Probation Essay

1094 Words3 Pages

The philosophy of probation has changed over the past several years. Originally, probation officers were considered social worker, able to focus on the individual offender, rather than statutory schemes of the legal system. This ideology aligned with the indeterminate sentencing structure that acknowledged individualization of the offender. However, today probation officers have been coined “the guardian of the guidelines” (Bunzel, 1995, para 2). Under this new philosophy, probation is a facilitator of the net-widening scheme that addresses governments’ main concerns of correctional facility overcrowding and high expenditures. The offender and the utilitarian motive fall second to the goals of net widening scheme. This has made the determinate sentencing model a mode to falsifying offenders’ rights to be treated with human dignity; by fulfilling the retributive goal of the justice models philosophy crime over criminal with the use of fix terms of supervision and sanction stacking practices.
Over the past 30 years, the criminal justice systems sentencing and corrections practices have changed immensely. Going from a rehabilitative approach in the early twentieth century, to the current uniform approach of the justice model in the 1970s (Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice, 2001). These changes have had an immense impact on probationary practices and terms. Under the rehabilitative models, probations goal was to focus on individualize treatment that would work to better the offender, help make him/her a productive individual and community member. A focus was placed on the criminal, rather than the crime. However, with the increase in crime rates during the 1960s, the rehabilitative approach to crime quickly ...

... middle of paper ...

...sociated with criminality can hinder the individual’s ability to reintegrate successfully. Therefore, unless imprisonment is necessary for public safety, then it is not an effective form of sentencing.
Determinate sentencing practices do not accommodate the goals of probationary practices and terms. The ultimate purpose to probations was to bring fairness, humanity, and utility to punitive practices. This process has been hinder through probations use of a net-widening scheme that focuses more on the ideas of the offense, rather than the needs of the offender. Moreover, mandatory sentencing stratagies that guide incarceration practices have been shown to have a negative effect on reducing recidivism rates. Determinate sentencing used as crime control method, does not offer a means to producing a resolution to crime. It merely falsifies a crime solution.

Open Document