Probation is the suspension of a jail sentence—the individual who
is "on probation" has been convicted of a crime, but instead of serving
jail time, has been found by the court to be amenable to probation and
will be returned to the community for a period in which they will have
to abide to certain conditions set forth by the court under the
supervision of a probation officer. The probation officer helps the
offender adapt to living in the community; to guide and help them to
behave in a lawful and responsible way.
Probation and parole are different forms of judicial leniency designed
to alleviate costs for the penal system and offer the opportunity of
rehabilitation to those found guilty of crimes. As such, they both serve
the public interest by making those who have broken the law of their
society accountable. Yet, when the offense is not deemed serious, and
the perpetrator has demonstrated their acknowledgment of wrongdoing and
expressed willingness to conform not only to the laws but to additional
conditions, probation satisfies the need for punishment. In an ideal
world, all those who violate a law would have such an attitude of
remorse and recognition of wrongdoing. In such cases, the purpose of the
penal system would become one of rehabilitation rather than
retribution; the probation system is an essential feature of this
process.
Conditions of probation
Individuals on probation have been found guilty of the crimes
with which they are charged. As such, their freedoms are limited as
punishment. General conditions of remaining out of prison may include
maintaining employment, abiding to a curfew, living where directed,
abstaining from unlawful behavior, following the probation officer's
orders and not absconding, and refraining from contact with other
individuals, who may include victims of the original crime (such as a
former partner in a domestic violence case), potential victims of
similar crimes (such as minors when the crime involves child sexual
abuse), potential witnesses, or those who have partnered with the
offender in the earlier crime.
History of probation: Origins and evolution
The concept of probation, from the Latin word probatio—meaning testing period—has historical roots in the practice of judicial reprieve.
In English Common Law, the Courts could temporarily suspend the
execution of a sentence to allow the defendant to appeal to the Crown
for a pardon. Probation first developed in the United States when John
Augustus, a Boston boot maker, persuaded a judge in the Boston Police
Court, in 1841, to give him custody of a convicted offender, a
"drunkard," for a brief period and then helped the man to appear
rehabilitated by the time of sentencing. Even before John Augustus, the
practice of suspended sentence was used as early as 1830, in Boston,
Massachusetts, and became widespread in U.S. Courts, although there was
no statutory authorization for such a practice. At first, judges used
"release on recognizance" or bail and simply failed to take any further
legal action. By the mid-nineteenth century, however, many Federal
Courts were using a judicial reprieve to suspend sentence, and this
posed a legal question. In 1916, the United States Supreme Court held
that a Federal Judge (Killets) was without power to suspend a sentence
indefinitely, which is known as the Killets Decision. This famous court
decision led to the passing of the National Probation Act of 1925,
thereby, allowing courts to suspend the imposition of a sentence and
place an offender on probation.
Massachusetts developed the first statewide probation system in 1880,
and by 1920, 21 other states had followed suit. With the passage of the
National Probation Act on March 5, 1925, signed by President Calvin
Coolidge, the U.S./Federal Probation Service was established to serve
the U.S. Courts. On the state level, pursuant to the Crime Control and
Consent Act passed by Congress in 1936, a group of states entered into
agreement by which they would supervise probationers and parolees for
each other. Known as the Interstate Compact For the Supervision of
Parolees and Probationers, the agreement was originally signed by 25
states in 1937. In 1951, all the states in the United States of America
had a working probation system and ratified the Interstate Compact
Agreement. In 1959, the newly adopted states, Alaska and Hawaii, in
addition the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands, and the
territories of Guam and America Samoa ratified the act as well.
Probation began as a humanitarian effort to allow first-time and minor
offenders a second chance. Early probationers were expected not only to
obey the law but also to behave in a morally acceptable fashion.
Officers sought to provide moral leadership to help shape probationers'
attitudes and behavior with respect to family, religion, employment, and
free time. They aimed to ensure that this was enforced as well, and
early probationers were given the opportunity to prove themselves and
possibly even reduce their sentence.
