Experiencing offender supervision in Europe

Durnescu, Ioan; Kennefick, Louise; Sučić, Ines; Tkalić, Renata Glavak

doi:10.1177/0264550517748360

Cited by 8 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The data collected in this research were gathered through a structured pan-European quantitative survey, the Eurobarometer on Experiencing Supervision (EES) developed within the Experiencing Supervision Eurobarometer subproject under the Cost Action (IS1106) on 'Offender Supervision in Europe' (Flynn & Little, 2016). According to Durnescu, Kennefick, & Sucic (2018), the development of the survey was methodologically based on Bieker (1982) and Cornel (2000) writings. The survey was developed and tested across eight jurisdictions (Croatia, England, Ireland, Lithuania, Norway, Romania, Serbia, and Spain) and the results of this pilot study have been published recently (Durnescu, Kennefick, & Sucic, 2018).…”

Section: Methods Measures and Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…According to Durnescu, Kennefick, & Sucic (2018), the development of the survey was methodologically based on Bieker (1982) and Cornel (2000) writings. The survey was developed and tested across eight jurisdictions (Croatia, England, Ireland, Lithuania, Norway, Romania, Serbia, and Spain) and the results of this pilot study have been published recently (Durnescu, Kennefick, & Sucic, 2018). The instrument measures eight core domains of supervision: Supervision as a human service, Offender"s perception regarding the supervisor, The relationship between the offender and the supervisor, Supervision and the practical help, Supervision and compliance, Breach practice, Supervision and rehabilitation and the offender"s involvement and participation (Durnescu et al, 2018).…”

Section: Methods Measures and Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Through Offenders’ Eyes: A Pilot Study on Experiencing Supervision in Serbian Criminal Justice System

Batričević

Đorić

Petrović

et al. 2020

TEME

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Probation and parole are intended as alternatives to incarceration for eligible offenders. In various European jurisdictions research studies indicated the importance of the offenders’ perspective in supervision; however, the contribution of this factor is still unclear and underexplored. In the present study, we explored the offenders’ experience of the supervision process, based upon the experience of 22 convicts. To understand the offenders’ experience, we used the newly constructed tool, Eurobarometer, which measures eight core domains of offender supervision. The pilot study was conducted in Belgrade and was a part of the European Cooperation in Science and Technology initiative (COST) which was implemented in eight European jurisdictions. Results confirmed that the offenders’ perception of supervision can be significant in various domains of offenders’ life and that Eurobarometer can be significant in capturing that experience.

show abstract

Section: Methods Measures and Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methods Measures and Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Through Offenders’ Eyes: A Pilot Study on Experiencing Supervision in Serbian Criminal Justice System

Batričević

Đorić

Petrović

et al. 2020

TEME

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…58 Recommendation Rec (2017)3 continues to allow indeterminate community sanctions or measures. 59 Durnescu et al (2013); Graebsch and Burkhardt (2014) find that some offenders under community sanctions perceive those sanctions to be excessively punitive. Consequently, they can be anxious about the intrusion into their private life.…”

Section: Human Rights Standards In the Context Of Community Sanctionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Changes in European instruments as a reflection of a shift in legal philosophies relating to community sanctions and measures

Yang

2018

Eur J Crim Policy Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The number of persons under community sanctions and measures in the criminal justice system have grown rapidly in many European countries. In response to this phenomenon, the Council of Europe has issued several recommendations on community sanctions and measures in recent decades. The European Union has also published two framework decisions concerning community sanctions and measures that are legally binding on its member states. This article examines the shifts of the general legal philosophies of European instruments on community sanctions and measures, through a review of the subtle changes in the rhetoric of these. Results show that community sanctions and measures are increasingly promoted because of their inherent value, rather than simply because they provide the means to reduce the use of imprisonment. The European instruments assert interdependence between the two objectives of offender rehabilitation and public protection, consider the indicators related to both as the criteria for effective supervision, and understand community sanctions and measures as being not only efficiency oriented but also based on Europe's human rights framework. However, a particular concernrisk management of dangerous offendersleads to looser interpretations of some principles of human rights. To retain the European image of resisting punitiveness, this problem can be addressed by firmer and stricter interpretation of these principles.

show abstract

“…Despite the long history of non-custodial supervision being used to dispose of individuals convicted of criminal offences (see generally Mair and Burke, 2012), the study of what it is like to experience penal supervision as a social phenomenon is relatively new, and the subject of comparatively few studies (Durnescu et al, 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%