Exploring the Impact of Rehabilitation and Custody Orientations on Workplace Experiences of Juvenile Probation and Detention Officers

• Published date: 01 April 2024
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/08874034241240990
• Author: Gayle Rhineberger,Kristin Y. Mack
• Date: 01 April 2024

https://doi.org/10.1177/08874034241240990

Criminal Justice Policy Review

2024, Vol. 35(2-3) 111 –131

© The Author(s) 2024

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/08874034241240990

journals.sagepub.com/home/cjp

Article

Exploring the Impact

of Rehabilitation and

Custody Orientations on

Workplace Experiences

of Juvenile Probation

and Detention Officers

Gayle Rhineberger1 and Kristin Y. Mack1

Abstract

Prior research has suggested that juvenile justice staff’s support for rehabilitation

is important for the success of their juvenile clients. The purpose of this article

was to assess how rehabilitation and punishment orientations impacted burnout,

secondary trauma, job stress, and job satisfaction among juvenile probation and

detention officers. Results indicated that having more of a rehabilitation orientation

did not demonstrate direct effects on the workplace outcomes included in this study.

However, staff who indicated more of a punishment orientation were less likely to

report emotional exhaustion and personal accomplishment, as well as less job stress,

but were more likely to report feelings of depersonalization.

Keywords

rehabilitation, probation officer, juvenile detention officer, juvenile justice, job stress

Juvenile justice staff play a significant role in the lives of youth under their care, par-

ticularly in terms of their outcomes during and after detention and/or probation super-

vision (Andrews & Bonta, 2010; Andrews & Kiessling, 1980; Marsh & Evans, 2006;

1University of Northern Iowa, Cedar Falls, USA

Corresponding Author:

Gayle Rhineberger, Department of Sociology, Anthropology & Criminology, University of Northern

Iowa, 1227 West 27th Street, Cedar Falls, IA 50614-0513, USA.

Email: gayle.rhineberger@uni.edu

1240990CJPXXX10.1177/08874034241240990Criminal Justice Policy ReviewRhineberger and Mack

research-article2024

112 Criminal Justice Policy Review 35(2-3)

Schwartz et al., 2017; Vidal & Woolard, 2017). As Vidal and Woolard (2017) noted, it

appears that

a positive youth–officer relationship that facilitates trust, fairness, and participatory

decision-making is beneficial in promoting a balanced approach (both in the interest of

community protection and youth rehabilitation) in correctional supervision and may help

promote compliance with the law and desistance from antisocial behaviors (p. 145).

Similarly, staff working at juvenile detention facilities play a significant role in the

outcomes of juveniles in detention (J. A. Gordon, 1999a, 1999b; Marsh & Evans,

2006; Roush, 1996). As with those on probation, youth in detention experience better

outcomes when they have a positive relationship with staff who provide empathy,

trust, and acceptance (Clark, 2001; M. J. Lambert, 1992; Marsh & Evans, 2006).

Establishing positive relationships is no easy task, particularly within the context of

balancing the need to support juveniles in facilitating positive behavioral and attitudi-

nal changes (rehabilitation) while at the same time holding them accountable for their

actions (punishment). The juvenile justice system was predicated on the belief that

juveniles who commit criminal offenses, because of their age and circumstances,

should be given a chance to rehabilitate instead of receiving harsh punishments for the

purpose of retribution and deterrence more typically associated with the adult system.

Laws, policies, and procedures were implemented that reflected this organizational

focus on rehabilitation. Since the peak of juvenile crime in the mid-1990s, however,

the juvenile system has shifted to a more explicit dual philosophical purpose of pun-

ishment and rehabilitation (Elin-Blomquist & Forst, 1993), with a more direct purpose

of protecting the community from juveniles who have committed criminal offenses

(Hemmens et al., 1997).

While punishment and rehabilitation ideologies represent a system-wide and

agency level approach to juvenile justice, they also reflect individual staff perspec-

tives. Bazemore et al. (1994) found that juvenile detention care workers held far more

punitive attitudes toward juveniles, even though the majority also indicated they origi-

nally took the job out of a “strong rehabilitative motivation” (p. 35). However, organi-

zational and individual perspectives may not always align (Petronio, 1982; Reese

et al., 1988), particularly as “frequent exposure of workers to disruptive youth, who

may be viewed as a threat, may also predispose workers to a punitive and controlling

outlook toward detained juveniles” (Bazemore et al., 1994, p. 24). In addition, prior

research suggests that organizational structure and work-related experiences have

more of an impact on staff attitudes than individual staff attributes (Leiber et al., 2002;

Lopez & Russell, 2008; Van Voorhis et al., 1991). While staff may begin their careers

with a rehabilitation mind-set, the reality of working with juveniles may cause a shift

in their individual perspectives over time.

These individual perspectives, especially adhering more strongly to either a reha-

bilitation or a treatment orientation, may influence staff attitudes and interactions with

individuals under their care (Farkas, 1999; E. G. Lambert & Hogan, 2009; Liou, 1995;

Whitehead, 1989; Whitehead & Lindquist, 1989), specific supervision practices