The inquiry was prompted by curiosity about the reasons for fluctuation of probationer participation in discussion groups and uses symbolic interactionism as the theoretical point of departure. Study information derives from interviews with three groups of probationers comprising 14 subjects and the supervisors of the groups. Taped interview material is analyzed qualitatively rather than quantitatively. Categories for analysis are perception of the opinions of others, ego-identity, present living circumstances, experiences and lessons, perception of autobiography, problem solutions, perspectives on life, assessment of probation and probationer discussion groups, and relationships to probation assistants. Results indicate that supervisors tend to use their own circumstances to measure the probationers' living conditions, which leads to communication failure when the realities of probationers and supervisors differ markedly. Supervisors frequently consider behavior observed in probationer groups as permanent characteristics, ignoring social factors in the world of probationers and the probation situation. On the whole, supervisors take their own positions and those of the probationers for granted. The therapeutic professional orientation causes supervisors to view psychological disturbances as the causes of all probationers' problems, hindering resocialization of probationers. Probationers have little chance of convincing supervisors that this is not necessarily the case and are forced to accept the view of the supervisor. Further research is needed to verify that differences in perspective really are at the root of difficulties in dealing with probationers. If this is the case, then supervisors must attempt to consider both their own perspectives and those of their clients and to emphasize the probationers' possibilities for development rather than their deficiencies. One table and a 14-item bibliography are supplied.