The Impacts of Special Needs Populations on Parole and Probation Officers - Research Paper Example

Running Head:Special Needs Population Special Needs populations and their impacts on Parole and Probation Officers of the of theinstitution] Abstract The purpose of the research paper is to understand the how special needs populations have changed the roles of Parole and Probation officers, and how the Parole and Probation officers must tailor their tasks specifically for special needs populations. Parole and Probation officers are playing a critical role in the rehabilitation of the offender groups. Many programs have been initiated to cater to the diverse need of special needs populations, including those with HIV, mental health issues, those who are extremely young, and a wide variety of other populations. Studies show mixed results about the effectiveness of these programs; however, no one can deny the importance of these programs in the judicial system when the criminal activities have reached new levels. Juvenile rehabilitation programs are of major importance in special needs populations apart from other programs. Special Needs Populations and Their Impacts on Parole and Probation Officers Introduction The ever growing special needs population and the nature of their needs have affected the role of Parole and Probation officers. A shifting focus to the needs of special needs populations is not unique to Parole and Probation officers; special needs populations by their very nature have unique needs, and many government institutions are attempting to shift to cater to these needs more appropriately. The primary role of a Parole and Probation officer is obviously to monitor the rehabilitation of criminal offenders outside of a prison environment with an eye towards re-integration and reducing rates of repeat offenders. The increased complexity of the nature of crimes has caused the judicial system to initiate a diverse number of offender programs to address them. It has also extended the scope of the role and duties of parole and probation officers who are being assigned in charge to supervise the programs. To understand the ways special needs populations have changed the roles of Parole and Probation officers, one must first understand key differences between those two roles. Probation officers are in place to supervise rehabilitation without the offender having been in prison at all for a crime – they are assigned probation as a replacement to prison, with the understanding that if they violate the terms of probation they will be sent to prison. Parole officers, on the other hand, deal with people who have been released from prison on parole after completing part of their sentence – the fact that they have been in prison makes addressing special needs populations, who often have a harder time dealing with correctional institutions, somewhat more subtle and complex. Thesis Statement Special needs populations have impacted the roles, responsibilities and difficulties of parole and probation officers and their supervision tasks. A variety of offender supervision programs have added to the stress level of the parole and probation officers. Discussion Parole and Probation are fundamental to criminal justice - especially juvenile justice in this country. They offer many services that are significant to the effective and efficient functions of every facet of the justice system, starting from law enforcement to convicting to the final release of lawbreakers into the society. Parole and Probation officers are best recognized for their role in the management of offenders within wider society (i.e. out of a correctional facility) while also conducting investigations to support parole and judicial decision making, supplying free labor using these convicts to local communities through community service programs and operating residential and secure custodial facilities. The vast majority of the job of a Parole or Probation officer is simply managing the truly massive offender population living outside of prison. Approximately 4.8 million adults were either in the Parole or Probation system at the end of 2010, or roughly double the prison population of 2.2 million (Glaze & Pella, 2004). Parole and probation officers supervises around 70 percent of adult correctional programs. Parole and Probation officers are especially important in the management of juvenile offenders – because of unwillingness to put juvenile offenders in correctional facilities nearly 70% of them are managed by Parole and Probation officers. In absolute numbers, some 675,000 young offenders are under probation supervision (Puzzanchera, 2003). During 2010, there is a decline of 66,700 in adult offenders under community supervision and at year end it was 4,887,900 offenders. Approximately 4.05 adults were on probation. About 4.4 million adults, during the year, move off or onto probation. At yearend 2010, an estimated 840,700 adults were on parole, and about 1.1 million offenders moved onto or off parole during the year. Both parole entries (down 0.5%) and exits (down 1.8%) declined during 2010 (Glaze & Bonczar, 2010). Offender supervision of special need population has changed dramatically over the years. The correction program ensures maximum general public safety while fulfilling the rehabilitation needs of the convicted offender. A risk assessment tool, along with the officer judgment, determines the level of supervision the division provides offenders (Petersilia, 2005). The role of Probation Officer is specifically to supervise the offenders completely outside of the prison system. They must manage the rehabilitation needs of the offenders along with managing the safety concerns of the community. (Washington, 2003). They must also help offenders meet required administrative deadlines, such as court dates as part of their rehabilitation process – this can be a task that can be especially challenging to rehabilitation officers dealing with special needs individuals. To add complexity to their responsibilities, they are expected to defend the general public from any potential crime of the offender under their supervision while ensuring successful integration of offenders in the community. They must also assist the offender in obtaining housing, paid work, jobs and communal services (Peter, 1997). The primary responsibility of Parole Officers is to oversee the successful re-entry into society of individuals who have been convicted previously and sentenced to prison but released early due to good behavior. They help the released offenders to live a better life by becoming better citizens within society while also developing behavior to avoid repeating their criminal activities. This is not as simple as it may seem. Parole Officers are expected to spend a great deal of time meeting with their charges in a wide variety of locations – again everything with special needs populations tends to be more time consuming, causing serious problems for Parole officers. They meet them at their homes or at work. They use many ways to supervise the behavior of the offender. If they cannot document satisfactory improvement of the offender, the Parole Officer has the authority to send him/her back to jail. They also have to ensure that the offender acquires paid work to assist with pharmaceutical rehabilitation services, housing and health care resources. Added Stress of Probation/ Parole Officers The simplest way that special needs populations have affected the role of Parole and Probation officers is adding a significant degree of stress to their lives. Special needs populations obviously often need more time to manage than others – a meeting with a mentally challenged infidel could take longer than with another offender, while someone living and trying to manage HIV might