safety of juvenile probation/parole officers

Running Head: SUMMARY 1

Safety of Juvenile Probation/Parole Officers

Denis Sharpe

Community Corrections

Prof Esteban Jimenez

New Jersey City University

23, November 2021

SUMMARY 2

Introduction: Parole/probation officers, like their contemporaries in law correction

and enforcement, can face a significant amount of employment-specific pressure. Advisors, team

members, and relatives can all be affected by their pressure. Furthermore, anxiety levels may

have risen in the latest decades, owing to raised conflict by offenders on parole/probation. The

"National Institute of Justice (NIJ)" supported research that looked at the impacts of pressure on

society probation officers and recognized encouraging pressure reduction initiatives. Although

the concerns of "juvenile probation officers" are comprehensible, particularly when

implementing field trips, there was no proof, other than opinion pieces, to verify that there is

more risk nowadays than in previous times in parole jobs. All sides' assertions have been

painterly, unconvincing, and devoid of empirical evidence.

Deliberations regarding "the safety of juvenile probation officers" have progressed to agencies

debating whether to arm security personnel, offer additional safety tools, improve training, or

completely remove field trips. Numerous authority officials have also been compelled to

confront their philosophical viewpoint on the primary task of parole "(guidance and treatment vs.

enforcement and punishment)" and, as a result, their initiatives about probation officers' work

tasks. Administrators could build suitable initiatives and safety protocols to guarantee "juvenile

probation officer safety" until more data is acquired concerning the particular amount, types, and

injury’s location of juvenile parole officers, as well as discrepancies between genders (Chavarria,

2016). Several pieces of research that have been done are ambiguous in the sense that they have

recognized the number of "injuries" but not the category or destination of those injuries. They

have also disregarded any connection between victimization, safety, and gender. Previous

research has also utilized flawed analysis methods, like "low response rates, small sample sizes,

Commented [H11]: Quotation marks are unnecessary for organization names.

Commented [H12]: Sentence clarity issue.

Commented [H13]: Cite any information in your first paragraph that isn’t common knowledge.

Commented [H14]: Key terms do not need quotation marks unless you are quoting the article

Commented [H15]: Awkward wording.

Commented [H16]: Noun number.

Commented [H17]: Place in the first sentence if the first sentence is using information from that source.

Commented [H18]: Condense the language.

SUMMARY 3

and poorly designed survey instruments," and the majority of research has only looked at the

safety and victimization of elderly parole officers.

Background: Parole officers have communicated issues regarding their safety and well-being on

the work since the "1980s." Parole officials have been especially worried about their security

while performing field trips in probationers' houses and society. As a result, numerous juvenile

probation agencies have "armed officers with firearms or other self-defense

instruments." Whereas many articles, guidebooks, and training guidelines have been published

on the subject, there has been a handful evidence-oriented research on parole/probation officers'

real victimhood, perceptions about their security, and involvement in having weapons (Matz, &

Kim, 2017).

Serious aggression by juveniles and grown-ups has reduced by roughly "33% since 1993", and

homicide rates by juveniles had also reduced by "39% since 1994". The most popular attitude in

the most juvenile court system, juvenile probation, has also risen noticeably. As a result, juvenile

and adult corrections officers face increased workloads and feel free to convey concerns about

their protection and the changes in the nature and attitudes of teenagers.

Victimization: Even though the concerns of juvenile corrections officers are comprehensible,

particularly when trying to conduct field trips, there seems to be no proof, other than columnists,

to verify that there is much more threat nowadays than prior in juvenile probation job. All edges'

objections have indeed been artistic, unconvincing, and devoid of scientific evidence. A few

scientists have set out to investigate the various police officers who have been victimized while

on work (Rhineberger-Dunn, & Mack, 2020). Greater "1993" conducted a nationwide survey of

all "adult and juvenile" probation municipalities. Regrettably, only "48% of the jurisdictions

Commented [H19]: Replace with a more specific idea

Commented [H110]: Citation placement: place in the first sentence that uses the source.

Commented [H111]: Keep consistent with verb tense, “has” from previous phrase in the sentence.

Commented [H112]: Word choice issue.

Commented [H113]: Rephrasing for this sentence and beware of less precise word choice.

Commented [H114]: Specify that this is part of Rhineberger-Dunn & Mack’s research. Make clear that all of these following articles are part of their literature review.

SUMMARY 4

reacted," ensuing in an insufficient illustration and a significant restriction of his research. The

"Denver Office of Probation Services" surveyed nation parole staff through "Colorado in 1994".

They discovered that "10%" of their specimen had been physiologically violently attacked at

least once while working as a parole official. This specimen is only applicable to the "state of

Colorado" and mature probation cops. According to a "1988" study by Parsonage and Bushey,

over half of all elderly probation cops were victims of certain sort of assault events. Torbet

discovered that probation cops had violently attacked one-third of her specimen of "juvenile

probation" officers at a certain moment in their professions and that "42%" were generally or

always involved for their protection. That would be the only research that included "juvenile

probation officers" as a specimen. Often these research teams acknowledge that, whereas violent

abuse does occur, the majority of victimization experiences against employees come in the form

of dangers, harassment, and verbal harassment.

Probation officer frequently works in hostile conditions that put their psychological and physical

protection in danger. As per the" U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics," regular travel and field

research to high-crime communities, separated rural places, and organizations is a job

requirement. A probationary job is physically demanding (Rhineberger-Dunn, & Mack, 2018).

