Abolishing probation–a political crime?

Abstract

Ironically, on the eve of its centenary, the probation service–despite its unique position within the criminal justice system–is in greater danger of extinction than at any time in its history. This article argues that populist-driven policies offer little in the way of public protection against crime or reduction in the harm caused by it. Instead, it promotes the case for a renewed political commitment to probation by arguing for a constructive, evidence-based approach to community sentences based on the principle of consent, community participation, and self-sentencing–probationers sharing responsibility for devising their own rehabilitation programmes that exploit their strengths rather than their weaknesses.

Thinking Beyond ‘Utility’: Some Comments on Probation Practice and Training

“…Pursuing this in their discussion of 'people skills' in probation practice, Treadwell and Mantle (2007, p.509) refer to research, discussed in Trotter (2000), indicating a connection between the use of interpersonal skill and improved outcomes in terms of reduced reoffending. (A similar link is made by Rex (1999), Dowden and Andrews (2004), McNeill (2006) and Priestley and Vanstone (2006).) Now, interpersonal skills training may be valuable, and valued by trainees.…”

Innovation in probation practice

“…Consensus in the literature is that the maelstrom of top-down initiatives and unrealistic timescales has militated against meaningful innovation at practice level in the recent past (Raynor, 2004). From 2003 onwards probation has struggled to remain ‘a genuinely reflexive and problem-solving organization’ (Priestley and Vanstone, 2006: 414), with probation practice continuing to operate within a context of relentless reorganization and still evolving, but potentially ominous, political consultations and directives (see Ministry of Justice, 2012c, 2012d).…”

Diversity and effectiveness in probation: The One-to-One programme in West Mercia

“…These proportions have remained remarkably constant over time, and we can now be confident that these figures give a robust and accurate picture of how programme completers assess its impact on their lives. Question Four clearly predates the political redefinition of probation as 'punishment in the community' (Priestley and Vanstone, 2006) and the 70 per cent of participants who said they 'enjoyed' the programme 'very much' provide clear endorsement of the lively and respectful way in which it was delivered to them. The second page of the Programme Response Form invites participants to comment generally on any aspect of the programme.…”