Posted: August 2nd, 2022

Probation or Parole Officer Victimization

Probation or Parole Officer Victimization
Research an actual case from any jurisdiction in the United States where a probation or parole officer was victimized as a result of their occupation.
Discuss the case, outcome, and the factors related to that victimization.
Include in your discussion how the firearms issue is related to increased victimization of officers.
What are the arguments for and against carrying firearms by officers?
If you were a probation/parole officer, which of the four officer supervision styles for the mentally ill would you utilize: “Law Enforcer”, “Therapeutic Agent”, “Timer Server” and “Synthetic Officer”? Explain.
Make sure to:

Write a short essay or paragraph of at least 500 words. YOU MUST INCLUDE THE WORD COUNT AT THE BOTTOM OF THE ASSIGNMENT.
Use concrete examples/details and avoid generalities.
Address all questions.
Use proper grammar and punctuation.
If you researched your topic and are using information from what you learned, remember to cite your sources in APA format.
Do not plagiarize.
You will not be able to edit your assignment once you post, so please proofread and spell check before hitting post!
As part of the assignment, you must also reply to ONE of your classmates with at least 200 words. You will have to POST FIRST to see your classmates’ postings. Make sure your replies are a thoughtful and relevant to what your classmate has posted. Try to build the discussion and keep it going
Probation or Parole Officer Victimization
The clientele and responsibilities of probation or parole officers in the United States have changed in three decades. According to various researches, the changes in the clientele and responsibilities have contributed to increased rates of probation or parole officer victimization (Lowry, 1999). Victimization of the probation or parole officers occurs in different legal doctrine interpretations. For instance, the liability imposed based on the special relationship between the probation or parole officer and their client could be used to victimize the officer. In Sterling v. Bloom (1986), the court applied the doctrine of the special relationship, which saw the probation officers being rendered liable for the probationer’s action under their supervision. In the case, Mud Sterling was struck and injured severely by a vehicle that Fred Bloom was driving. By the time of the accident, Bloom was on probation, and the condition of the probation was that he was not allowed to operate a motor vehicle following a conviction of driving under the influence.
Sterling went on to victimize the probation officer and brought the suit against him. According to Sterling, the probation officer was liable as he was responsible for supervising Bloom. The officer had failed to execute his duties by being negligent in allowing Bloom to operate a motor vehicle against probations’ conditions. Although the District Court had demised the suit, the Supreme Court of Idaho, following the appeal, held that the probation officer was liable as he was negligent in conducting his responsibility of supervising Bloom, which foreseeably endangered the lives of other motorists. In this case, the probation officer’s victimization is associated with the probationer’s mistakes, which in most cases, the officer may not have been in the position to know they were conducted.
The issue surrounding probation officers’ requirement to carry firearms has contributed to the increased victimization of probation officers. The safety concern, whereby the probation officer has to deal with high-risk offenders on the caseload, has seen most departments and jurisdictions allowing the probation officers to carry firearms. However, carrying a firearm is related to increased victimization of probation officers based on various perspectives. For instance, a probation officer carrying a firearm creates a distrust atmosphere between the officer and the client, which may impact the probability of victimization. The other issue concerning firearm possession by probation or parole officers is a liability. Augments for carrying firearms provide that the officers should be allowed to carry firearms both on-duty and off-duty due to the high safety risks they face. Officers could face any threat at any point in their daily lives, and having a firearm would increase their chances of surviving when attacked. However, carrying firearms off-duty is related to increased officer victimization. For instance, an officer off-duty in the neighbourhood carrying a firearm will not have the freedom of interaction with everyone freely, as already they have concerns about their safety.
Probation and parole officers use various forms of supervision depending on different factors of the client. For instance, the client with mental issues or illness is supervised using one or more four forms of supervision, including “law Enforcer,” “Therapeutic Agent,” “Timer Server,” and “Synthetic Officer.” The Synthetic officer style is the most effective and more contemporary and should be utilized in supervision for the mentally ill. The supervision style involves both legal and therapeutic processes, including the use of surveillance (Skeem et al., 2012). The officers mostly use the questioning technique to support their clients to gain more sense and reduce recidivism.
References
Lowry, K. (1999). United States probation/pretrial officers’ concerns about victimization and officer safety training. UNLV Retrospective Theses & Dissertations. 976. https://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/rtds/976
Skeem, J., Vidal, S., Camp, J., & Peterson, J. (2012). Supervision Practices in Specialty Mental Health Probation: What Happens in Officer–Probationer Meetings? Law and Human Behavior, 36(2), 109-119. DOI: 10.1037/h0093961
Sterling v. Bloom, 723 P.2d 755 (Idaho, 1986).

Check Price Discount

Study Notes, Research Topics & Assignment Examples: PART 1: THE MACHINE STOPS SUMMARY »Advanced Probation and Parole