This article poses and answers the question of the role of supervision in the process of ceasing a criminal career. It draws on the personal experience and opinions of probation service clients conditionally released from prison, obtained through prospective and longitudinal qualitative research conducted in the Czech Republic. The semi-structured interviews identified two groups among the participants. The first one considered supervision to be rather a pointless and formal measure with no influence on their lives and behaviour, while the second one regarded it as a useful tool that could help them successfully reintegrate back into society. The primary reason for these positive assessments was the perception of support and assistance provided by probation officers, who were seen as helping or motivating to overcome various life challenges. Furthermore, some parolees expressed contentment regarding the control element of supervision, perceiving it as a useful reminder of the potential consequences of undesirable behaviour. However, it became also evident that attitudes and perceptions concerning the role of supervision can evolve over time, particularly in the context of significant life events.
ArmstrongRDurnescuI (2016) Parole and beyond: international experiences of life after prison. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
2.
BarryM (2007) Listening and learning: the reciprocal relationship between worker and client. Probation Journal54(4): 407–422.
3.
BarryM (2013) Desistance by design. Offenders’ reflections on criminal justice theory, policy and practice. European Journal of Probation5(2): 47–65.
4.
BattyE (2020) Without the right support network I'd probably be either dead or in the prison system’: the role of support in helping offenders on their journey to desistance. The Howard Journal of Crime and Justice59(2): 174–193.
5.
BeckPMcGinnisE (2022) An exploration of the relationship between probation supervision and desistance: a systematic narrative review. Irish Probation Journal19: 97–118.
6.
BeláňováATrejbalováTWetherellK (2024) Veiling religion: the public face of Czech re-entry faith-based organizations. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology68(10–11): 1145–1160.
7.
BlaskoBLFriedmannPDRhodesAG, et al. (2015) The parolee–parole officer relationship as a mediator of criminal justice outcomes. Criminal Justice and Behavior42(7): 722–740.
8.
BottomsAShaplandJ (2019) Introducing ʿdesistanceʾ into criminal justice supervision policies and practices. In: FarrallS (eds) The architecture of desistance. London: Routledge, 249–277.
9.
BraunVClarkeV (2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology3(2): 77–101.
10.
BucknerZMartinSNorrisK, et al. (2025) Does procedural justice matter in probation? Investigating the relationship between procedural just treatment and law-abiding behavior among a sample of high-risk offenders. Crime & Delinquency71(1): 175–196.
11.
BurnettRMcNeillF (2005) The place of the officer-offender relationship in assisting offenders to desist from crime. Probation Journal52(3): 221–242.
12.
CantonR (2011) Probation: working with offenders. Abingdon: Routledge.
13.
CarlssonC (2012) Using ʿturning pointsʿ to understand processes of change in offending. Notes from a Swedish study in life course and crime. The British Journal of Criminology52(1): 1–16.
14.
ChamberlainAWGriciusMWallaceDM, et al. (2018) Parolee–parole officer rapport: does it impact recidivism?International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology62(11): 3581–3602.
15.
Clark-MillerJStevensKD (2011) Effective supervision strategies: do frequent changes of supervision officers affect probationer outcomes?Federal Probation75(3): 11–18.
16.
De LudeBMitchellDBarberC (2012) The Probationer’s perspective on the probation officer-probationer relationship and satisfaction with probation. Federal Probation76(1): 36–39.
17.
DigardL (2014) Encoding risk: probation work and sex offenders’ narrative identities. Punishment and Society16(4): 428–447.
18.
DoekhieJVan GinnekenEDirkzwagerA, et al. (2018) Managing risk or supporting desistance? A longitudinal study on the nature and perceptions of parole supervision in The Netherlands. Journal of Developmental and Life-Course Criminology4: 491–515.
19.
DomineyJ (2019) Probation supervision as a network of relationships: aiming to be thick, not thin. Probation Journal66(3): 283–302.
20.
DurnescuI (2011) Pains of probation: effective practice and human rights. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology55(4): 530–545.
21.
FairHWalmsleyR (2024) World prison population list, 14th editionLondon: Institute for Crime and Justice Policy Research.
22.
FarrallS (2002) Rethinking what works with offenders. Probation, social context and desistance from crime. Cullompton: Willan Publishing.
23.
FarrallS (2020) The long-term impacts of probation supervision. In: BestDColmanC (eds) Strenghts-based approaches to crime and substance use. From drugs and crime to desistance and recovery. London: Routledge, 49–85.
24.
FarrallSCalverleyA (2006) Understanding desistance from crime. Theoretical directions in resettlement and rehabilitation. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
25.
