Behind Invisible Bars: Lived Experiences of Probationers

This study explored the lived experiences of probationers participating in community-based rehabilitation programs in the Province of Iloilo, Philippines. As an alternative to incarceration, community-based rehabilitation seeks to promote offender reintegration by addressing the psychological, social, and behavioral dimensions of rehabilitation while maintaining public safety. Guided by a transcendental phenomenological approach, the study employed semi-structured, in-depth interviews with ten (10) probationers who were purposively selected based on their direct experience with the probation system. Data were analyzed using Colaizzi's phenomenological method, which involved verbatim transcription, extraction of significant statements, formulation of meanings, clustering of themes, and synthesis of the participants' lived experiences. The findings revealed that probation was experienced as a transformative yet challenging journey. Participants described positive personal changes characterized by improved self-discipline, strengthened family relationships, and renewed hope for the future. However, their rehabilitation was continuously challenged by social stigma, discrimination, restrictions associated with probation supervision, and economic difficulties. To navigate these challenges, probationers actively engaged in rehabilitation activities while drawing emotional strength from their families, communities, and personal resilience. Their aspirations centered on achieving sustainable livelihoods, maintaining personal growth, and successfully reintegrating into society as productive and responsible citizens. Overall, the study highlights that effective community-based rehabilitation extends beyond legal supervision and requires holistic interventions that strengthen family support, reduce stigma, expand livelihood opportunities, and encourage community participation. The implementation of Circles of Support and Accountability (COSA) is recommended as a community-based strategy to enhance reintegration by fostering social support, accountability, and long-term desistance from crime.

Probation, Non-Institutional Corrections, Community-Based Treatment

1. Becker, H. S. (1963). Outsiders: Studies in the sociology of deviance. Routledge. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Bowlby, J. (1988). A secure base: Parent-child attachment and healthy human development. Basic Books. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Harvard University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Burnett, R. (2004). To reoffend or not to reoffend? The ambivalence of convicted property offenders. In S. Maruna & R. Immarigeon (Eds.), After crime and punishment: Pathways to offender reintegration (pp. 152–180). Willan. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Byrne, J., & Yanich, D. (1982). Incarceration vs. community-based corrections: More than just politics. Review of Policy Research, 2(2), 216–223. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-1338.1982.tb00145.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Casey, E. S. (2000). Imagining (2nd ed.). Indiana University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Castleberry, A., & Nolen, A. (2018). Thematic analysis of qualitative research data: Is it as easy as it sounds? Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning, 10(6), 807–815. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cptl.2018.03.019 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Creswell, J. W. (2021). A concise introduction to mixed methods research. SAGE Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Cullen, F. T., & Gendreau, P. (2000). Reformation and rehabilitation. In M. Tonry (Ed.), Crime and justice: A review of research (Vol. 26, pp. 113–180). University of Chicago Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Cullen, F. T., & Gendreau, P. (2000). Rehabilitation: Beyond nothing works. Crime and Justice, 26, 113–180. https://doi.org/10.1086/652208 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Cullen, F. T., Jonson, C. L., & Mears, D. P. (2017). Reinventing community corrections. Crime and Justice, 46, 27–93. https://doi.org/10.1086/688461 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Davidson, C. (2009). Transcription: Imperatives for qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 8(2), 35–52. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690900800206 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. Plenum Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. De Leon, D. (2023, April 6). Philippine penal institutions are 421% occupied as of June 2023 – BuCor. Rappler. https://www.rappler.com/philippines/statistics-philippines-prison-congestion-june-30-2023/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Dictionary.apa.org. (n.d.). APA dictionary of psychology. American Psychological Association. https://dictionary.apa.org/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Durkheim, E. (1893). The division of labor in society. The Free Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Durkheim, E. (2002). Suicide: A study in sociology (2nd ed.). Routledge. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Glaser, D. (1964). The effectiveness of a probation and parole system. Bobbs-Merrill. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Iloilo.gov.ph. (n.d.). About Iloilo. Iloilo Provincial Government. https://www.iloilo.gov.ph/en/about-iloilo [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Laub, J. H., & Sampson, R. J. (2001). Understanding desistance from crime. Crime and Justice, 28, 1–69. https://doi.org/10.1086/652208 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Lipsey, M. W., Landenberger, N. A., & Wilson, S. J. (2007). Effects of cognitive-behavioral programs for criminal offenders. Campbell Systematic Reviews, 3(6), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.4073/csr.2007.6 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50(4), 370–396. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0054346 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. McGuire, J. (2001). What works in correctional intervention? Evidence and practical implications. In C. R. Hollin (Ed.), The handbook of offender assessment and treatment (pp. 25–43). Wiley. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Melander, G., & Alfredsson, G. (1997). United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for Non-Custodial Measures (The Tokyo Rules). In G. Melander & G. Alfredsson (Eds.), The Raoul Wallenberg Institute compilation of human rights instruments (pp. 475–483). Martinus Nijhoff. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learning. Jossey-Bass. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Mowen, T. J., & Visher, C. A. (2016). Drug use, employment, and family relationships: The collateral consequences of felony conviction. Criminology, 54(2), 295–323. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9125.12106 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Naz, N., Chaudhry, F. N., & Jabeen, A. (2022). Development of qualitative semi-structured interview guide for case study research. Competitive Social Science Research Journal, 3(2), Article 2. https://doi.org/10.53087/cssrj.v3i2.81 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. PhilAtlas. (n.d.). Western Visayas (Region VI) profile. https://www.philatlas.com/visayas/r06.html [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Rai, N., & Thapa, B. (2015). A study on purposive sampling method in research. Kathmandu School of Law Review, 5(1), 8–15. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Rogers, C. R. (1961). On becoming a person: A therapist’s view of psychotherapy. Houghton Mifflin. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Rousseau, J.-J. (1762). The social contract (G. D. H. Cole, Trans.). Clarendon Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Schinkel, M. (2014). Being and becoming an ex-prisoner: Making identity work in the transition from prison to the community. Theoretical Criminology, 18(1), 51–68. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362480613486423 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Schmitt, R. (1959). Husserl’s transcendental-phenomenological reduction. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 20(2), 238–245. https://doi.org/10.2307/2104452 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. Shapiro, C., & Schwartz, M. (2001). Coming home: Building on family connections. Corrections Management Quarterly, 5(3), 52–61. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. Taxman, F. S. (2008). Reentry and supervision: Supporting the transition to law-abiding behavior. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 4(1), 113–120. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-008-9050-6 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. Thorne, S. (2000). Data analysis in qualitative research. Evidence-Based Nursing, 3(3), 68–70. https://doi.org/10.1136/ebn.3.3.68 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. Yangco, C. C. (2019). Community-based treatment for offenders in the Philippines: Old concepts, new approaches, best practices. Resource Material Series, 54, 283–299. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Occupational Culture in Relation to Job Satisfaction and Work Performance among Police
• Inmates' Character Reformation and Recidivism in Nigeria: A Study of Okaka Correctional Facility, Yenagoa, Bayelsa State.
• Life World of Former Female Basic Internal Security Operations Course (BISOC) Trainees
• Efficacy of Fingerprint and Facial Recognition in Enhancing National Security in Kenya
• No More Catcalling: Awareness of College of Criminal Justice Education Students on Republic Act 11313 Also Known as Safe Spaces Act