NCJ Number
172691
Journal
Perspectives Volume: 20 Issue: 3 Dated: Summer 1997 Pages: 26-32
Date Published
1997
Length
7 pages
Annotation
Common ethical dilemmas that probation officers experience are discussed, with emphasis on the principles that probation officers should consider in their decision-making and action.
Abstract
Areas in which ethical dilemmas can arise include promising services without any guarantee that these services will be provided, conflicts among the needs of different probationers, whistle blowing against the probation administration, confidentiality, and the unequal relationship between probation officers and their clients. A common typology defines four main types of probation officers. The punitive or law enforcement officer always places society's interests above clients' interests. The welfare/therapeutic practitioner or social worker focuses on offender treatment and rehabilitation regardless of consequences to the community. Passive time savers or civil servants are concerned about themselves. The synthetic or combined officer combines the treatment and control components of probation and seek a middle ground between client welfare and community protection. Overall, probation officers should be guided by the ethic of care. The central goal of this ethic is to reintegrate individuals into the community. The ethic of care recognizes individuals' basic rights and values, but it does not elevate them above those of society. It is essential to reevaluate needs, responsibilities, and rights on a continuing basis to ensure that the well-being of all parties is promoted. Therefore, ethical probation officers must be ready to override the needs of offenders who pose a serious threat to community welfare. Text of two codes of ethics and 19 references