have a harder time finding and keeping employment, as well as managing their health care, all things Parole and Probation officers are supposed to assist with. Unfortunately, Parole and Probation officers are rarely given enough time to deal with their case loads excluding special needs scenarios – so adding those in puts Parole and Probation officers in an even more difficult position. This not only makes their job more stressful, but reduces the quality of care received by special needs populations, because Parole and Probation officers try to deal with them in the same amount of time as they would any other offender. Special Offender Programs In America, there is diverse range of offender treatment programs for special needs offenders. These programs usually address the special need more specifically, while also catering to offenders with those special needs. These programs are directed to provide a variety of services like addiction services for the drug addicted offender, social skills programs that aim to develop the social transition of the offender to deal with daily life activities in order to enhance their transition into society. There are also programs which specifically address the sex offenders and provide assistance to recognize and improve their behaviors and actions, along with helping them deal with their particular issues with re-integration into society. According to CDC, some of the special needs populations include but are not limited to: a. Elderly populations b. Disabled populations (sensory, physical, mental) c. Non-English speaking populations d. Incarcerated/Prison populations Adult offenders Female offenders Sex offenders Juvenile Offenders e. Populations residing in shelters (e.g., homeless, runaways, battered spouses, etc.) f. Institutionalized mentally ill populations g. Long-term nursing care facility populations h. Substance abuse in-patient facilities A survey was conducted which evaluated forty four meticulously controlled offender correction programs from 1970 to 1991. The analysis showed that there were six factors that led to success of these programs. They included: social & cognitive skills, role-playing and modeling training, multifaceted model, a sound conceptual model, the responsively principle and the targeting of criminogenic needs (Antonowicz & Ross, 1994). One of the primary factors and focus of any rehabilitation program is recidivism. The programs must improve the criminal behavior among the offenders. Cognitive Behavioral Therapy is believed to be the best program to reduce recidivism in offenders. The success of cognitive behavioral therapy, however, is largely dependent on the willingness of the offender to partake in the therapy and try to move away from criminal behavior. Successful Program Among many operational corrective programs, Juvenile training programs are arguably the most important. Juvenile training programs specifically address the issues of the young offender. These programs, after analyzing the factors that have been associated with criminal behavior in youth, work toward rectifying their behavior to ensure society remains safe while the juvenile offender gets back into society and tries to establish a new beginning. These training programs deal with interpersonal skills training, individual counseling, and behavioral programs. The primary objective of any juvenile offender treatment is not to punish but rather divert prospective criminal conduct by offering positive, replacement options to assist the juvenile offenders towards being responsible members of society. Research documents that around 80 to 90 percent of juvenile offenders who get released from jail are prone to commit the crime again until they are sent through community service interventions. Probation Officers ensure that these juvenile offenders re-integrate to society and contribute to their own betterment and to the community in general. Probation Officers monitor to ensure that juveniles do not start repeating crimes once again. Most Controversial and Least Successful Program Sex offender programs are the most controversial correction program as well as the least successful: there is little documentation indicating that these programs work. Even those that claim to have evidence-based are not effective in challenging and changing criminal, self-defeating thoughts and behaviors. A more recent study (Seto MC), appeared to show that psychopaths rated as having active and appropriate treatment for their behavior reoffended sooner and more often than psychopaths with poor treatment programs for their behavior; this suggests that a total re-evaluation of special needs programs towards sex offenders might be necessary. In the wake of these study results, the controversy has aroused whether to continue these programs which are making societies more vulnerable to the hands of sex offenders. Conclusion Special needs populations have completely changed the experiences of Parole and Probation officers. One of the most important ways they have done so is simply adding to the stress and reducing the time allotment for any particular officer – dealing with special needs cases simply takes more time. This requires recognition from all levels of the correctional system to allow Probation and Parole officers to do their jobs properly. The more special needs cases a Parole and Probation officer has, the less time they will have for everything else. Without this recognition, burn out rates will increase, offender care will decrease, and everyone in the community will undoubtedly suffer/ These populations also require that Parole and Probation officers familiarize themselves with a wide array of resources available to any particular special needs group. This means that ongoing training of Parole and Probation officers are key elements of professional development that must be continued across an entire career. It is important to note that the more well established correctional and community programs tend to be the ones that deliver the best results – juvenile intervention in particular has proved effective, while less established programs such as those for sex offenders have shown little effectiveness on recidivism in those special populations. This could indicate that more effort needs to be put into the development of programs for the smaller and less noticed special needs populations. References Bonezar, T. P. & Glaze, L. E. (2011) Probation and Parole in the United States, 2010 Bureau of Justice Statistics. Bureau of Justice Statistics. (2003) Probation and parole in the United States, 2002 Washington, DC: Author. Sage publications Daniel H. & Robert R. Ross (1994) “Essential Components of Successful Rehabilitation Programs for Offenders” Department of Psychology, Carleton University Developing a Law Enforcement Stress Program for Officers and Their Families, by Peter Finn and Julie Esselman Tomz, Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, 1997 Glaze, L. E. & Pella S. (2004). Probation and Parole in the United States, 2003, Glaze, L. E. (2003) Probation and parole in the United States, 2002. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics. Hughes, T. A., Wilson, D. J., & Beck, A. J. (2001) Trends in state parole, 1990–2000. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics. Offenders programs in general, retrieved from http://www.offender-programs.com/offender-programs-in-gerneral/ and accessed on Nov 27th, 2011. Petersilia, J. (2002) Reforming probation and parole in the 21st century. Lanham, MD: American Correctional Association Petersilia, J. (2003) When Prisoners Come Home: Parole and Prisoners Reentry, New York: Oxford University Press, p.65 Puzzanchera, C., et al.(2003). Juvenile Court Statistics 1999, Pittsburgh, PA: NationalCenter for Juvenile Justice. p. 38 Read More