NCJ Number
204280
Journal
Social Policy & Administration Volume: 37 Issue: 1 Dated: February 2003 Pages: 49-64
Date Published
February 2003
Length
16 pages
Annotation
This study examined the nature, extent, and managerial response of violence directed against probation officers.
Abstract
Probation officers and social care workers potentially face danger from the people they work with in the commission of their duties. Previous research has indicated that social and health service staff are at a relatively higher risk of violence from clients than workers in other occupational settings. Probation officers are in a uniquely vulnerable position because they are charged with making recommendations that can be influential when decisionmakers are sentencing offenders; and offenders have a right to see the recommendation from the probation officer. In order to investigate the impact of violence perpetrated against probation officers, the author analyzed research funded by the Economic and Social Research Council’s Violence Research Programme, which was undertaken between 1998 and 2001. The original study was a large-scale victimization survey administered to 1,280 main-grade, senior, and community service officers working in southeast England. The survey probed experiences of verbal abuse, threats, and physical and sexual assaults incurred in the course of work between 1997 and 1999. The current analysis revealed that violence in the form of verbal abuse, threats, and assaults, is a common feature of everyday work for probation officers. Of the 72 accounts of assaults on probation officers, 79 percent took place in the officer’s main place of work. The distribution of violence was evenly distributed among the sexes and among senior and main-grade officers. The impact of the violence can be far reaching, spanning from physical injuries to anxiety and depression. Despite the real danger faced by probation officers, the analysis found that the managerial response to violent victimization among probation staff has been largely defensive, piecemeal, and context-bound. Thus, while extensive risk assessments are undertaken in an effort to keep the public safe from violent probationers, similar assessments do not benefit probation staff; rather, violence perpetrated against probation staff is treated as isolated incidents. In conclusion, the author calls for more attention and evaluation of the managerial responses to violence in the workplace, including training and greater organizational support for safety at work. Tables, notes, references