NCJ Number
150492
Journal
Federal Probation Volume: 58 Issue: 2 Dated: (June 1994) Pages: 3-10
Date Published
1994
Length
8 pages
Annotation
The role of probation in managing crime and criminal offenders needs to be evaluated, particularly with respect to philosophies that will guide probation into the next century.
Abstract
Despite the importance of developing a clear mission for probation, there is considerable disagreement about probation's role in corrections. Probation models have been proposed that range from control to case management to offender rehabilitation. In contemporary probation, State legal codes specify approaches to be employed by probation departments when handling offenders. Although rehabilitation is the most common probation goal, recently enacted statutes tend to incorporate punitive goals. Most States prescribe multiple probation goals, including reintegration, punishment, custody, public protection, and deterrence. Probation officers themselves endorse offender rehabilitation, but they also indicate strong support for offender control. Intermediate sanctions have been introduced in some probation systems, such as intensive supervised probation, house arrest, shock incarceration, boot camps, community service, restitution, and day fines. As the 21st Century approaches, probation will likely continue to be characterized by a dual emphasis on reform and control. Economic strains of punitive sanctions may force the public to reassess justice policies which, in turn, may lead to greater use of reform-oriented probation strategies. Future probation goals will likely have a strong emphasis on offender rehabilitation. Guidelines may need to be established to monitor the implementation of diverse intermediate sanctions. 63 references