Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Qualitative Social Work
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ajzenstadt, M.
Right arrow Articles by Borowski, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Setting Things Straight

Probation Officers' Perspectives on the Impacts of the Introduction of Public Defenders on Israel's Juvenile Courts

Mimi Ajzenstadt

The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel

Allan Borowski

La Trobe University, Australia

Between 1999 and 2003 public defenders were gradually introduced into Israel's welfare-oriented Juvenile Courts. This article reports on the findings of a study that sought to assess the perspectives of the social work trained probation officers on the early impacts of the introduction of public defenders. The study involved in-depth interviews with 14 probation officers. The major findings of the study were that the probation officers: (1) supported the introduction of public defenders in principle but not in practice; (2) believed public defenders should be committed to the therapeutic perspective of the court and become an additional link in the treatment chain; (3) felt that their influence in the court had diminished with the arrival of public defenders; and, (4) viewed the public defenders as compromising the benefit to the young defendant of the drama of the court hearing. Many of the study's findings can be explained by Eisenstein and Jacob’s (1991) model of the courtroom workgroup.

Key Words: impacts • Israel's Juvenile Courts • justice model • probation officers • public defenders • welfare model

Qualitative Social Work, Vol. 4, No. 1, 33-50 (2005)
DOI: 10.1177/1473325005050198
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?