Probation Officers’ Experiences Reveal How Power, Race, and Gender Shape the U.S. Criminal Legal System

Probation officers supervise nearly 4 million people across the United States, making them one of the most visible and influential groups in the criminal legal system. Yet despite their reach and responsibility, a new academic study shows that probation officers often feel undervalued, marginalized, and constrained within a system where real power lies elsewhere. The research, led by Sukhmani Singh, an assistant professor at the University of Connecticut School of Social Work, takes a close look at how probation officers themselves experience their roles, particularly through the lenses of race, gender, and occupational hierarchy.

The study, published in the journal Feminist Criminology in 2025, is based on in-depth interviews with 27 probation officers working in a large northeastern U.S. city. This group included both frontline officers and supervisors, with 71% identifying as women and 67% identifying as Black. Using an intersectional framework, the researchers examined how overlapping social identities and institutional roles shape officers’ daily work, their sense of legitimacy, and their understanding of the criminal legal system as a whole.

Probation Officers as a “Minor” Arm of the System

One of the clearest findings from the study is that probation officers widely perceive their role as secondary or “minor” compared to judges, prosecutors, and police officers. Even though probation officers hold significant authority, they often feel their power is minimized within the broader legal hierarchy.

In practice, probation officers can conduct searches of homes, vehicles, and individuals without a warrant, require probationers to disclose deeply personal information about their lives, file violation reports that can lead to incarceration, and maintain regular, ongoing supervision. Despite these responsibilities, officers reported being underpaid, under-recognized, and frequently dismissed as little more than social workers rather than legitimate law enforcement professionals.

This perception is not limited to the public. Officers described feeling subordinate to police officers and believed that both law enforcement agencies and community members accord them less respect and authority. Many felt they lacked meaningful influence over decisions that truly shape outcomes, particularly sentencing and incarceration, which remain firmly in the hands of judges and district attorneys.

Recognizing the Criminal Legal System as Racially Oppressive

Across racial and gender lines, the probation officers interviewed shared a strikingly consistent view: the criminal legal system is a reflection of broader societal racial oppression. Officers pointed to systemic issues such as disproportionate policing of Black and Brown communities, racial disparities in sentencing, and the over-surveillance of marginalized neighborhoods.

For Black probation officers, this awareness was deeply personal. Even while holding an official position within the system, many described feeling vulnerable to racial profiling and discrimination in their own lives. Being a probation officer did not shield them from racialized treatment, particularly during encounters with police. Their professional status often felt secondary to how their race was perceived in public spaces.

Supervisory officers also highlighted how judges, who wield the greatest power in the system and are disproportionately white, are often disconnected from the lived realities of the communities most affected by criminal supervision. This disconnect, officers noted, can lead to punishments that feel excessive or poorly aligned with the actual circumstances of probationers’ lives.

Why Diversification Alone Is Not Enough

The study also delivers a broader structural lesson: diversifying the workforce does not automatically produce justice or equity. Probation officers are now the most demographically diverse group within the criminal legal system, particularly compared to judges and prosecutors. However, this diversity is concentrated in roles that are lower-paid, lower-status, and more client-facing, while positions of real authority remain largely homogeneous.

According to the researchers, this pattern reflects how institutions tend to reproduce themselves. When diversification occurs primarily in service-oriented roles that deal directly with poor communities and communities of color, it does little to disrupt existing power structures. Instead, it can reinforce them by placing the most demanding emotional and relational labor on workers who already face systemic disadvantage.

The study also notes a historical shift. When probation work was dominated by white men, the role carried greater pay, prestige, and authority. As women, particularly women of color, have come to represent a larger share of the workforce, the occupation’s status has declined, highlighting how gender and race intersect with institutional value.

Gender, Care, and Subtle Resistance

Another important finding centers on gendered differences in how probation officers approach their work. Many women officers described engaging in what the researchers call resistant care. This includes advocating for clients, clearly explaining their rights, connecting them to education or employment resources, and emphasizing rehabilitation over punishment whenever possible.

These practices are not framed as efforts to overhaul the system. Officers were realistic about the limits of their power and recognized they could not dismantle structural racism on their own. Instead, resistant care represents a way to humanize probation within an otherwise punitive framework, offering small but meaningful forms of support and dignity to people under supervision.

Some officers noted that probation work today is less punitive than in previous decades, with greater emphasis on relationships and rehabilitation. Others spoke about the importance of acknowledging how closely connected probationers’ struggles are to broader social conditions such as poverty, lack of education, and limited access to resources.

The Emotional and Practical Demands of Probation Work

Beyond questions of power and legitimacy, the study also sheds light on the intense emotional labor involved in probation work. Officers balance enforcement duties with ongoing interpersonal relationships, often managing large caseloads under resource constraints. This balancing act can be exhausting, especially when officers feel their labor is undervalued by both the system and the public.

Probation officers operate at a crossroads of surveillance and support, tasked with enforcing court orders while also encouraging stability and compliance. This dual role creates constant tension, particularly when officers believe that systemic inequalities make true rehabilitation harder to achieve.

Understanding Probation in the Broader Criminal Legal Landscape

Probation is the largest form of community supervision in the United States, far exceeding incarceration in reach. Because of this scale, probation officers play a critical role in shaping how justice is experienced on the ground. Their perspectives offer a rare window into how inequality operates not only on those being supervised, but also on those tasked with enforcing the system.

By listening closely to probation officers, the study reveals how institutional hierarchies, racial dynamics, and gendered labor work together to sustain the criminal legal system as it exists today. The findings suggest that meaningful reform requires more than surface-level diversity. It demands a redistribution of power, changes in institutional values, and deeper engagement with the communities most affected by criminal supervision.

At its core, the research argues that diversification without transformation is not enough. Whether in the criminal legal system or other institutions, representation must be paired with structural change if real equity is the goal.

Research paper:
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/15570851251330916