|
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
|
Attorney Views on the Use of Private Agencies for Probation Supervision and Treatment
Leanne Fiftal Alarid*
and
Christine S. Schloss
* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: Leanne.Alarid{at}utsa.edu.
 |
Abstract |
|---|
The exponential rise in probation caseloads has necessitated that some jurisdictions contract with private probation agencies and community-based private treatment providers. Regulations that monitor private providers are ill defined or absent, leaving standards open to broad interpretation. Attorneys in one jurisdiction that used private providers were surveyed to measure their beliefs about private treatment providers for people sentenced to probation. The research found that attorneys supported private provider representatives being present in court to contact defendants and to provide evidence to strengthen probation violations. Private agency reputation and standardized criteria were important to establish qualifications in offering supervision and treatment services.
First published on April 2, 2008, doi:10.1177/0306624X08316510
International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology 2009;53:278.
A more recent version of this article appeared on June 1, 2009
 CiteULike  Complore  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati  Twitter What's this?
|
|
