Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Probation Journal
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Durnescu, I.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

An exploration of the purposes and outcomes of probation in European jurisdictions

Ioan Durnescu

University of Bucharest, Romania, ionut_durnescu{at}yahoo.com

The theme of this article was developed at a conference organized by Conférence Permanente Européenne de la Probation (CEP) together with the Ministry of Justice of Estonia which took place in Tallinn, September 2007. The title of the conference was `Unity and Diversity in Probation'. Within this context, this article aims to examine issues and dilemmas in evaluating probation effectiveness in different jurisdictions. According to the published aims of various probation services, probation systems in EU countries could be divided into four main types: probation services based on promoting community measures and sanctions; probation services based on the model of assisting the judiciary; probation services based on the rehabilitation model/public protection; and probation services based on a punishment or enforcement model. These different types require different criteria for evaluating probation effectiveness, but each criterion has some important risks, which need to be carefully assessed. The article's focus therefore is on the methodological dilemmas and not on the ethical aspects of defining probation's purposes and objectives.

Key Words: effectiveness • evaluation • intermediate outcomes • probation

Probation Journal, Vol. 55, No. 3, 273-281 (2008)
DOI: 10.1177/0264550508092814
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?