NCJ Number
208732
Journal
Journal of Offender Rehabilitation Volume: 39 Issue: 4 Dated: 2004 Pages: 47-67
Editor(s)
Nathaniel J. Pallone Ph.D.
Date Published
2004
Length
21 pages
Annotation
This study examined the legally prescribed function of adult and juvenile probation officers, as defined in the State legal codes.
Abstract
Throughout history, there have been two competing goals of probation: law enforcement/community protection and rehabilitation/reintegration of the offender. In an attempt to uncover what differences exist between adult and juvenile probation officers, this study explored the roles of adult and juvenile probation officers and compared their statutorily prescribed duties. The 2002 legal codes for all 50 States and the District of Columbia were analyzed in an effort to uncover the duties of adult and juvenile probation officers. After the analysis, 34 prescribed tasks were established. To determine whether or not the State codes mandate a law enforcement or rehabilitation-oriented approach, the legally prescribed functions of adult and juvenile probation officers were classified into the two categories of law enforcement-oriented or rehabilitation-oriented. The results indicate that juvenile probation officers had more prescribed tasks than adult probation officers, supervision was one of the three most frequently prescribed tasks for both juvenile and adult probation officers, the States placed a greater importance on community control in the adult system, and of the 34 identified prescribed tasks of probation officers 26 were law enforcement-oriented. References