Justinas Paliauka’s research while affiliated with Environmental Law Institute and other places

This article aims to explore the roles that Lithuanian probation officers associate with their profession, the differences between their ideal and actual roles, and the conflicts they encounter in their daily work with probation clients. The research was conducted using both quantitative and qualitative methods, including a survey of 129 individuals and interviews with 20 probation officers. Results from the survey showed that Lithuanian probation officers tend to associate their profession with control and balancing roles. Interviews revealed that probation officers associate their ideal roles with control or resocialisation functions but accept these contrasting roles as a professional necessity. The study also found that probation officers face a high workload related to paperwork, which suggests an actual role as a bureaucrat. Nevertheless, this role is not desired by the officers and is rejected. Additionally, the study revealed that probation officers experience internal conflicts related to the different expectations of their clients and the management of the probation service. This article argues that the organisation's attitude and requirements influence the gap between the ideal and actual roles of probation officers and orient their actual roles towards bureaucratic and control functions.

The article discusses the results of the quantitative survey of Lithuanian probation of­ficers. We attempt to answer the question of what roles officers choose in their pro­fessional service. Taking into account the specificity of probation officers’ duties and internationally accepted classifications, we use, in the article, the categories of the pro­fessional roles of policeman (or controlling agent) and social worker (or resocialising agent) to analyse Lithuanian probation officers. Theconducted research demonstrates that the Lithuanian probation officers associate their professional service with the con­trol­oriented and balanced roles. We explain the choice of the control­oriented role as influenced by such factors as strict punitive policies and punitive culture and the devel­opment of the Lithuanian probation system from the institution of police and control towards the institution of resocialisation and social support. The choice of the balanced role could be associated with the contrasting functions of control and resocialisation that the probation officers attempt to combine in their everyday professional activities.

The article discusses the results of the quantitative survey of Lithuanian probation officers. We attempt to answer the question of what roles officers choose in their professional service. Taking into account the specificity of probation officers’ duties and internationally accepted classifications, we use, in the article, the categories of the professional roles of policeman (or controlling agent) and social worker (or resocialising agent) to analyse Lithuanian probation officers. The conducted research demonstrates that the Lithuanian probation officers associate their professional service with the control-oriented and balanced roles. We explain the choice of the control-oriented role as influenced by such factors as strict punitive policies and punitive culture and the development of the Lithuanian probation system from the institution of police and control towards the institution of resocialisation and social support. The choice of the balanced role could be associated with the contrasting functions of control and resocialisation that the probation officers attempt to combine in their everyday professional activities.