Probation Violation Factors and Impact on Community

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Factors that contribute to the probation violation

Most offenders have repeatedly cycled through the criminal justice system. Their names and faces are all too familiar to the police, probation officers, jail booking staff, judges, public defenders, and prosecutors. These individuals are extremely likely to be rearrested following release from incarceration, both because untreated offenders have a high rate of relapse to crime and because their replacement tends to the level of criminal activity among this population.

Key factors that contribute to the risk of probation violation include; A chronic history of crime, low socioeconomic status and or unemployment, various stressors related to criminal justice supervision, inadequate skills for handling social pressures to commit a crime, and returning to inner-city crime areas that provide exposure to the high-risk situation (e.g., active criminals) associated with their previous criminal activity.

The graduated sanctions component seeks to reduce delinquency by linking behavior and consequences. It does this through the detailed assessment of factors that contribute to delinquent behavior. It also utilizes interventions found in the neighborhood of the offender to monitor and address these factors. Compliance causes sanctions to be reduced and increases of interventions for non-compliance.

When the National Institute of Corrections (NIC) began its first series of technical assistance projects addressing violation practices for probation and parole in the late 1980s, the urgency of the issue arose from several concerns. Many of these concerns remain unaddressed today, while other issues have remerged to make an interest in violation responses more critical than ever.

Placing low-risk children in high-level supervision can result in more arrests and confinement time because they are likely to be charged with technical violations. In spite of this problem, youth with nonviolent and minor offense histories are often placed on high-intensity service plans that are not needed to ensure community safety.

The share of prison admission due to probation/parole revocations rather than new sentences has been rising. In the early 1990s, about 1/3 of all prison admissions were for probation/parole violations with no new convictions, while by the late 1990s, about half were for probation/parole violations with no new convictions. The trends are fairly consistent across racial groups.

When a probationer violates certain conditions of their probation sentence (e.g., misses appointments with their probation officers or treatment provider, fails to pay fees or fines, tests positive for illegal drugs through a urine test), they are considered to have technically violated their probation sentence. One important thing to consider when comparing rates of technical violations is that the more conditions included in a probationer’s sentence, such as treatment, financial conditions, community service, urinalysis, etc., the more chances there are for technical violations. By comparison, a probationer who has no conditions other than reporting to their probation is not at a high risk of having technical violations, all else being equal, since there are fewer conditions to violate-40 percent of all adult probationers have at least one technical violation during their period of supervision.

Racial differences

The race of the offender is associated with recidivism rates. Overall black offenders are more likely to recidivate (32.8%) than are Hispanic offenders’ (24.3%). White offenders are likely to top recidivate (16.0%).

Economic factors are also significant. The concept of economic irrelevance come by Jeremy Rifkin in his book “The End of Work” suggests the conditions of those segments of our population who have no possibility of contributing to society because their members have neither desirable skills nor significant purchasing power. Many of the youth of color in the juvenile justice system reflect this circumstance which results in structural decisions that do not include them in a productive future.

While the number of jail and prison inmates have explored in the last two decades, the number of offenders sentenced to probation has also grown dramatically. Persons of color, especially African-Americans, are disproportionately represented in both groups, but they are less likely than white offenders to receive a community corrections sentence. At the same time, part of the explanation for this may lie in an analysis of offense, convictions, and criminal history.

It may also be because the probation service and consequently the courts are less familiar and less comfortable with the ethnic communities from which these defendants come. As a result, court officials may not recognize positive neighborhood residents and resources in the defendant’s life that could make constructive contributions to his supervision and treatment in the community.

Gender

Statistics indicate that for women, there is a high correlation between drug abuse and incarceration and parole/probation violations, and yet our society provides no comprehensive continuum of care for these women.

