Widely-adopted probation conditions that are vaguely defined, burdensome and rigidly applied across the country are unnecessarily landing people in prison despite not having committed any new crime, a new report from the Prison Policy Initiative has found.
Over .9 million people are on probation nationwide — more than the 1.9 million who are incarcerated. And over ten percent of people are admitted to state prisons every year for breaking one or more of the many conditions, or rules, of their probation.
“Our analysis of 76 jurisdictions finds that people on probation must abide by 12 standard conditions every day, on average, plus any special conditions that a judge or an officer imposes,” said report author Emily Widra. “These rules are rigidly applied across the board, and have serious consequences for people who are already marginalized along lines of race, class, and disability.”
The report argues that probation conditions in many cases set people up to fail, and that reducing the number of people on probation is key to ending mass incarceration. Those conditions include financial requirements, rules impacting employment, movement restrictions, association restrictions, and other vague conditions.
In 64 out of 76 jurisdictions , probation rules require people to make regular payments, including monthly fees, drug testing or other treatment fees, or mandated support of legal dependent. Despite more than 60 jurisdictions requiring people on probation to maintain full-time employment or the pursuit of “a course of study or vocational training,” most jurisdictions also impose rules that make it harder for people to get and keep a job. Almost all of the 76 jurisdictions studied restrict where people on probation can go, and 21 jurisdictions restrict people’s movements to within a county or district. At least 31 jurisdictions in the sample have rules restricting social relationships with categories of people. Only one — Arkansas — clarifies that unavoidable associations via work or treatment programs are not prohibited.
The report makes several recommendations for how jurisdictions should change their probation systems to reduce negative impacts, including paring down the number of conditions attached to probation, giving officers more discretion to support people on probation rather than punish them, and reducing the use of probation altogether.
“Probation conditions today are not only burdensome; they are often in conflict with one another, which puts people in impossible situations where violations are unavoidable,” said Widra.
Comments