Probation Research Paper

Here are some facts: in 2012 the annual cost of placing an offender is prison is eight times the cost to put the same offender on probation (Supervision); 35% of state prison admissions in 2006 were probationer violators by technical violations (Lawrence); over two-third of prison admissions in [California, Orgeon, Texas] are probation or parole violators (Baynes, Chapter 7). What does this illustrate? We, the tax payers, are spending more money to send less violent offenders to prison while taking up space for more violent offenders. The effect of putting probationer violators in prison is increasing prison cost, disrupting the community where the probationer resides and society. Changes need to make in the ways the judicial system impose

Hence they are allowed to remain within the community under supervision of probation officers. Probationers have to follow strict guidelines to retain their freedom such as report to probation officer, find employment, notification of change in residency, no further law violations, server community services and random drug tests. Nevertheless, the probation rules will vary for individuals, from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, and even states. The main point is for probationer is follow the establish guidelines. However, circumstances arise where probationer violates one of the technically rules (i.e. failure on drug test, moving with notification, etc.) which results him or her to be sent to prison. This constitutes an insensible practice similar to the analogy one strike and you are out. The severity and circumstances of the violation need to be taken in consideration and provide leniency if possible. When probationers is remove from society is cost the state money to house them in prison, their son or daughter is without a parent, and a tax payer is remove if he or she had job. Action must be taken by official when they discover violations; however prison may not be the best