NCJ Number
89467
Journal
British Journal of Social Work Volume: 12 Issue: 3 Dated: (1982) Pages: 291-301
Date Published
1982
Length
11 pages
Annotation
The tension between control and care in probation should remain as a realistic aspect of managing behavior and change for individuals, and this requires that the probation officer, who manages this tension, be given the discretion to make decisions about how to supervise probationers according to their circumstances, needs, problems, and personality.
Abstract
There was a time when probation officers could make discretionary decision about the management of the tension between control and care with relative confidence, but structural pressures and the decline of the correctional/treatment model have made this more difficult. Empirical evidence that rehabilitative efforts have little effect have created doubt about the purpose and possibly arbitrary use of the officer's discretion in managing clients. This has led to arguments that favor the separation of control and care functions, with care functions being offered only when the client voluntarily requests them. This is viewed as the logical implementation of the justice model. The difficulty with such a separation is that the rejection of the possibility of holding the tension between care and control within one service and indeed within one relationship would undermine the probation service as we know it. If the probation service were to become exclusively a policing institution, the middle ground between care and control would be lost within the apparatus of social control, making it vulnerable to becoming a purely repressive apparatus. Managing the tension between care and control is part of the skill of the probation officer in providing a constructive and individualistic approach to each client, and it appears best that this kind of interaction between officer and client continue as the principal hope for an offender's social reconciliation and the community's safety. Eleven references are provided.