Probation Officers Methodology

Historically, probation officers have performed both rehabilitative and law enforcement functions, especially in juvenile probation. In a rehabilitative role the probation officer serves as a social case worker, a counselor whose primary concerns are generally in the best interest of the offender. In this role, a probation officer must know how to interview, how to obtain facts about an offender’s background, how to identify and distinguish surface from underlying problems, what community resources exist, and how to make referrals to such resources. In the law enforcement role, however, the probation officer is a control agent, an authoritarian figure, a threat to the offender’s conditional freedom. The dual role of probation is evident in the classic definition: “Probation strives to protect the community through the rehabilitation of the offender.” Given these conflicting roles, today’s probation officer is more likely to emphasize surveillance and control functions, holding the protection of the community as a higher priority than rehabilitation.

I ask myself, when probation officers meet with offenders, what should they do? Of course, there are bureaucratic tasks to be performed, paperwork to be completed or perhaps a drug test to monitor. But the most significant issue is whether, in the often constrained supervision meetings, there is anything that officers or I can do to reduce the likelihood that offenders will recidivate.

In a growing community corrections population, constrained budgets, and cumbersome caseloads have, in part, may contribute to ineffectual supervision practices. Many officers in the past have been unable to do little more than take a "pee 'em and see 'em" approach. Moreover, perhaps b...

... middle of paper ...

...isely how officer-offender interactions can be used potentially to reduce recidivism. Like I mentioned previously, the research shows that officers can have positive impact on their supervisees' risk of reoffending if they build quality relationships with them and are trained to use solid principles during their sessions. Probation officers methodology in their interaction with their probationers should remain a researched area of corrections in the future. Possibly calling for the development of a "supervision tool kit," in systematic efforts to explore how to expand the resources officers can draw upon in supervision. I believe this enterprise could promises to improve offenders' chances at avoiding further criminal involvement and to improve public safety. We should never stop in out pursuit of rehabilitation of offenders in our communities we serve and protect.