Parole officers need flexibility

The Journal Sentinel recently reported that the Wisconsin Division of Corrections’ arbitrary and inconsistent policy of automatic parole revocations has cost taxpayers more than $147 million (“3,000 parolees imprisoned,” Dec. 14).

As a social worker, I once had occasion to phone a parole agent about one of her parolees. When she called back, I said, “I’m glad you reached me before I leave town tomorrow.” There was a stunning silence, followed by, “I didn’t give you permission to (travel).” The overworked agent was completely unaware that I was not on her caseload and had not bothered to inquire into the reason for my call. I was briefly shocked that my freedom was in question. I promptly corrected her.

I can only imagine the stress in the lives of probationers and parolees because their freedom can be arbitrarily terminated. I was able to correct this misfire without incident. But what recourse do corrections “clients” have? They get no hearing. Recovering from incarceration with the overbearing fear of revocation can add recidivism where none is needed.

For decades, judges have not been allowed flexible sentencing. Rigid sentencing guidelines led to automatic incarceration. This is slowly changing. Probation and parole officers should have similar flexibility to prevent senseless revocations. Reform can save money, and families and communities will benefit, with no loss of safety.

Charles J. Trimberger, LCSW Milwaukee