizens believe that probation means
  coddling offenders and causes them to not take
  seriously their punishment
• In 1841 Augustus was criticized by the press and
  by jailers, as their income was based on the
  numbers of prisoners held in jails
• Augustus philanthropy indirectly decreased
  profiteering among jailers
• Today, probation operates very differently from
  the way it was originally conducted in 1841
• Technological developments have spawned several
  different kinds of offender management systems

8
The Philosophy of Probation

• Probation in the 2000s has undergone significant
  changes in its conception and implementation
• There are currently diverse options among experts
  about how probation should be reconceptualised
  and reorganized
• The aim of probation is to give offenders an
  opportunity to prove themselves by remaining law
  abiding
• Society has questioned the rehabilitative value
  of prisons and jails, the belief is that
  incarceration does not deter crime
• Prisons and jails also cost taxpayers money
  probation is a less costly option

9
The Philosophy of Probation

• The general philosophy of probation follows its
  pioneer
• Augustus wanted to reform offenders, he wanted to
  rehabilitate them
• Thus rehabilitation continues to be a strong
  philosophical aim of probation
• The major difficulty in naming a specific
  philosophy of probation is that there are diverse
  impressions of what probation should be
• Present day probation has become streamlined and
  bureaucratic, POs do their work in terms of
  client caseloads and officer/client ratios

10
Models for Dealing With Criminal Offenders

• The treatment or medical model
• This model considers criminal behavior as an
  illness to be remedied
• Probation permits rehabilitation to occur through
  treatment programs and therapeutic services not
  readily available in prisons or jails
• Critics, however, believe that the flaw with the
  treatment model is that offenders are treated as
  objects
• But selectively applying probation to some
  offenders leads to more fundamental criticisms
  regarding inequitable treatment

11
Models for Dealing With Criminal Offenders

• The rehabilitation model
• Closely resembles the treatment model
• This model stresses rehabilitation and reform
• Rehabilitation was a major correctional objective
  when the Federal Bureau of Prisons formed in 1930
• Prison rioting in federal prisons in the 1950s
  and 1960s led officials to consider
  rehabilitation as ineffective
• 1970s Rising crime rates and recidivism have
  also led to condemnation of rehabilitation

12
Models for Dealing With Criminal Offenders

• The Justice or Due Process model
• Not intended to replace the rehabilitative model
  but to enhance it
• The justice model applied to probation stresses
  fair and equitable treatment
• In recent years, probation practices have been
  influenced by the justice model through the
  imposition of more equitable sentences
• A main reason citizens oppose the use of
  probation is that they do not define probation as
  punishment

13
Models for Dealing With Criminal Offenders

• The Just-Deserts model
• This model emphasizes equating punishment with
  the severity of the crime
• In other words, offenders should get what they
  deserve
• Retribution, therefore is an important component
• For probationers, this means that supervision
  levels are adjusted to fit the seriousness of the
  offenses
• Public pressure for applying the just-deserts
  model in judicial sentencing, including greater
  severity of penalties, has stimulated the get
  tough movement

14
Models for Dealing With Criminal Offenders

• The community model
• Sometimes called the reintegration model, the
  community model stresses offender adaptation to
  the community
• The primary strengths of the community model are
  that offenders are able to re-establish
  associations with their families and have the
  opportunity to work at jobs
• The community model uses citizen involvement in
  offender reintegration
• Important community officials may be members of
  boards of directors of community-based services
• With community support, offenders have a better
  chance of adapting to community life

15
Functions of Probation

• Crime control
• Stems from the fact that probationers are often
  supervised closely by their POs
• Precisely how much crime control occurs as a
  result of probation, however, is unknown
• Standard probation probably offers little by way
  of crime control
• Requiring probationers to comply with certain
  conditions succeeds to some extent as a method of
  crime control

16
Functions of Probation

• Community reintegration
• One obvious benefit to offenders is that they
  avoid the criminogenic environment of
  incarceration
• Offenders on probation usually maintain jobs,
  live with and support their families, and engage
  in vocational training or other educational
  programs

17
Functions of Probation

• Rehabilitation
• It is difficult to make the transition from
  prison life to community living, especially if
  incarcerated for several years
• With probations, offenders remain in their
  communities, make restitution to victims and
  perform other useful services
• The community reintegration function of probation
  is most closely associated with its
  rehabilitative aim

18
Functions of Probation

• Punishment
• There are many behavioural conditions
  accompanying probation orders
• Any violation can lead to ones probation being
  revoked
• Restitution to victims, public services, and
  fines are all part of the punishment of probation
• Offenders must also sustain regular employment

19
Functions of Probation

• Deterrence
• With standard probation there is not much of a
  deterrent effect, recidivism rates are higher
  than those for more intensively supervised
  intermediate programs
• Although there is no national standard, a 30
  percent recidivism rate has been defined by
  various researchers as a cutting point
• The deterrent value of probation then may vary
  according to the standard by which deterrence is
  measured
• Traditional programs have recidivism rates of
  about 65 percent

20
A Profile of Probationers

• The profile of probationers in the United States
  changes annually
• In 2004, 77 percent of probationers were male
• Between 1995 and 2004, the proportion of female
  probationers increased from 21 to 23 percent
• The racial distribution of probationers hasnt
  changed much during that same period
• About 56 percent of probationers were White
• About 30 percent of probationers were African
  American
• About 12 percent of probationers were Hispanic

21
First Offenders and Recidivists

• Although Judges have wide discretion to decide
  probation, most probationers share the following
  characteristics
• Tend to be first offenders or low-risk offenders
• More property offenders than violent offenders
  are considered for probation
• More convicted females are considered for
  probation
• Not having a history of drug or alcohol use is
  positive for granting probation
• If there were no physical injuries or weapons
  used during the offense, the chance for probation
  is greater

22
Civil Mechanisms in Lieu of Probation

• Because of large volumes of offenders being
  arrested, prosecutors are faced with larger
  numbers of cases
• There arent enough courts and judges to handle
  this volume of cases
• Two alternative solutions include
• Alternative dispute resolution
• Community-based, informal, dispute settlement
  between offenders and their victims
• Mostly targets misdemeanants
• Pretrial diversion
• Procedure whereby criminal defendants are
  diverted to either a community-based agency for
  treatment or assigned a counsellor for assistance

23
Pretrial Diversion

• Functions of pretrial diversion
• To permit divertees to remain in their
  communities
• To permit divertees the opportunity to make
  restitution to their victim
• To help divertees avoid the stigma of criminal
  conviction
• To assist corrections officials in reducing
  prison and jail overcrowding
• To save the courts time, trouble, and expense of
  formal proceedings
• To preserve the family unit and enhance family
  solidarity and continuity

24
Pretrial Diversion

• Criticisms of diversion
• Diversion is too lenient on criminals
• It is an inappropriate punishment and it does not
  effectively deal with offenders
• Diversion leads to net-widening
• Diversion usually excludes female offenders
• Diversion solves an offenders case without the
  benefit of due process
• Diversion assumes guilt without trial