Risk Principle

Risk Principle and Need Principle:

A Comparison

February 1st, 2014

Abstract

Probation officers have a number of duties and responsibilities of which include, but is not limited to the supervision, as well as, supervision and investigation of both offenders and defendants as directed by the court (Clear, Cole, & Reisig, 2011). The successful execution of their duties does not only entail that they are knowledgeable about their job specific functions in the areas of supervision and investigation, but also calls for them to become acquainted with evidence-based principles for effective interventions, especially target interventions which include utilizing the risk principle and need principle (Mackenzie, 2006). Based on information obtained from various informational sources (i.e., studies, reports, and research), it seems reasonable that probation officers dedicate a large portion of their time and efforts towards those offenders who have been identified as high risk offenders with the greatest likelihood of reoffending versus the low risk offenders. The focus on high risk offenders by probation officers is not only a responsible approach in decreasing crime and recidivism, but is necessary as they work towards ensuring the safety of the public.

One of the most important functions of the criminal justice system according to the community correction model is to prepare offenders to return to community as law abiding citizens after effectively addressing their criminogenic needs (Clear, Cole, & Reisig, 2011). Community corrections are the theories of supervising felons and misdemeanants outside of prisons or jails and are kept at home or in a community-based residential facility. While there are various forms of community corrections practices or forms, probation is one of the most common forms. Court ordered supervised probation normally requires that a probation officer be assigned to supervise and investigate offenders who have received alternative conditional sanctions versus incarceration. However, there are some persons who are under the misunderstanding that if a probationer perpetrates a criminal violation of the law, that the court system will automatically remove them from society via incarceration (Foster, 2006). On the other hand, community corrections has also been viewed as an instrument utilized to provide probationers with a second opportunity to make up for their crimes or wrong doings that they have done in the community (Clear, Cole, & Reisig, 2011). In other cases, it is a method utilized to reduce the cost attached with the overpopulation of inmate populations and other daily cost of operating these correctional facilities.

Thus, probation officers have a huge responsibility as they are tasked with the supervision and investigations related to offenders and defendants as directed by the court (Clear, Cole, & Reisig, 2011). Probation officers regularly find themselves in contradictory roles that involve enforcing the law and assisting offenders, hence the risk and need principles are helpful in differentiating between low risk and high risk offenders (Clear, Cole, & Reisig, 2011). In addition, the mentioned principles are also helpful in assisting probation officers in selecting which methods to use or in determining the amount of time they should devote to each offender.

The risk principle for instance, proposes that probation officers must concentrate their efforts and direct their treatment resources to offenders who have been categorized as higher risk offenders who are likely to reoffend. According to MacKenzie (2006), data obtained from past studies and research, have demonstrated that recidivism rates were either not impacted or minimally impacted as a consequence when supervision and treatment resources were aimed at offenders who were categorized as low risk offenders. Re-directing these resources to those offenders who have been categorized as high risk offenders is aimed at reducing crime and enhancing the safety of the public (Andrews & Bonta, 1998). On the other hand, high risk offenders have shown that they have greater needs. Some of these greater needs involve pro-social skills and thinking in view of the fact that high risk offenders are more likely to re-offend (Andrews & Bonta, 1998). Effectively engaging high risk offenders, calls for the probation officers to maintain caseloads that are not only smaller but most importantly that are manageable. In ensuring