FarrallSHunterBSharpeG, et al. (2014) Criminal careers in transition: The social context of desistance from crime. Oxford: University Press.
26.
FernandoR (2024) Comparing pathways of desistance. An international perspective. London and New York: Routledge.
27.
GålnanderR (2020) Maintaining desistance. Barriers and expectations in women`s desistance from crime. Stockholm: Stockholm University.
28.
GiordanoPCCernkovichSARudolphJI (2002) Gender, crime, and desistance: toward a theory of cognitive transformation. American Journal of Sociology107(4): 990–1064.
29.
HealyD (2010) The dynamics of desistance. Charting pathways through change. Cullompton: Willan Publishing.
30.
HealyD (2012) Advise, assist and befriend: can probation supervision support desistance?Social Policy and Administration46(4): 377–394.
31.
HofingerV (2019) Mission impossible? The professionalisation of Austrian probation between desistance and “what works”. European Journal of Probation11(1): 1–13.
32.
KingS (2013) Early desistance narratives: a qualitative analysis of probationers` transitions toward desistance. Punishment and Society15(2): 147–165.
33.
KingS (2014) Desistance transitions and the impact of probation. London and New York: Routledge.
34.
KrulichováEBašnáKBeláňováA, et al. (2023) Faktory recidivy a proces ukončování kriminální kariéry v kontextu podmíněného propuštění z výkonu trestu odnětí svobody. Souhrnná výzkumná zpráva. Praha: Sociologický ústav AV ČR.
35.
LaubJHSampsonRJ (2003) Shared beginnings, divergent lives. Delinquent boys to age 70. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
36.
LeibrichJ (1994) What do offenders say about supervision and going straight?Federal Probation58(2): 41–46.
37.
LiemMRichardsonNJ (2014) The role of transformation narratives in desistance among released lifers. Criminal Justice and Behaviour41(6): 692–712.
38.
LussierPMcCuishECorradoRR (2015) The adolescence-adulthood transitiv and desistance from crime: examining the underlying structure of desistance. Journal of Developmental and Life-Course Criminology1: 87–117.
39.
MarunaS (2001) Making good: How ex-convicts reform and rebuild their lifes. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
40.
MarunaSLeBeLTPMitchellN, et al. (2004a) Pygmalion in the reintegration process: desistance from crime through the looking glass. Psychology, Law and Crime10(3): 271–281.
41.
MarunaSLeBellTP (2010) The desistance paradigm in correctional practice: from programmes to lives. In: McNeillFRaynorPTrotterC (eds) Offender supervision. New directions in theory, research and practice. Cullompton: Willan Publishing, 65–87.
42.
MarunaSMannR (2019) Reconciling ‘Desistance’ and ‘What Works’. Manchester: HM Inspectorate of Probation, Academic Insights 2019/1.
43.
MarunaSPorterLCarvalhoI (2004b) The liverpool desistance study and probation practice: opening the dialogue. Probation Journal51(3): 221–232.
44.
McCullochT (2005) Probation, social context and desistance: retracing the relationship. Probation Journal52(1): 8–22.
McNeillF (2000) Defining effective probation: frontline perspectives. The Howard Journal of Criminal Justice39(4): 382–397.
47.
McNeillF (2006) A desistance paradigm for offender management. Criminology & Criminal Justice6(1): 39–62.
48.
McNeillF (2009) What works and what’s just?European Journal of Probation1(1): 21–40.
49.
McNeillF (2016a) Desistance and criminal justice in Scotland. In: CroallHMooneyGMunroR (eds) Crime, justice and society in Scotland. London: Routledge, pp. 200–216.
50.
McNeillF (2016b) The fuel in the tank or the hole in the boat? In: ShaplandJFarrallSBottomsA (eds) Global perspectives on desistance. Abingdon: Routledge, 265–281.
51.
McNeillFFarrallSLightowlerC, et al. (2012) How and why people stop offending: discovering desistance. Glasgow: Institute for Research and Innovation in Social Services.
52.
McNeillFSchinkelM (2016) Prisons and desistance. In: JewkesYCreweBBennettJ (eds) Handbook of prison. London: Routledge, 154–171.
53.
MertlJ (2024) What seems to be the problem? Ex-prisoners’ reentry/resettlement in the Czech Republic. Crime & Delinquency70(8): 1993–2016.
54.
NugentBSchinkelM (2016) The pains of desistance. Criminology and Criminal Justice16(5): 568–584.
55.
OuředníčkováLŠternPDoubravováD (2008) The Czech Republic. In: Van KalmoutAMDurnescuI (eds) Probation in Europe. Nijmegen: Wolf Legal Publishers, 203–230.
