By Dr. Eliasar Herrera
Discretion is one of the most powerful and misunderstood tools in corrections. On paper, correctional work appears simple: rules exist, incarcerated individuals follow them, and staff enforce them uniformly. But anyone who has worked behind the walls knows that custody environments are far more complex. Safety, order and respect are not achieved through policy alone. They are earned through judgment, respect, fairness and professional presence.
Correctional officers make discretionary decisions constantly: when to intervene, when to redirect behavior, when to counsel, when to report and when to escalate in using force. Used correctly, discretion promotes safety, reinforces legitimacy and models professionalism. Misused, it undermines authority, erodes ethics and can slowly deteriorate institutional culture.
This article blends practitioner experience with established correctional theory to clarify what discretion is and what it is not, while offering practical guidance for officers and supervisors.
What research says about discretion in corrections
Academically, discretion is defined as the authority to choose between lawful options based on professional judgment. [1] It allows correctional staff to maintain safety efficiently, respond proportionally to behavior, preserve working relationships, prioritize resources and apply human judgment to complex situations. Dr. Joycelyn Pollock notes that discretion is essential to fairness because rigid rule enforcement ignores context — and context matters behind the walls. [2]
Researchers have long observed that discretion is built into everyday criminal justice practice. [1] The best officers learn that effective authority is not loud or impulsive; it is calm, consistent and grounded in judgment.
Learning the line in the sand
When I first stepped into corrections, I was 25 years old. I had a bachelor’s degree in criminal justice and four years of U.S. Marine Corps experience, but no background working inside a correctional facility. After a two-week in-house training, I was issued keys, a radio and a housing unit with 160 federal inmates. I was nervous.
Many of the men in that housing unit were twice my age. Some had spent more years in prison than I had been alive. Yet there I was, a young officer, suddenly responsible for their safety, their movement and the order of the housing unit. I was telling grown men to clean their cells, put on their uniforms, follow the schedule and respect the rules. In turn, they responded by telling me, “Youngster, go sit down in your office.”
When I was a new correctional officer, I was given a clear directive during training: “You have no discretion. If there’s a violation, you write it up.” That message seemed clear — rigid consistency equals professionalism. But a seasoned correctional officer pulled me aside and quietly corrected the lesson: “You do have discretion. Think of it as drawing a line in the sand. If an inmate crosses it, you take action. But not every misstep across the line deserves a storm.”
Early in my career, my line was rigid. Fights, homemade intoxicants, tattooing, minor disrespect, schedule refusals — nearly everything resulted in a disciplinary report. I believed firm enforcement equaled fairness and control. It was a humbling and eye-opening introduction to the profession. In those early moments, I quickly learned that correctional work is not just about authority but about communication, respect and learning how to lead people from all walks of life, even when you’re still finding your footing yourself.
Over time, as I gained real-world correctional experience, that line shifted not because I cared less, but because I understood more. True professionalism was not measured by how many reports I wrote but by how effectively I managed behavior, prevented violence and maintained order in the housing unit.
“Early in my career, my line was rigid. As I gained real-world correctional experience, that line shifted not because I cared less, but because I understood more.”
Nearly every professional in criminal justice uses a similar metaphorical line. Police officers decide whether to arrest or warn. Probation officers determine when a violation warrants revocation. Judges decide when rehabilitation deserves priority over punishment. The line is always there. The question is where we draw it, and why.
Violence, weapons, extortion, predatory behavior — those remained zero-tolerance, and a disciplinary report followed. But a first-time failure to stand for count, being in an unauthorized area, gambling or unsanitary conditions sometimes required coaching or informal correction if it posed no threat to safety or order.
I realized something important: discretion was not about ignoring rules, but about applying them intelligently. It meant knowing when enforcement served safety and when it merely created resentment, paperwork and unnecessary disruption. Discretion is not about being lenient. It is about being effective. It means applying rules in a way that strengthens control, supports rehabilitation and upholds the mission.
The ethical edge: Sykes’ warning
Discretion has risks. Sociologist Gresham Sykes, whose landmark 1958 book “The Society of Captives” examined life inside a maximum-security prison, warned that unchecked discretion can drift into a “corruption of authority.” [3] Over time, staff may overlook violations out of fatigue or convenience, rely on inmate helpers to maintain order, or trade informal favors for compliance. Pollock emphasizes that discretion must be rooted in ethics and organizational values. [2] Without structure, reflection and supervision, discretion becomes vulnerability rather than strength.
Practical guidance for correctional professionals
Know your non-negotiables: Violence, weapons, sexual misconduct and predatory behavior are zero-tolerance discretion.
Be fair, firm and consistent: Fairness generates compliance more reliably than force alone.
Your best weapon is your communication skills: Sometimes a calm directive resolves more than paperwork ever will.
Document what matters: Discretion is purposeful and proportional, not avoidance of paperwork.
Guard against burnout and bias: Stress and emotion cloud judgment; self-awareness protects ethics.
Lead by example: If supervisors demonstrate ethical discretion, staff will follow.
Why this matters
Leaders must train and reinforce ethical discretion by ensuring policy clarity, providing scenario-based training, coaching officers, requiring documentation of key decisions and fostering a culture grounded in ethics and professionalism.
Inside correctional facilities, power dynamics, stress and unpredictability are daily realities. Discretion is not a luxury — it is a necessity. Every decision either strengthens or weakens safety, culture, trust, legitimacy and professional identity. Discretion is not the opposite of accountability — it is its partner.
The academy teaches rules. Experience teaches judgment. But reflection teaches wisdom. The question every officer should ask themselves is: Where is your line in the sand? Be smart.
Training discussion points
- How do you define your “line in the sand” in your current role?
- What safeguards does your agency have to ensure discretion remains ethical?
- How can supervisors model discretion that supports both accountability and morale?
Tactical takeaway
At the end of each shift, ask yourself: Did my use of discretion build safety, fairness and respect — or just paperwork?
References
- Payne BK, Oliver WM, Marion NE. (2024). Introduction to criminal justice: A balanced approach (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications.
- Pollock JM. (2020). Ethical dilemmas and decisions in criminal justice (10th ed.). Cengage Learning.
- Sykes GM. (1958). The society of captives: A study of a maximum-security prison. Princeton University Press.
About the author
Dr. Eliasar Herrera serves as a Contract Oversight Specialist with the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP), overseeing compliance, contract performance and community corrections operations. He has over 20 years of experience working in corrections. He is an adjunct criminal justice instructor at Olive-Harvey College and Saint Xavier University. His research interests include prison behavior management, PREA-aligned practices and evidence-based correctional strategies. Dr. Herrera is a U.S. Marine Corps veteran and holds a Doctor of Criminal Justice degree from Pennsylvania Western University. Views expressed are the author’s own and do not represent the BOP or Department of Justice.