• Law -> Criminal Law and Justice

• 0 Comment

How do cultural attitudes and biases about race, class, and gender affect probation and parole decision-making and outcomes, and what can be done to address these disparities?

Milagros Pickup

Cultural attitudes and biases regarding race, class, and gender can heavily influence the decision-making and outcomes of probation and parole processes. Such attitudes and biases are often ingrained and can unconsciously affect the perception of risk and the severity of punishment towards certain individuals, leading to disparities in how they are treated.

For example, research has repeatedly shown that individuals from Black, Asian, and minority ethnic (BAME) backgrounds are disproportionately represented in the criminal justice system. They are more likely to face harsher sentences, experience a higher rate of reoffending, and be refused parole than their White counterparts. The reasons behind this trend could be traced back to the expectation that BAME individuals are more likely to be violent and a danger to society. These ingrained attitudes are exacerbating the impact of pre-existing socioeconomic inequalities.

Similarly, women are often underserved by the criminal justice system and are less likely to be granted parole. This is often due to stereotypes and biases held by judicial officials that women are not as threatening as men and are less likely to reoffend. However, some research suggests that women offend differently than men and are often motivated by different factors such as poverty, trauma, and addiction.

The influence of cultural attitudes and biases on probation and parole outcomes is a complex issue, and addressing disparities would require a multifaceted approach. It is essential to raise awareness and provide anti-bias training for probation and parole decision-makers. This training should include an analysis of how cultural attitudes and biases affect perceptions of risk and probability of future offending.

Moreover, there needs to be increased transparency and accountability of the decision-making process. This can be achieved by collecting demographic data and measuring the impact of current decision-making. Of equal importance is the need to streamline the assessment tools used to evaluate an individual's risk. These tools should be assessed regularly for possible biases and adapted to encapsulate a diverse range of experiences.

Finally, it is important to acknowledge the influence of poverty and socioeconomic inequalities in offenders' lives. This may mean providing additional support for probationers and parolees concerning education, employment, counseling, and housing, thus reducing their chances of reoffending.

In conclusion, cultural attitudes and biases can heavily influence the decision-making and outcomes of probation and parole processes. Addressing these disparities would require training and awareness-raising for decision-makers, increased transparency in the decision-making process, a streamlining of assessment tools, and confronting social inequalities. Ultimately, implementing these measures would lead to a more just and fair system.