Technical Violations, Treatment and Punishment Responses, and Recidivism of Women on Probation and Parole

• Author: Merry Morash,Jennifer E. Cobbina,Sandi W. Smith,Deborah A. Kashy
• DOI: 10.1177/0887403417723425
• Published date: 01 June 2019
• Date: 01 June 2019
• Subject Matter: Articles

https://doi.org/10.1177/0887403417723425

Criminal Justice Policy Review

2019, Vol. 30(5) 788 –810

© The Author(s) 2017

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/0887403417723425

journals.sagepub.com/home/cjp

Article

Technical Violations,

Treatment and

Punishment Responses,

and Recidivism of Women

on Probation and Parole

Merry Morash1, Deborah A. Kashy1, Sandi W. Smith1,

and Jennifer E. Cobbina1

Abstract

There is much debate about the effects of punitive or treatment responses to the

many women who are on probation and parole. This article examines whether types

of technical violations (drug or nondrug related) and responses to them (treatment

or punishment oriented) as well as supervision intensity predict recidivism. Study

participants are 385 women on probation or parole for a felony offense, and official

records of violations and recidivism are the data source. Negative binomial regression

analysis revealed that for high-risk women, treatment responses to nondrug

violations are related to reductions in recidivism, whereas punitive responses to

nondrug offenses are related to increased recidivism. For low-risk women, treatment

responses to non-drug-related violations are related to increased recidivism and

punitive responses to violations unrelated to drug use are related to decreased

recidivism. Study findings suggest differential reactions to common supervision

practices depending on a woman’s initial risk to recidivate.

Keywords

women, punishment, supervision intensity, technical violations, treatment

1Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA

Corresponding Author:

Merry Morash, School of Criminal Justice, Michigan State University, 655 Auditorium Road, East Lansing,

MI 48824-1312, USA.

Email: morashm@msu.edu

723425CJPXXX10.1177/0887403417723425Criminal Justice Policy ReviewMorash et al.

research-article2017

Morash et al. 789

Individuals sentenced to probation instead of incarceration and those released from

prison to complete their sentences on parole are expected to conform to numerous

requirements. Requirements vary between offenders and jurisdictions, and include

avoiding drug use and submitting to drug testing and treatment; paying fines, fees,

and restitution; securing approved housing and employment; avoiding contact with

known felons; and attending various treatment, educational, and job preparation pro-

grams. When offenders fail to follow rules and meet requirements, agents issue tech-

nical violations that are distinct from arrests and charges for the commission of new

crimes (Campbell, 2016). In many cases, agents not only issue violations but also

respond to violations by levying sanctions or they add or increase requirements for

treatment. Supervision of substance-involved offenders often combines objectives,

because substance misuse is viewed as a combination of criminal, medical, and

behavioral problems that can be addressed through both sanctions to shape behavior

and administer punishment, as well as through substance abuse and mental health

treatment (Tiger, 2011).

The purpose of the study described in this article is to examine the relationship

between patterns of issuing and responding to technical violations during an 18-month

period and subsequent recidivism. The focus is on women, first, because compared with

men, women are disproportionately in conflict with the law because of their substance

involvement (Belknap, 2014; Guerino, Harrison, & Sabo, 2011; Langan & Pelissier,

2001; Mumola & Karberg, 2006). Thus, responses to technical violations are likely to

include both sanctions and treatment requirements. Second, women make up an increas-

ing proportion of offenders on probation and parole. At the end of 2014, more than 1

million U.S. women were supervised in the community, and they constituted 12% of the

national parole population and 25% of the probation population (Herberman & Bonczar,

2014). Extrapolation of these numbers over multiple years indicates that community

supervision practices affect a large part of the U.S. population, a majority of convicted

offenders, and a sizable number of women. The high number of women who are super-

vised in the community is a major justification for research attention to them.

Research has documented considerable variation in the reasons for issuing technical

violations and in responses to violations. For example, at one point, the California cor-

rectional system specified 247 different types of parole violations (Grattet, Petersilia,

Lin, & Beckman, 2009). The many possible responses to violations include revocations

of community supervision and incarceration in prison, short jail terms, increased moni-

toring and drug testing, verbal warnings, and encouragement or requirements to attend

treatment and educational programs. Given these variations, scholars have pointed out

the need for better understanding of whether recidivism outcomes are affected by com-

plex combinations of the number of specific types of technical violations and the nature

of responses to them (Clear, Harris, & Baird, 1992; Hamilton & Campbell, 2013;

Hawken & Kleiman, 2009; Kleiman, 2011; MacKenzie, Browning, Skroban, & Smith,

1999; Rydberg & Grommon, 2016). The present analysis addresses this key question

about the effects of issuing violations and of alternative ways of responding to them.

The lack of research on offenders in general and on technical violations in particular

is most apparent for women, who are often understudied in correctional research either