United States' Probation System and Recidivism

Overcrowding is unlikely to cease either time soon and public confidence in probation, and different aspects of the reprehensible justice system, has both but disappe bed. Americans "suffer 40 meg criminal victimizations" annually and only one share of these crimes "actually results in anyone getting caught, convicted, and sent to prison" era most felony defendants, among whom repeat offenders are in the majority, "are sentenced not to prison but to probation" (DiIulio, 1997, p. 40). At the end of 1996 there were 3.2 million adults on probation in the United States, "up from almost 2 million in 1985 and 1.1 million in 1981 (Petersilia, 1997). Since those under titular supervision by law enforcement (probation or parole) commit a very high percentage of all crimes, and the percentage among modern offenders is even higher, people have come to perceive criminal justice as a "revolving-door adult system" come with by, and being swelled by, a "no-fault juvenile system" (DiIulio, p. 40). at that place is, however, a difference between recidivism among felons and misdemeanants. As many as 75 percent of adults on probation for misdemeanors complete their periods of supervision satisfactorily yet it is the high number of recidivist felonies that receive all the attention when probation is discussed (Petersilia). The result has been that the American public constantly calls for tougher approaches to the give-and-take of crim

The probation officer is in a very similar position to that of the social work caseworker in many respects. The probation officer must work with separately student nurse as an individual. In theory this extends far beyond the paper-work and basic contacts. At a minimum, in most systems, the probationer or potential probationer is the responsibility of the caseworker from the radical of the process. As Petersilia (1997) notes, judges' knowledge of defendants is "usually limited to what is contained in the presentence piece" and probation officers' recommendations correlate strongly with judges' decisions regarding imprisonment. Their reports also have a considerable impact on parole decisions.

The probation officers then supervise those assign to probation, making decisions about the extent of supervision needed, degree of adhesion to the terms of probation, and which violations to report to the court. Most treatment programs for substance smear are court-designated. But the compliance of probationers and the special needs of individuals are usually the province of the probation officer. Other options undertaken by probation departments are very much at the discretion of the probation officer. Departmental guidelines, of course, are set up for the extent to which officers follow up on probationers' other(a) needs--including education, job-training, and other types of therapy. There is, of course, no call to consider probation officers to be nevertheless social workers rather than corrections officers. Research has shown that neither essential works well, and officers who were well balanced in their orientation had depress recidivism rates among their probationers--"20 percent on average for leash measures of recidivism"--than officers "who were 'law enforcement' or 'social work' in their approach" (Gendreau et al., 1993).

As probation officer Joe shelter of Escambia County points out, the overwhelming number of misdemeanor probationers get very teeny-weeny assistance in "breaking th
Order your essay at Orderessay and get a 100% original and high-quality custom paper within the required time frame.