During the 1920s through the 1950s, the major developments in the field
of psychology led probation officers to shift their emphasis from moral
leadership to therapeutic counseling. This shift brought three important
changes. First, the officer no longer primarily acted as a community
supervisor charged with enforcing a particular morality. Second, the
officer became more of a clinical social worker whose goal was to help
the offender solve psychological and social problems. Third, the
offender was expected to become actively involved in the treatment. The
pursuit of rehabilitation as the primary goal of probation gave the
officer extensive discretion in defining and treating the offender's
problems. Officers used their judgment to evaluate each offender and
develop a treatment approach to the personal problems that presumably
had led to crime.
During the 1960s, major social changes swept across the United States.
These changes also affected the field of community corrections. Rather
than counseling offenders, probation officers provided them with
concrete social services such as assistance with employment, housing,
finances, and education. This emphasis on reintegrating offenders and
remedying the social problems they faced was consistent with federal
efforts to wage a "war on poverty." Instead of being a counselor or
therapist, the probation officer served as an advocate, dealing with
private and public institutions on the offender's behalf.
In the late 1970s, the orientation of probation changed again as the
goals of rehabilitation and reintegration gave way to "risk management."
This approach, still dominant today, seeks to minimize the probability
that an offender will commit a new offense. Risk management reflects two
basic goals. First, in accord with the deserved-punishment ideal, the
punishment should fit the offense, and correctional intervention should
neither raise nor lower the level of punishment. Second, according to
the community protection criterion, the amount and type of supervision
are determined according to the risk that the probationer will return to
a life out of compliance with the law.
Probation officer
Probation officers and parole officers function as agents or officers of the courts. Parole officers generally function as agents or officers of the Parole Board or the Department of Corrections. Probation officers
serve under the court system as the enforcing arm of the court's
sentence of someone who has been placed on supervised probation.
Probation and parole in the United States
In the United States, there can be probation officers at the city,
county, state, or Federal level—wherever there is a court of competent
jurisdiction. Probation Officers, depending on the jurisdiction,
may or may not also be Parole Officers. Since the abolishment of parole
in the Federal System in 1984, there are essentially no Parole Officers
on the Federal Level of the United States. However, there is a small and
decreasing number of parolees still being supervised, that were
sentenced before 1984, or court-martialed military service personnel,
and U.S. Probation Officers serve as parole officers in that capacity.
Most all jurisdictions require officers to have a four year college
degree, and prefer a Graduate level degree for full consideration for
probation officer positions on the Federal level.
Generally, Probation Officers investigate and supervise defendants who
have not yet been sentenced to a term of incarceration. Transversely,
Parole Officers supervise offenders released from incarceration after a
review and consideration of a Warden, Parole Board, or other parole
authority. Parolees are essentially serving the remainder of their
incarceration sentence in the community due to the excellent adjustment
and behavior while an inmate. However, some jurisdictions are modifying
or abolishing the practice of parole and giving post-release supervision
obligations to a community corrections agent, generically referred to
as a Probation Officer. Typically, probation and parole officers do not
wear a uniform, but simply dress in business or casual attire. Probation
officers are usually issued a badge/credentials and, in many cases, may
carry concealed weapons and pepper spray for self protection or serving
arrest warrants. Parole Officers, in many jurisdictions, are also
issued a badge and firearm and often have full police powers.
Probation/Parole officers with law enforcement powers, technically
classified as peace officers, must attend a police academy as part of
their training and certification.
Probation Agencies have a loosely based paramilitary command structure
and are usually headed by a Chief Probation Officer or Director. The
chain-of-command usually flows to Deputy Chief or Assistant Director,
then to Supervisor or Senior Probation Officer, then to the line
probation officer. Some Parole and Probation Officers supervise general
caseloads with offenders who are convicted of a variety of offenses.