Lack of education or employment

Researchers have concluded a lack of educational attainment and work experience has made reintegration into the community after prison and complying with parole or probation requirements difficult for many offenders. Without such skills, offenders have trouble attaining steady, gainful employment, and studies suggest these offenders will return to criminal activity either to earn a living or because they believe they have no other alternative lifestyle choice. Rearrest rates for those without a high-school diploma or job training have been shown to be much higher than for individuals with more experience or success in the job market.

Probation and corrections agencies across the nation are attempting to pursue evidence-based best practices. Corrections workers and supervision officers are urged to understand the importance of assessment, to address criminogenic factors in offenders’ lives, to master motivational interviewing, and to stay up on the rapidly developing literature of criminology and corrections

Finding and maintaining a job is a critical dimension of successful prison reentry. Research has shown that employment is associated with lower rates of reoffending, and higher wages are associated with lower rates of criminal activity. However, former prisoners face tremendous challenges in finding and maintaining legitimate job opportunities, including low levels of education, limited work experience, and limited vocational skills. This is further compounded by the incarceration period, during which they forfeit the opportunity to gain marketable work experience and serve professional connections and social contacts that could lead to legal employment upon release. In addition, the general reluctance of employers to hire former prisoners serves as a barrier to job placement.

Lack of housing

Research had found that released prisoners who do not have stable housing arrangements are more likely to return to prison, suggesting that the obstacles to securing both temporary and permanent housing warrant the attention of policymakers, practitioners, and researchers. The process of obtaining housing is often complicated by a host of factors: the scarcity of affordable and available housing, legal barriers and regulations, prejudices that tenancy for this population, and strict Eligibility requirements for federally subsidized housing.

Most prison systems are crowded with inmates housed in areas that were designed for the program and recreational use. Not only does overcrowding contribute to prison violence, but it also makes an effort to provide prisoners with vocational, medical, mental health, and other treatment services. Significant numbers of the inmate population are either idle or not receiving basic educational and vocational services that would serve to enhance their ability to succeed in securing meaningful employment upon release.

History of substance abuse

The use of alcohol and illicit substances has been widely linked to arrestees generally, as more than 80 percent of state prison inmates have indications of serious drug or alcohol involvement. This is not limited to arrestees who are charged with drug crimes or those who live in urban areas where drug abuse is thought to be more prevalent. Continued substance abuse by released inmates greatly reduces the likelihood that they will be able to obtain and maintain steady employment, have stable family relations, or comply with people’s supervision requirements.

Research indicates that substance abuse is a particularly important factor in violent recidivism, including domestic abuse and that incarcerated women are more likely than incarcerated men to have severe substance abuse histories.

Prisoners who view their communities as safe and good places to live are much less likely to return to prison and more likely to be employed than those who report their communities to be unsafe or characterized with low social capital. In addition, those who feel that drug selling is a problem in their neighborhood are more likely to engage in substance abuse after release than those living in neighborhoods where drug selling is not perceived to be a problem.

Mental illness

Mental illness as a risk factor for recidivism has received considerable attention in recent years. Often, failure to seek treatment or follow a prescribed treatment plan results in the exacerbation of the symptoms of mental illness. Since the capacity available to admit people’ experiencing mental health illness is limited, there is often no alternative but to hold them in jail. Many women commit illegal acts such as prostitution, shoplifting, and dealing drugs in order to support their drug habit. In addition, they are often brought to court on child abuse or neglect charges that are also often a result of drinking or drugging behavior.

Community-based treatment for substance abuse, mental illness, or co-occurring disorders is often not available or accessible for people who are on probation, incarcerated, or recently released from prison. Seventy percent of people on probation or parole referred to community-based substance abuse treatment programs wait an average of one month before starting an outpatient treatment program, during which time they are especially likely to relapse, violate conditions of release and return to prison.

Since many behaviors are intertwined, such as co-occurring disorders of mental health and substance abuse problems, the practitioner needs to determine which factors should be addressed as part of the criminal justice system and which factors may be important for the person to address in the greater scheme of their overall health and well-being but do not necessarily need to be encompassed in the criminal justice system.

