Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-dfsvx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T02:52:14.744Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Waste Managers? The New Penology, Crime Fighting, and Parole Agent Identity

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 April 2024

Mona Lynch
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This ethnographic research, conducted in a parole field office in central California, looks at how Feeley and Simon's (1992) “new penology” paradigm plays out at the level of implementation, given competing pressures on agents to be tough on crime as well as successful danger “risk managers.” Findings suggest that agents embrace a traditional law enforcement role for themselves that primarily takes an individualistic approach to the clientele and an intuitive approach to their management, rather than taking on the new penological role of actuarial risk managers defined by upper management. The agents were influenced by the popular discourse on crime in defining their priorities and actively subverted directives management issued to reorder those priorities. As Simon (1993) foreshadowed in his work on parole, the agents in this setting did not appear poised to become mere human “waste managers.”

Type
Articles
Information
Law & Society Review , Volume 32 , Issue 4 , 1998 , pp. 839 - 870
Copyright
Copyright © 1998 by The Law and Society Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

I wish to thank Gray Cavender, Gregory Coben, David Greenberg, Craig Haney, John Hepburn, and the anonymous Law & Society Review reviewers for their thoughtful comments and suggestions on earlier drafts. I am also grateful to the parole agents and parolees who were so generous in allowing me access to their lives. I am especially indebted to Craig Haney for providing me with the training, guidance, and inspiration to carry out this research.