Officers are regularly called upon to monitor violators who have decided to commit severe

criminal activities or suffer from serious psychological and substantiation abuse issues that make

them more likely to resort to violent acts. Worries about probation officers' security involve

becoming victimized or even accosted. Massive workloads are a continual source of stress for

probation officers. They run the danger of being unable to stay current with documentation and

court-imposed due dates over which they have no power.

Commented [H115]: No quotation marks

Commented [H116]: Remove unnecessary quotation marks about general information like years and places.

Commented [H117]: Exact wording. “probation officers”

Commented [H118]: Use “detainee” to clarify who is attacking and who is involved ‘or detained” for their own protection.

Commented [H119]: Is there a more specific word?

Commented [H120]: Noun number: might be more clear as plural.

Commented [H121]: Substantial

Commented [H122]: Maybe a clarification that these are Rhineberger’s observations: “Rhineberger-Dunn & Mack found with those studies that…”

SUMMARY 5

Philosophy of Professional Role: The probation cop's expert involvement is inextricably

connected to the discourse over having weapons. One could suppose those probation officers

who support carrying weapons see their position as a cop, whereas those who oppose carrying

weapons see their responsibility as a change agent. Nevertheless, "Sluder and Shearer

1991" discovered that while most probationers polled were in favor of having weapons, they still

saw their professional duties as that of a reformer.

Police officials were queried to rate their ideology or involvement as "juvenile probation

officers" on a scale of "1–5", with 1 highlighting a social recovery role and 5 highlighting a

police chief disciplinary responsibility. " Fifty-two percent " of those polled said their job was a

3, "31" percent said it was mainly cop or a true officer’s template, and "19 percent" said it was

mainly volunteer capital or a simple social work template. Once questioned what one's

company's ideology was on the role of "juvenile probation officers," "62 percent" said it was

mostly or entirely a social work model, while 27 percent said it was somewhere in the center

among police and social work ideologies. On the whole, many security personnel assume their

role is somewhere in between a human service and a police model, but they assume their

organization viewpoints the responsibility of "juvenile probation officers" as primarily a social

methodology. These philosophical distinctions are significant because they imply that there

could be distinctions in techniques and differences of opinion regarding policy initiatives and

processes among employees and the organization.

Strategy to resolve problems of worker safety: The stress on agency admin staff to "be doing

something" for employee protection has been increasing. Nevertheless, many initiatives have

been undertaken without the advantage of accurate knowledge about the original problem

SUMMARY 6

occurrence and prevalence. Acting without sufficient information entails threats. Measures

considered could well be misdirected or, scarier, add to the problem despite all positive motives

(Sheidow et al., 2020). It is critical to recognize that no particular model can be suggested for

homogenous implementation all over states to seek ways to improve safety regulations. There

could be some "general purpose" or broadly relevant elements, but organization strategies to

employee victimization avoidance and cleanup must be tailored to the particular legitimate,

institutional, and environmental situations in which organizations function. Whereas efficient

worker protection courses must be "tailor-made" for specialized agencies, those in charge of

agency safety procedures can benefit from the expertise and perspectives of others. This

monograph's goal should be to provide details, points of view, and guidance in that procedure.

Conclusion: Probation cops are targeted both in their office buildings and on the job. Their

considerations, even so, appear to be larger than the real occurrences. Agencies must determine

why this is the situation. Suitable early and annual training may alleviate these concerns.

Officials will continue to be injured on the work until agencies find answers. Organizations

should then determine if "juvenile probation officers" need to possess weapons or if other safety

equipment, such as pepper spray, batons, tasers, and so on, can be beneficial. Appropriate

training for the secure use of Security measures must be an unexpressed component of the

company's operations. If parole officers are wounded and attacked more frequently in the

headquarters than in the field, organizations must reconsider their policies, methods, and

physical location. To decrease workplace violence, precautionary measures and processes must

be established and implemented. The organizations where the research was done did not have

strategies in place for risky circumstances in the office, and they also had risky physical

boundaries that prevented officers from rapidly departing the building. Furthermore, there were

SUMMARY 7

no "metal detectors, clerks, or assistants" to oversee guests in the apartments. Officials are

jeopardized as a result of these processes. The juvenile parole officer performs an important

responsibility in the juvenile justice structure and is being used more regularly as the structure

grows. It's unlucky, but it's evident that juvenile parole officials' safety

and victimization concerns have been largely disregarded.

SUMMARY 8

References

Chavarria, D. E. (2016). Analyzing the Relationship Between Job Demands, Job Resources, and

Personal Resources on Employee Engagement and Exhaustion of Juvenile

Probation/Parole Officers.

Matz, A. K., & Kim, B. (2017). A national survey of chief probation/parole officers' perceived

interest in and impact of partnerships with police. Corrections, 2(4), 269-292.

Rhineberger-Dunn, G., & Mack, K. Y. (2020). Negative Impact of the Job: Secondary Trauma

Among Juvenile Detention and Juvenile Probation Officers. Violence and victims, 35(1),

68-87.

Rhineberger-Dunn, G., & Mack, K. Y. (2018). To Carry or not to Carry: Predictors of Support

for Allowing Probation/Parole Officers to Carry Firearms. Corrections, 3(2), 92-104.

Sheidow, A. J., McCart, M. R., Chapman, J. E., & Drazdowski, T. K. (2020). Capacity of

juvenile probation officers in low-resourced, rural settings to deliver an evidence-based

substance use intervention to adolescents. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 34(1), 76.

Resources:

Sample paper

https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/research_and_citation/apa_style/apa_formatting_and_style_guide/apa_sa

mple_paper.html

https://apastyle.apa.org/style-grammar-guidelines/citations/paraphrasing

SUMMARY 9