Peer influence

The other (and sometimes more influential) support mechanism that many rely upon (non-familiar) generally consists of peers and associates. The risk factor is that the offender associates with others in a like situation and this reinforces the criminal behavior. Over time the offender essentially loses contact with prosocial or non-criminal individuals. In other words, the support network that supports mainstream behaviors (prosocial). This is not just an issue of whether the offender is involved in a gang but rather whether the offender has any close associates that are not connected to criminal behavior. The question here is the degree to which the offender relies upon the peers that are involved in the criminal justice system and whether any of the associates are non-criminally involved.

Antisocial behaviors

Persistent irresponsibility, callous unconcern for others, disregard for rules, obligations, and social norms characterize antisocial personality behavior. Such people also blame others for their behavior. Probationers with antisocial personality behavior are likely to violate probation.

Offenders have the dynamic characteristics of risk-taking and impulsive behavior. The general belief is that criminal behavior is not defined by low self-control. However, low self-control depending upon opportunities provides a context for criminal acts. It is shown by offenders who are easily influenced by environmental and situational factors to commit crimes.

Age

Probation violations decline relatively consistently as age increases. Generally, the younger the offender, the more likely the offender is to recidivate. Among all offenders under age 21, the recidivism rate is 35.5 percent, while offenders over age 50 have a recidivism rate of 9.5 percent.

Lack of family support

Inmates are deprived of regular contact with family and friends in the community, which has negative effects on both the community and inmates. Families often encounter difficulties with respect to housing, finances, and child-rearing, given their inability to help in such circumstances; inmates experience frustration and a loss of self-esteem. This, in turn, increases their volatility within the institution and depresses their motivation to use what opportunities are available for treatment and skills development. This vicious cycle almost certainly contributes to the relatively high rates of probation violation, especially within the first year of release.

Criminal history

Offenders who have been arrested and convicted severally before in a short span usually violate probation more. Offenders who commit larceny and burglary crimes have the highest possibility of violating probation. This trend is especially common in probationers who have drug abuse problems. This is because the drug-abusing probationer needs money to support his habit.

There is conflicting evidence about whether or not repeat offenders “specialize” in one type of crime. That is, they commit the same type of crime over and over. Although some studies observed a tendency for recidivates to commit the same types of offenses as they had when first sentenced, others found offenders to be “opportunistic” in their criminal activity (i.e., taking advantage of circumstances and committing a variety of crimes).

Research on persistent criminal behavior generally indicates crime is not a life-long activity for many offenders. Most offenders were found to have ended their criminal “careers” during early adulthood (about 26 to 30 years old), and those who continued committing the crime were not typically arrested for the last time until at least the age of 40. Studies have suggested the average period of time between first and final arrest was approximately five years, and property offenders have shorter than average periods of criminality and violent offenders’ longer periods. Research further indicates a relatively small group of repeat offenders are responsible for a disproportionately large number of serious crimes.

It is complicated to interpret criminal history data because many crimes in the United States go unreported or unsolved and do not result in an arrest. This is because some first-time offenders repeat crimes that have not been documented. They could also have begun committing crimes when young.

Impacts on community safety and crime

Men and women enter US prisons with limited marketable work experience, low levels of education or vocational skills, and many health-related issues, ranging from mental health needs to substance abuse histories and high rates of communicable diseases. When they leave prison, these challenges remain and affect neighborhoods, families, and society at large. With limited assistance in their reintegration, former prisoners pose public safety risks to communities, and about half will return to prison for new crimes or parole violations within three years of release. This cycle of removal and return of a large number of adults, mostly men, is increasingly concentrated in communities often already deprived of resources and ill-equipped to meet the challenges this population presents.