References

Allen, Harry, Eskridge, Chris, Latessa, Edward, & Vito, Gennaro (1985) Probation and Parole in America. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Applegate, Brandon, Cullen, Francis, & Fisher, Bonnie (1997) “Public Support for Correctional Treatment: The Continuing Appeal of the Rehabilitative Ideal,” 77 Prison J. 237–58.Google Scholar
Bender, Penny (1996) “Break the Law? Shame on You! Judges Using Embarrassment and Humiliation as Ways to Keep Felons Out of Courtrooms, Out of Trouble,” Tennessean, 15 Dec, p. 1A.Google Scholar
Bittner, Egon (1990) Aspects of Police Work. Boston: Northeastern Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Blomberg, Thomas C., & Cohen, Stanley, eds., Punishment and Social Control: Essays in Honor of Sheldon L. Messinger. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Boyd, Elizabeth, Berk, Richard, & Hamner, Karl (1996) “‘Motivated by Hate or Prejudice’: Categorization of Hate-Motivated Crimes in Two Police Divisions,” 30 Law & Society Rev. 819–50.Google Scholar
Burton, Alice (1991) “Dividing up the Struggle: The Consequences of ‘Split’ Welfare Work for Union Activism,” in Buroway, M. et al., eds., Ethnography Unbound: Power and Resistance in the Modern Metropolis. Berkeley: Univ. of California Press.Google Scholar
California Department of Corrections (1996a) Region II Training Bulletin. April 1996. Sacramento: California Department of Corrections.Google Scholar
California Department of Corrections (1996b) Region II Training Bulletin. May 1996. Sacramento: California Department of Corrections.Google Scholar
Cavender, Gray (1978) “Parole and Rehabilitation: The False Link,” 5 New England J. on Prison Law 1–20.Google Scholar
Cavender, Gray (1982) Parole: A Critical Analysis. Port Washington, NY: Kennikat Press.Google Scholar
Cavender, Gray, & Knepper, Paul (1992) “Strange Interlude: An Analysis of Juvenile Parole Revocation Decision Making,” 39 Social Problems 387–99.Google Scholar
Chance, Amy (1994) “Governor's Parole Policy under Fire,” Sacramento Bee, 14 Jan., p. A1.Google Scholar
Clear, Todd, & Latessa, Edward (1993) “Probation Officers' Roles in Intensive Supervision: Surveillance versus Treatment,” 10 Justice Q. 441–62.Google Scholar
Cullen, Francis (1995) “Assessing the Penal Harm Movement,” 32 J. of Research in Crime & Delinquency 338–58.Google Scholar
Cullen, Francis, Cullen, John, & Wozniak, John (1988) “Is Rehabilitation Dead? The Myth of the Punitive Public,” 16 J. of Criminal Justice 303–17.Google Scholar
Cullen, Francis, Wright, John, Brown, Shayna, Moon, Melissa, Blankenship, Michael, & Applegate, Brandon (1998) “Public Support for Early Intervention Programs: Implications for a Progressive Policy Agenda,” 44 Crime & Delinquency 187–204.Google Scholar
Dembo, Richard (1972) “Orientation and Activities of the Parole Officer,” 10 Criminology 193–215.Google Scholar
Emerson Robert, Rachel Fretz, & Shaw, Linda (1995) Writing Ethnographic Fieldnotes. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Emmelman, Debra (1996) “Trial by Plea Bargain: Case Settlement as a Product of Recursive Decisionmaking,” 30 Law & Society Rev. 335–60.Google Scholar
Endicott, William (1994) “Political Novice Unz Is Taking a Toll,” Fresno Bee, 28 April, p. A4.Google Scholar
Epstein, Edward (1994) “Brown Tries to Grab Crime Issue,” San Francisco Chronicle, 14 June, p. A3.Google Scholar
Feeley, Malcolm, & Simon, Jonathan (1992) “The New Penology: Notes on the Emerging Strategy of Corrections and Its Implications,” 30 Criminology 449–74.Google Scholar
Friedman, Lawrence (1993) Crime and Punishment in American History. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Fromson, Kenneth (1994) “Beyond an Eye for an Eye: Castration as an Alternative Sentencing Measure,” 11 New York Law School J. of Human Rights 311–37.Google Scholar
Fulton, Betsy, Stichman, Amy, Travis, Lawrence, & Latessa, Edward (1997) “Moderating Probation and Parole Officer Attitudes to Achieve Desired Outcomes,” 77 Prison J. 295–312.Google Scholar
Garland, David (1990) Punishment and Modern Society: A Study in Social Theory. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garland, David (1995) “Penal Modernism and Postmodernism,” in Blomberg & Cohen, eds., 1995.Google Scholar
Grove, William, & Meehl, Paul (1996) “Comparative Efficiency of Informal (Subjective, Impressionistic) and Formal (Mechanical, Algorithmic) Prediction Procedures: The Clinical-Statistical Controversy,” 2 Psychology, Public Policy, & Law 293–323.Google Scholar
Haney, Craig (1995) “The Social Context of Capital Murder: Social Histories and the Logic of Mitigation,” 35 Santa Clara Law Rev. 547–609.Google Scholar