56.
PaternosterRBushwayS (2009) Desistance and the feared self: towards an identity theory of criminal desistance. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology99(4): 1103–1156.
57.
PhillipsJ (2017) Towards a rhizomatic understanding of the desistance journey. The Howard Journal Of Crime and Justice56(1): 92–104.
58.
PhillipsJAliADockleyA, et al. (2025) Probation, technical compliance and the ‘drowning’ of hope. The British Journal of Criminology: azaf006.
59.
ProudfootK (2023) Inductive/deductive hybrid thematic analysis in mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research17(3): 308–326.
60.
RaszkováTZhřívalováPHákováL, et al. (2025) Cesta ke svobodě: Příprava odsouzených na propuštění z VTOS. Praha: Institut pro kriminologii a sociální prevenci.
61.
RaynorP (2019) Supervision skills for probation practicioners. Manchester: HM Inspectorate of Probation, Academic Insight 2019/5.
62.
RaynorPRobinsonG (2005) Rehabilitation, crime and justice. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan.
63.
RaynorPUgwudikePVanstoneM (2014) The impact of skills in probation work: a reconviction study. Criminology & Criminal Justice14(2): 235–249.
64.
RaynorPVanstoneM (2002) Understanding community penalties: Probation, policy and social change. Buckingham: Open University Press.
65.
RexS (1999) Desistance from offending: experience of probation. The Howard Journal of Criminal Justice38(4): 366–383.
66.
RobinsonGCrowI (2009) Offender rehabilitation: Theory, research and practice. London: Sage.
67.
RozumJKotulanPTomášekJ (2008) Účinnost dohledu u osob podmíněně propuštěných. Praha: Institut pro kriminologii a sociální prevenci.
68.
RozumJKotulanPTomášekJ (2011) Probační programy pro mladistvé. Praha: Institut pro kriminologii a sociální prevenci.
69.
SampsonRJLaubJH (2003) Life-course desisters? Trajectories of crime among delinquent boys followed to age 70. Criminology41(3): 555–592.
70.
SavolainenJ (2009) Work, family and criminal desistance: adult social bonds in a Nordic welfare state. British Journal of Criminology49(3): 285–304.
71.
ScheinostMHákováLRozumJ, et al. (2014) Sankční politika pohledem praxe. Praha: Institut pro kriminologii a sociální prevenci.
72.
SegevD (2020) Desistance and societies in comparative perspective. London and New York: Routledge.
73.
ShaplandJ (2022) Once convicted? The long-term pathways to desistance. The Howard Journal of Crime and Justice61(3): 271–288.
74.
ShaplandJBottomsA (2011) Reflections on social values, offending and desistance among young adult recidivists. Punishment & Society13(3): 256–282.
75.
ŠternPOuředníčkováLDoubravováD (2010) Probace a mediace - možnosti řešení trestných činů. Praha: Portál.
76.
StoneRMorashMGoodsonM, et al. (2018) Women on parole, identity processes, and primary desistance. Feminist Criminology13(4): 382–403.
77.
TomášekJDiblíkováSScheinostM (2016) Probace jako efektivní nástroj snižování recidivy. Praha: Institut pro kriminologii a sociální prevenci.
78.
TomášekJFaridováPPřesličkováH, et al. (2017) Zaměstnání jako faktor desistence. Praha: Institut pro kriminologii a sociální prevenci.
79.
TomášekJHákováLKrulichováE (2022) Public opinion and awareness regarding probation in the Czech Republic. European Journal of Probation14(2): 87–108.
80.
TomášekJRozumJ (2018) Recidivism as a measure of the effectiveness of sanctions: experience from the Czech Republic. Acta Universitatit Carolinae2: 9–22.
81.
TrotterC (2015) Working with involuntary clients. A guide to practice. New York: Routledge.
82.
UgwudikePRaynorPAnnisonJ (2018) Evidence-based skills in criminal justice. International reserach on supporting rehabilitation and desistance. Bristol: Policy Press.
83.
VanstoneM (2016) What is probatiońs role in successful social integration (resettlement) of people leaving prison? A piece in the jigsaw. In: McNeillFDurnescuIButterR (eds) Probation. 12 essential questions. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 129–151.
84.
WeaverB (2014) Control or change? Developing dialogues between desistance research and public protection practices. Probation Journal61(1): 8–26.
85.
WilliamsGCSchaeferL (2020) Expanding desistance theories through the integration of offender strategies. Journal of Crime and Justice44(3): 16–32.