The impact of incarceration and reentry on children and families is significant and, in many cases, difficult to measure. When a parent is sent to prison, the family structure, financial responsibilities, emotional support system, and living arrangements are all potentially affected. Incarceration, as a result, can drastically disrupt spousal relationships; reunifying with the family and undertaking these roles and responsibilities upon return also pose a unique set of challenges. (Hairston, 1990)

The American urban societies have released prisoners in high concentrations returning. This is compared to the communities’ small numbers. As a result, there is a huge impact on life in the communities, social capital, and family networks, and social capital. The probationers usually have economic and social disadvantages and bring a burden to the community when they return home. The high number of probationers returning may further cause these communities to be destabilized.

Violation of probation has contributed significantly to the increase in jail and prison populations. When a violation is a consequence of committing a new and serious offense, incarceration is often mandatory. However, when the new offense is a nonviolent, low-level misdemeanor or when the violation is a consequence of the offender’s inadequate compliance with the conditions of probation, the decision to return the case to court and to seek an incarcerate sentence is often discretionary on the part of the probation officials.

Probation violations are associated with criminal activity. However, increases in the intrusiveness or conditions, in the agent’s knowledge of misbehavior, or in how the agent responded to misbehavior are not associated with either criminal activity or violations of conditions. There is a near unanimity that the greatest threat to probation and parole today is a lack of clarity about purpose.

The public wants public safety now in their neighborhoods. They don’t care about national crime rates. They want to know what’s going on as they walk out of their door in the community. And so, there is a need to provide public safety by holding accountable the offenders in their neighborhoods.

Although there is excitement and optimism about embracing the community and about creating value for crime victims and other especially interested or vulnerable parts of the community, there is skepticism and even despair about the ability of probation and parole agencies to identify properly and to satisfy adequately such demanding and complex people. Probation and parole should be held accountable for advancing public safety broadly defined are challenged to limit the definition of this public safety purpose to the reduction of recidivism among offenders under supervision. Probation and parole had to address community conditions giving rise to public safety problems, not just reoffending by individuals currently under supervision.

For offenders whose crimes are related to drug use, for example, long term avoidance of recidivism might require tolerance of some substance abuse recidivism during the short term so that responses to early relapses do not prevent attaching an offender to the labor market, to family, and to the community in ways that promise greater socialization in the long term. A system in which offenders are averse to punishment and criminal justice officials seek to maximize compliance (given limited enforcement resources) has two equilibrium or configurations in which the system is stable.

When violation rates are high, the limited punishment resources are stretched too thin to be effective in reducing those rates. As a result, violation rates remain high (or may even increase). When violation rates are low, even limited resources suffice to keep those rates down.

Probation officers often lack the authority to impose swift and certain sanctions. They asserted that there might not be a direct relationship between sanctions and changes in violation rates. This deficit is a result of both their inability to impose meaningful sanctions without going through a judge and to arrange circumstantial conditions, including vouchers for services and holding them to a single condition: avoid rearrest.

Probation officers cannot themselves confine individuals following a violation; people on probation are guaranteed a full adversarial hearing before they can be confined. Human behavior is much more complex and much less rational. Even imperfect rationality may fail to describe the behavior of some individuals accurately. Drug addicts or individuals with severe mental illness, for example, may behave in unpredictable and irrational ways. This observation led several to argue that sobriety rather than credible sanctions may be the most significant factor in keeping crime rates down. Massive addiction problems lead to a criminal justice problem.

Departments are feeling the pressure to create a policy to be less likely to report the technical violation in fear of budget reduction of an already under budget and under-funded department. This has great meaning for victims. Those violators will not have an incentive to comply with the court sanctions and the laws of the state. The punishment continues to be the last choice, and accountability is set aside for rehabilitation at the cost of the taxpayer and victims. One of the bigger issues is the relaxed policy of drug dealers and violent criminals being placed on probation and lack of will to punish for violations swiftly.

Community safety and health are not promoted, and taxpayer dollars are not saved when nonviolent persons convicted of drug possession or drug use are not provided appropriate community-based treatment instead of incarceration.

Click Here To Order Now!