Haney, Craig (1998) “Riding the Punishment Wave: On the Origins of Our Devolving Standards of Decency,” 9 Hastings Women's Law J. 27–78.Google Scholar
Haney, Craig, & Lynch, Mona (1997) “Regulating Prisons of the Future: A Psychological Analysis of Supermax and Solitary Confinement,” 23 New York Univ. Rev. of Law & Social Change 477–570.Google Scholar
Haney, Lynne (1996) “Homeboys, Babies, Men in Suits: The State and the Reproduction of Male Dominance,” 61 American Sociological Rev. 759–78.Google Scholar
Herbert, Steve (1996) “Morality in Law Enforcement: Chasing ‘Bad Guys’ with the Los Angeles Police Department,” 30 Law & Society Rev. 799–818.Google Scholar
Klockars, Carl (1972) “A Theory of Probation Supervision,” 63 J. of Criminal Law, Criminology, & Police Science 550–57.Google Scholar
Law Enforcement News (1997) “NYC's Compstat Continues to Win Admirers,” Law Enforcement News, 31 Oct., p. 5.Google Scholar
Lemert, Edwin (1993) “Visions of Social Control: Probation Considered,” 39 Crime & Delinquency 447–61.Google Scholar
Leo, Richard (1996) “Miranda's Revenge: Police Interrogation as a Confidence Game,” 30 Law & Society Rev. 259–88.Google Scholar
Lowenthal, Gary (1993) “Mandatory Sentencing Laws: Undermining the Effectiveness of Determinate Sentencing Reform,” 81 California Law Rev. 61–123.Google Scholar
Lynch, Mona (1998) “Modernist Rhetoric in Corrections: The Precarious Place of Rehabilitation in Parole Ideals and Practices.” Unpub. MS., San Jose State Univ.Google Scholar
Maupin, James (1993) “Risk Classification Systems and the Provision of Juvenile Aftercare,” 39 Crime & Delinquency 90–105.Google Scholar
McCleary, Richard (1975) “How Structural Variables Constrain the Parole Officer's Use of Discretionary Power,” 23 Social Problems 209–25.Google Scholar
McCleary, Richard (1977) “How Parole Officers Use Records,” 24 Social Problems 576–89.Google Scholar
McCleary, Richard (1978) Dangerous Men: The Sociology of Parole. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
McCorkle, Richard, & Crank, John (1996) “Meet the New Boss: Institutional Change and Loose Coupling in Parole and Probation,” 21 American J. of Criminal Justice 1–25.Google Scholar
McGarrell, Edmund, & Sandys, Maria (1996) “The Misperception of Public Opinion toward Capital Punishment: Examining the Spuriousness Explanation of Death Penalty Support,” 39 American Behavioral Scientist 500–513.Google Scholar
Messinger, Sheldon, Berecochea, John, Berk, Richard, & Rauma, David (1988) “Parolees Returned to Prison and the California Prison Population,” BCS Collaborative Report. Sacramento: California State Department of Justice.Google Scholar
Messinger, Sheldon, Berecochea, John, Rauma, David, & Berk, Richard (1985) “The Foundations of Parole in California,” 19 Law & Society Rev. 69–106.Google Scholar
Montes, Marisela (1996) “Technological Advances in Parole Supervision,” 58 Corrections Today 88–91.Google Scholar
O'Hara, Patrick (1998) “Bratton's Turnaround': Glimpse of the Future or Reinvention of the Past?” Law Enforcement News, 15/30 June, pp. 13–15.Google Scholar
Ohlin, Lloyd, Piven, Herman, & Pappenfort, D. M. (1956) “Major Dilemmas of the Social Worker in Probation and Parole,” 2 National Probation & Parole Association J. 21–25.Google Scholar
Ozimek, Nancy (1997) “Reinstitution of the Chain Gang: A Historical and Constitutional Analysis,” 6 Boston Univ. Public Interest Law J. 753–75.Google Scholar
Rafter, Nicole (1994) “Eugenics, Class, and the Professionalization of Social Control,” in Bridges, G. & Myers, M., eds., Inequality, Crime, and Social Control. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Roberts, Julian, & Edwards, Don (1989) “Contextual Effects in Judgments of Crimes, Criminals, and the Purposes of Sentencing,” 19 J. of Applied Social Psychology 902–17.Google Scholar
Simon, Jonathan (1993) Poor Discipline: Parole and the Social Control of the Underclass, 1890–1990. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Simon, Jonathan, & Feeley, Malcolm (1995) “True Crime: The New Penology and Public Discourse on Crime,” in Blomberg & Cohen, eds. 1995.Google Scholar
Skolnick, Jerome (1966) Justice without Trial: Law Enforcement in Democratic Society. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Skolnick, Jerome, & Fyfe, James (1993) Above the Law: Police and the Excessive Use of Force. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Sutton, John (1995) Book Review: Poor Discipline: Parole and the Social Control of the Underclass, 1890–1990, by Jonathan Simon, 100 American J. of Sociology 1096–98.Google Scholar
von Hirsch, Andrew, & Hanrahan, Kathleen (1978) Abolish Parole? Washington: National Institute of Law Enforcement & Criminal Justice, Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, U.S. Department of Justice.Google Scholar