As a journeyman parole officer with several years of experience, respect from peers and supervisors, and an unblemished reputation, I clearly understand the importance of professional and ethical performance. According to 18 U.S. Code § 3603, the probation officer is responsible for aiding the defendant and contributing to the improvements of his condition and conduct (United States Courts, n.d.). Through being aware of the defendant’s standards of living and environment, promoting prosocial bonds to work and family, and practicing correctional evidence-based interventions, the probation officer decreases the risk of recidivism. For it, he acts not only as a law enforcer and social worker but as an advisor and even friend of the defendant. In a considerable number of cases, the officer is a single role model in his supervisees’ lives. That is why adherence to ethical principles plays an immeasurably significant role in his performance as it impacts the defendant’s perceptions and behavioral patterns in the future.
Probation officers’ conduct is regulated by the codes of ethics of the American Probation and Parole Association or other probation institutes. According to them, supervised release and probation should be executed according to the highest professional standards to ensure public trust and social safety (American Probation and Parole Association, n.d.). At the same time, the probation officer should perform objectively and with respect to the defendant’s inalienable rights, worth, and dignity.
As an experienced and qualified parole officer, I strongly believe that offenders are people who deserve one more chance for a better living and may become responsible and productive members of society. It goes without saying that the change of behavioral patterns as the basis of resistance may be regarded as a long-lasting process that requires patience and time, however, it is the duty of probation officers to assist, advice, and guide in a non-judgmental honest, reliable, and trustworthy manner (Dominey & Canton, 2022). Therefore, a probation officer cannot be conducted by prejudice or stereotypes or act expressing his seeming and unreasonable superiority.
That is why I view my co-worker’s treatment of offenders as highly inappropriate and unethical. As his office is directly next to mine, I heard him screaming at offenders. In addition, one time, I personally observed him pat a female probationer on the buttocks, as she was leaving his office, and leave vulgar comments. According to the ethical standards of probation officers, this behavior is unethical as it lowers defendants’ dignity on the basis of their social status (Babicka-Wirkus, 2019). In other words, the co-worker uses his position and authority to humiliate people whose probation strongly depends on his attitude to them.
According to the ethical principles of the profession, although appropriate boundaries between colleagues should exist, sexual harassment and other expressions of misconduct should not be tolerated. That is why I believe that it is my duty to suppress unethical behavior in my office. However, there are several alternatives of action, and I consider reporting through appropriate channels directly to management as the most appropriate one. At the same time, I may talk to my colleague and explain to him the inappropriateness of his behavior in face-to-face conversation. However, there is a significant reason for not following this alternative, as it may lead to more serious consequences instead of providing a solution.
First of all, I think that people act unethically, being aware of the standards and values of their professions on the basis of their inner beliefs and perceptions. In other words, if a person does not have the value of acting ethically, others’ directions and requirements would be senseless to him. That is why I do not believe that my words would make my co-worker change his behavior. As he did not have any moral anguish before, he would not realize the inappropriateness of his actions after our talk as well. At the same time, being aware that someone is dissatisfied knowing what he does can make this person act more cautiously and hide his incorrect actions. It may lead to more serious consequences, especially in the case of sexual harassment. For example, this woman may be molested in other places to keep this tendency in secret.
That is why I would like to inform management directly – in a polite and non-judgmental manner, I would express my concerns about my colleague’s behavior on the basis of what I saw and heard. At the same time, I realize that my evidence cannot serve as the reason for the co-worker’s accusation. Thus, the installation of a hidden camera in the office of my colleague would be reasonable. On the one hand, it may be viewed as unethical, however, there are several arguments in favor of this decision. First of all, this act cannot be regarded as an interference in a person’s private life as it relates to professional duties. In addition, professional supervision is encouraged, especially in the case of potential violations. In addition, records will be kept in a highly accurate and professional way. Finally, data will be protected in accordance with ethical norms and legislation.
All in all, probation officers should act in accordance with their profession’s ethical principles that presuppose respect for defendants’ dignity. In this case, unethical behavior should not be tolerated and left unreported. In this case, informing management and continuous investigation with the use of a hidden camera may be regarded as an appropriate practice that will allow to detect violations if they exist in an anonymous and reliable manner.
The situation may be regarded as highly controversial as it demonstrates the interference of ethics and morals. On the one hand, according to professional standards, the violation of probation conditions should be reported and disclosed as police officers should cooperate in order to improve their performance and contribute to social well-being. On the other hand, there are multiple aspects that should be considered. Thus, in this case, I would be conducted by my personal philosophy of ethics that presupposes trust, belief in people, and adherence to my responsibilities.
First of all, I would not inform my wife and other officers about this man’s probation status as I was asked to be discreet with this case. In addition, I would suggest him a ride home as I am responsible for this person’s safety as well. However, I would explain to him the inappropriateness of his actions related to drinking. I believe that conversation would be enough as the man nevertheless realizes that driving home alone would be dangerous – thus, he deserves another chance. At the same time, I would inform the director of probation about this situation for consideration. In this case, I would keep confidentiality and execute my professional duties at the same time.
References
American Probation and Parole Association. (n.d.). Code of ethics [PDF document]. Web.
Babicka-Wirkus, A. (2019). From authoritarianism to emancipation. About the dangerous areas of relationship between the probation officer and the ward. Resocjalizacja Polska, 17(1), 97-107. Web.
Dominey, J., & Canton, R. (2022). Probation and the ethics of care. Probation Journal, 69(4), 417-433. Web.
United States Courts. (n.d.). Chapter 2: Visits by probation officer (probation and supervised release conditions). United States Courts. Web.