Probation and parole have some similarities and some differences. Probation is a sentence
handed down to offenders in lieu of jail time. While on probation an offender can find
themselves still invested in society but must follow certain rules set by a judge and by a
Probation Officer. Probation originated in the 19th century with the efforts of John Augustus,
who advocated for the release of offenders under supervision rather than incarceration. Parole,
on the other hand, emerged in the 20th century to alleviate prison overcrowding and facilitate
offender rehabilitation (Petersilia, 1997). He shared his efforts, introducing the notion of
probation to the legislature for review. Boston, Massachusetts, officially implemented it in 1878,
marking the inception of the probation system (Petersilia, 1997). The inaugural probation officer
gained recognition from U.S. courts in 1878, appointed by the Mayor of Boston from a former
police officer. In the early 20th century, the U.S. Supreme Court identified an issue with judges
indefinitely suspending sentences. Consequently, the National Probation Act of 1925 was
enacted. This legislation empowered courts to defer incarceration sentences, placing offenders on
supervised probation for a designated period. The U.S. Federal Probation Service was
subsequently established that same year.
Parole, like probation, arose from the ideology of reform and rehabilitation. Alexander
Maconochie, a Scotsman, laid its roots in the mid-19th century. He devised a system for
prisoners to demonstrate good behavior and reform, earning their release – essentially
pioneering the parole system (Simon, 1993). The type of parole assigned revolves
around the condition of the offender. Discretionary parole, supervised mandatory parole,
and expiring sentence parole are commonly used types (Travis, 2000). Under
discretionary parole, parole boards evaluate the offender’s readiness for parole before
2
prison sentence completion. Supervised mandatory parole follows serving of full
sentence minus good-time allowances, being monitored until sentence expiration.
Expiring sentence parole releases inmates to parole after serving their maximum
sentence, devoid of supervision rights (Travis, 2000).
Successful execution of probation and parole mandates responsibility and teamwork,
centered around probation and parole officers. Their vital duties encompass overseeing
offenders, facilitating reintegration, and enforcing parole or probation terms (Klingele,
2013). Absent their presence, the crucial link between community correctional
endeavors and public safety would weaken, emphasizing their indispensable
contribution to its effectiveness (Klingele, 2013). Efficient coordination among probation
and parole officers, law enforcement entities, treatment providers, and community
organizations is essential for the effective implementation of these correctional
strategies. Probation and parole officers are pivotal in overseeing offenders, ensuring
adherence to conditions, offering assistance and resources, and enabling access to
rehabilitation services.
Probation and parole are integral elements of the correctional process, essential for
advancing rehabilitation, ensuring community safety, and facilitating the reintegration of
offenders. They address the root causes for probation, work towards established
objectives, employ various parole strategies, and prioritize collaboration and
accountability, all contributing to a more efficient and compassionate criminal justice
system. These community corrective measures go beyond punitive measures, offering
3
convicts a chance for redemption and rehabilitation. Their historical evolution
underscores their evolving roles in preserving societal equilibrium. However, their
effectiveness hinges on the commitment, collaboration, and accountability upheld by
probation and parole officers in their implementation.
4
References
Klingele, C. (2013). Rethinking the Use of Community Supervision. The Journal of
Criminal Law and Criminology, 103(4), 1015-1070. Retrieved from:
https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/jclc/vol103/iss4/3
Travis, J. (2000, August). But they all come back: Rethinking prisoner reentry. Paper
presented at the meeting of the National Institute of Justice, Washington, DC. Retrieved
from: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/181413.pdf
Simon, J. (1993). Poor Discipline: Parole and The Social Control of The Underclass,
1890-1990. University of Chicago Press. Retrieved from:
https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/P/bo3684086.html
Petersilia, J. (1997). Probation in the United States. Crime and Justice, 22, 149-200.
Retrieved from: https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/449270
5
