Probation remains the most common disposition for juvenile offenders. The current study explores a multi-stakeholder approach to juvenile probation, highlighting the importance of maintaining positive working relationships among different individuals. The study hypothesizes that the juvenile probation officer (JPO)-youth relationship serves as a primary driving force in juvenile probation and operates as a relationship that can facilitate or impede the probation process. There has been a dearth of research that examines the quality of this relationship, the possible mechanisms that influence it, and its implications for probation outcomes. This study examines how relationship quality between juvenile probation officers and their supervisees predicts supervision, decision-making strategies, and case outcomes; and whether this relationship is moderated by two youth-related variables, namely (a) parent-youth relationship and parents' perceptions of juvenile probation and/or (b) mental health and substance use problems among juvenile probationers. Taking an interdisciplinary approach by bridging theories and practice in psychology, law, and public policy, this study is the first of its kind to examine the quality of JPO-probationer relationship (as perceived by juvenile probationers). At baseline, youth probationers and their parents will participate in a structured interview and JPOs will complete a survey. Six months after baseline, JPOs will complete a brief survey regarding youth compliance to probation.
Data from this study can potentially inform the development and improvement of evidence-based probation programs and services related to diverse needs of youth on probation. The PIs will partner with juvenile probation programs and will disseminate their findings to both the academic and professional communities.
Rationale. Probation is one of the most common sanctions in juvenile court with great potential to improve well-being and reduce recidivism of offending youth. Yet, researchers have spent little energy talking with youth, parents, and probation officers to understand systematically how their probation experience relates to probation success. For example, the youth-juvenile probation officer (JPO) relationship itself could inspire positive changes in offending youth and reduce the likelihood of reoffending, but have not been systematically investigated. Likewise, parents could help or undermine the probation experience and outcome, but have not been systematically studied how. This study is an important first step in (1) exploring the link between youth perceptions of relationship quality with their JPO, JPO supervision practices, and probation compliance; and (2) examining the role of parent-youth relations and parents’ perceptions of and engagement with probation on probation compliance. Method. We interviewed 102 adjudicated youth supervised on juvenile probation, 78 of their parents, and 49 officers who supervised 79 of the youth.[1] Youth participants reported on the quality of relationships with their JPO and parents, JPO supervision practices, and their own compliance on probation over the past six months or since they started working with the JPO, whichever was shorter. Parents reported on their own relationships with their child’s JPO, how well probation helped promote youth well-being and reduce delinquency, and their engagement with probation. Results. Our findings indicate that youth characterized their relationships with their JPO as trusting, caring/fair, and/or tough. Certain types of youth-JPO relationships are associated with client-oriented supervision practices (e.g., use of problem-solving praises, and reminders) and improved probation compliance. For example, youth-JPO relationships characterized as caring/fair are more likely to involve problem-solving, praises, and reminders to encourage compliance. Tough youth-JPO relationships use the same client-oriented practices, but are also likely to use controlling strategies such as confrontational tactics, threats of detention, increased monitoring and surveillance. Youth who perceived tough relationships with their JPO have more types of technical violations compared to youth who perceived better relationships with their JPO. Our findings also provide evidence of the important roles both probation officers and parents play in youths’ perceptions and behaviors while on probation. Positive parent-youth relationships appear to reduce the negative effect of tough relationships with a JPO on the types of delinquent offenses. Likewise, better youth-JPO relationships appear to be a protective factor against technical offenses when youth have poor relationships with their parents. Results also showed that good parent-JPO relationships may help facilitate positive probation experiences for both parents and youth. For parents, such positive relationships appear to encourage engagement with probation by employing practices that promote probation compliance among their children. When parents find their relationships with their child’s JPO as respectful, fair, and supportive, they are more likely to perceive probation as helpful in promoting the well-being of their child and helping them desist from crime. Further, positive parent-JPO relationships appear to be helpful in facilitating good relationships between youth and their JPO. Such positive experiences may help enhance the positive effects of probation on youth’s well-being and desistance from crime. Implications. The dynamic and reciprocal context of probation allows for development of positive JPO-youth relationship quality, engagement of parents with probation, and collaboration between the JPO and the parent that can help facilitate successful intervention among offending youth. The establishment of the juvenile justice system was inspired by the reevaluation of the role of families and communities in creating the most optimal environment for youth’s well-being and desistance from delinquency. Probation, as a community-based sanction, exemplifies the potential of both community and families to make significant contributions in promoting positive changes among offending youth. Our findings support the common-sense view of building resources and capacities that would help promote better collaboration between JPOs and parents. Such programs and practices may include: (1) incorporating parental engagement in officer trainings, (2) facilitating family conferences at the beginning and throughout the duration of probation, and (3) providing helpful resources for parents. In some jurisdictions, for example, evening reporting or meetings with JPOs have been implemented to accommodate parents’ work schedules. Such an approach may help increase interaction between JPO and parents and promote the notion that probation welcomes parents’ participation in the probation process. Indeed, in a report to the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention by the American Bar Association, Center on Children and the Law, juvenile justice professionals including judges and probation officers acknowledged the importance of proactive institutional commitment to parental engagement. A collaborative partnership between parents and JPOs may help facilitate the full potential of probation to effect positive changes among offending youth. Proactively investing in relationships among probation stakeholders is worth further research to identify the mechanisms by which those relationships affect probation outcomes. [1] Only youth and parent data are reported and included in the analyses.