Others hold specialist positions, and work with specific groups of
offenders such as Sex Offenders, offenders sentenced to electronic
monitoring (house arrest) or GPS Monitoring, cases with severe mental
health, substance abuse, and violent histories.
A probation officer can perform any function assigned to him or her by
the court. However, their usual mandate is to supervise offenders placed
on supervision, and to investigate offender's personal and criminal
history for the Court prior to sentencing. Probation and parole officers
are required to possess excellent oral and written communication skills
and a broad knowledge of the criminal justice system and the roles,
relationships, and responsibilities distributed among the courts, the
parole authority, the Bureau of Prisons or Department of Corrections
and/or local jails, police, substance abuse counseling and social
services agencies, applicable case law, sentencing guidelines (if
applicable), and the prosecutor. Additionally, they must have an ability
to work with an extremely diverse population and wide variety of
government agencies and community organizations and accept the potential
hazards of working closely with a criminal population.
Pre-sentence investigation
Probation Officers who prepare pre-sentence reports must be especially
skilled in gathering, organizing, and analyzing information. In the
report and accompanying sentencing recommendation, the probation officer
must assess the probability of risk to the community in the form of
future criminal behavior, the harm the offense caused and the need for
restitution, any profit the defendant received from the crime, and the
defendant's ability to pay sanctions such as a fine, restitution, or
cost. The officer must identify the defendant's need for treatment to
correct characteristics, conditions, or behavioral patterns that limit
motivation or ability to obey the law and must assess the availability
and suitability of rehabilitative programs. The preparation of
pre-sentence reports is critical not only to the individual offender and
those directly affected by the offense, but to the systematic
administration of criminal justice.
In the U.S, pursuant to the Privacy Act of 1974, a copy of the
Pre-sentence Report must be provided to each offender, or their counsel,
before sentencing and, depending on the jurisdiction, must provide both
counsels with a copy of the sentencing guidelines (if applicable) and
be able to explain the calculations, resolve disagreements and noted
objections to the Court. After sentencing, the pre-sentence writer
should provide the offender with a written explanation of his or her
conditions of supervision. In addition, the probation officer should
forward a copy of the Pre-sentence Report to the incarceration agency to
be used in classification of the inmate to ensure proper placement of
the inmate and a better utilization of prison programs and resources.
Probation and parole officers in England and Wales
The National Probation Service is charged with supervising offenders and
compiling relevant data regarding offender supervision and its modern
form was set out in April 2001, by the Criminal Justice and Court
Services Act. It has existed since the 1907 The Probation of Offenders
Act, but the practice of placing offenders on probation was routinely
undertaken in the London Police Courts by voluntary organizations such
as The Church of England Temperance Society as early as the late 1800s.
These earlier probation services provided the inspiration for similar
ideas in the humane treatment and supervision of offenders throughout
the British Empire and also in former colonies of Britain as
missionaries and members of the British criminal justice system traveled
the globe.
In modern times, the duties of probation officers mirror the duties of
their U.S. counterparts with some notable exceptions. Probation officers
make regular recommendations to sentencers regarding an offender's
progress and potential to contribute to the community after release,
although recent legislation creating new orders such as the Drug
Treatment and Testing Order have introduced U.S. style reporting to the
English Courts for the first time. Additionally, probation officers
will supervise a Restorative Justice plan that provides the victim of a
crime an opportunity to address the impact of the crime to the
offenders. In England and Wales, some attempts have been made to follow
the United States and Canada style corrections services but this has
sometimes led to poor or inappropriate implementation of politically
expedient ideas for changes in the supervision of offenders that do not
fit easily with the stable and somewhat conservative criminal justice
System in England and Wales.
Probation and parole officers in Australia
Parole Officers in Australia serve an active role in recommending parole
to Judges (who, in Australia, determine if Parole should be granted).
Probation Officers are expected to not only supervise an offender while
he performs community service, but to also develop the community service
plans themselves.