Probation pp 179-196 | Cite as

What Are the Costs and Benefits of Probation?

  • Faye S. Taxman
  • Stephanie Maass


Probation is an elastic sanction, and one that occurs in the community. The elasticity of the sanction means that it can be tailored to an individual based on the risk and need factors, as well as the severity of the offense. Probation, unlike incarceration which is defined by total restrictions of liberty, can use the tools of supervision to achieve various degrees of liberty restriction. The flexibility of the sanction is a benefit but the costs related to supervision depend on the degree to which the program features are proportional to the offense, are parsimonious, reinforce citizenship, and affect social justice. This chapter reviews the costs and benefits of community sanctions that affect the justice system, the individual probationer, and the community. In total, probation has a number of attributes, but the consideration of these costs and benefits is important as systems are further developed and probation emerges as a preferred sanction.


Social Justice Justice System Community Service Restorative Justice Probation Officer 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Boyd, S. J., Fang, L. J., Medoff, D. R., Dixon, L. B., & Gorelick, D. A. (2012). Use of a “microecological technique” to study crime incidents around methadone maintenance treatment centers. Addiction, 107(9), 1632–1638. Retrieved from
  2. Crewe, B. (2012). Depth, weight, tightness: Revisiting the pains of imprisonment. Punishment and Society, 13(5), 509–529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Drake, E. K. (2012). “What works” in community supervision: Interim report (Document No. 11-12-1201). Olympia: Washington State Institute for Public Policy. Retrieved from
  4. Durnescu, I. (2011). Pains of probation: Effective practice and human rights. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 55, 530–545.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Haney, C. (2005). Reforming punishment: The psychological limits to the pains of punishment. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
  6. Maruna, S. (2001). Making good. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
  7. McNeill, F. (2012). Four forms of supervision: Towards an interdisciplinary perspective. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 17(1), 18–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. National Research Council. (2014). The growth of incarceration in the United States: Exploring causes and consequences. In Committee on Causes and Consequences of High Rates of Incarceration, J. Travis, B. Western, & S. Redburn (Eds.). Committee on Law and Justice, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  9. Petersilia, J., & Deschenes, E. (1994). Perceptions of punishment: Inmates and staff rank the severity of prison versus intermediate sanctions. Prison Journal, 74(3), 306–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Piat, M. (2000). Becoming the victim: A study on community reactions towards group homes. Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal, 24(2), 108–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Taxman, F. S. (2008). No illusions: Offender and organizational change in Maryland’s Proactive Community Supervision efforts. Criminology & Public Policy, 7(2), 275–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Taxman, F. S. (2012). Probation, intermediate sanctions, and community-based corrections. In J. Petersilia & K. Reitz (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of sentencing and corrections (pp. 363–385). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Taxman, F. S. & Rhine, E. (2015). Markers of probation: Exploring measures of supervision. Los Angeles, CA: 2nd World Congress.Google Scholar
  14. Tonry, M. (2006). Purposes and functions of sentencing. In M. Tonry (Ed.), Crime and justice: A review of research (Vol. 34). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s) 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Faye S. Taxman
    • 1
  • Stephanie Maass
    • 1
  1. 1.Center for Advancing Correctional Excellence (ACE!) George Mason UniversityFairfaxUSA

Personalised recommendations