Advertisement

The Rise of Risk in Probation Work: Historical Reflections and Future Speculations

  • Hazel KemshallEmail author
Chapter
  • 290 Downloads

Abstract

Risk has become a major element in the practice of probation. Its rise to prominence in relation to the management of persons deemed ‘at serious risk of harm’ is documented in this chapter together with the impact it has had on the traditional ‘advise, assist and befriend’ model of probation. The author played a key role in developing and disseminating risk assessment tools. Research on Sarah’s Law – the disclosure of details about people convicted of sex offences – is described; and the workings of Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangement (MAPPA) are discussed in relation to the ongoing colonisation of probation functions by the police.

Keywords

Police Officer Crime Control Probation Officer Crime Risk Disclosure Rate 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Bell, V. (2005, May). The vigilant(e) parent and the paedophile: The News of the World campaign 2000 and the contemporary governability of the child sexual abuse. Economy and Society, 34(2), 83–102. https://www.gold.ac.uk/media/migrated/media/goldsmiths/prospectus/maingenderculture/pdf/bell2.pdf. Accessed 11 January 2016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Daily Mail. (1997, July 2). Killing and raping while on probation, p. 1.Google Scholar
  3. Daily Mail. (2009, August 1). One murder and one rape committed every week by prisoners released early, p. 1. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1203504/One-murder-rape-week-prisoners-freed-early.html Accessed 11 January 2016.
  4. Express. (1997a, July 2). Stop this scandal of prisoners being freed to commit murder, p. 9.Google Scholar
  5. Express. (1997b, July 2). Officers facing blame as sex crimes soar, p. 2.Google Scholar
  6. Express. (2006, September 18). Scandal of the killers freed early., p. 1. http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1225/Scandal-of-the-killers-freed-early. Accessed 11 January 2016.
  7. Fox, C., & Albertson, K. (2011). Payment by results and social impact bonds in the criminal justice sector: New challenges for the concept of evidence-based policy? Criminology and Criminal Justice, 11(5), 395–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fox, C., & Grimm, R. (2015). The role of social innovation in criminal justice reform and the risk posed by proposed reform in England and Wales. Criminology and Criminal Justice, 15(1), 63–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Full Fact Team. (2010). Sarah’s Law the story behind the statistics. http://beta.fullfact.org/news/sarahs-law-story-behind-statistics/. Accessed 3 December 2015.
  10. Garland, D. (2001). The culture of crime control: Crime and social order in contemporary society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  11. The Guardian. (2000, August 30) Doctor driven out of home by vigilantes. The Guardian. http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2000/aug/30/childprotection.society. Accessed 3 December 2015.
  12. Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Probation. (1995). Dealing with dangerous people: The probation service and public protection. London: HMSO.Google Scholar
  13. Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Probation. (1998). Exercising constant vigilance: The role of the probation service in protecting the public from sex offenders. London: HMSO.Google Scholar
  14. Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Probation and Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary. (2014). An inspection of the integrated offender management approach. http://www.justice.gov.uk/publications/inspectorate-reports/hmi-probation/inspection-reports-thematic. Accessed 11 January 2016.
  15. Home Office. (1997). The three year plan for the probation service 1997–2000. London: Home Office.Google Scholar
  16. House of Commons Justice Committee. (2010). Cutting crime: The case for justice reinvestment. First report of session 2009–2010. http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200910/cmselect/cmjust/94/94i.pdf. Accessed 3 December 2015.
  17. Jackson, J., & Gray, E. (2010). Functional fear and public insecurities about crime. British Journal of Criminology, 50, 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Justice Committee. (2011). Eighth report: The role of the probation service, volume 1. http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201012/cmselect/cmjust/519/51902.htm. Accessed 3 December 2015.
  19. Kemshall, H. (1997). Risk assessment and risk management: A training pack for probation staff. In The assessment and management of risk in the probation service. London: Home Office.Google Scholar
  20. