The Ethical and Legal Obligations of Probation Officers and Judicial Officers1
| Author | R. C. Wood |
| Published date | 01 December 1971 |
| Date | 01 December 1971 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/000486587100400404 |
| Subject Matter | Original Articles |
218 AUST. &N.Z. JOURNAL OF CRIMINOLOGY (Dec., 1971): 4, 4
The
Ethical and Legal
Obligations
of
Probation
Officers
and
Judicial
Officers
I
R. C. WOOD2
MY
starting
point
for
an
examination
of
the
ethical
and
legal obligations
of
probation
officers
and
[udicial officers
in
dealing
with
confidential
matters
contained
in
pre-sentence
reports
is to define as concisely as I
can
the
purpose for which a
pre-sentence
report
is
prepared
and
the
duty
im-
posed by law
upon
the
person who prepares it.
In
essence, a
probation
officer is
an
officer of
the
court
called in
aid
by
the
court
to assist
it
in
sentencing
an
offender.
The
assistance which
the
court
seeks is a
portrait
of
the
offender
to reveal acomplete
account
of his
birth,
nationality,
family
background,
home
environment, educational,
industrial
and
social history,
recreational
activities, earnings, savings,
health
and
prior
offences.
The
court
needs
this
information
in
most
cases because
it
wants
its
sentence to
be one
which
fits
the
offender
rather
than
the
crime.
In
considering
the
ethical
and
legal obligations of a
probation
officer
in respect of confidential
matters
revealed to
him
in
the
course of
pre-
paring
his
pre-sentence
report, his
ethical
obligations towards
the
offender
must
always be subordinate to
his
legal obligation to
the
court, because
he is
an
officer of
the
court
and
the
adoption of
his
views by
the
court
directly influences
the
administration
of criminal justice. I
can
see no
parallel between
the
relationship of probation officer
and
offender
and
that
of doctor
and
patient,
or solicitor
and
client. Among
other
reasons,
the
latter
are
based on a
contractual
situation
arising from
the
voluntary
seeking
out
by
the
patient
of
the
doctor, or by
the
client
of
the
solicitor.
The
probation
officer is
thrust
upon
the
offender by direction of
the
court
after
the
offender
has
been found guilty of
an
act
of which society dis-
approves. Although he
may
please himself how
much
he
discloses to
the
probation officer,
the
relationship is one between
an
officer of
the
court
and
an
offender
in
the
disposition
and
power of
the
court
and
the
purpose
of
the
relationship
is to assist
the
court
in
adjusting
the
demand
of
society for conformity to acceptable behaviour
under
threat
of
punishment
on
the
one
hand,
and
the
right
of
the
offender to receive for
his
offence
the
minimum
punishment
necessary to satisfy society's
right
to protection
and
vindication. Where a
probation
officer receives
confidential
informa-
tion concerning
an
offender,
and
this
information
is,
in
his
opinion,
material
to
the
assessment
the
court
expects of him, I
think
there
is no doubt
that
1. A submission prepared for the Australian Crime Prevention, Correction and After-Care
Council.
2. LL.B., Stipendiary Magistrate, Hobart, Tasmania.
To continue reading
Request your trial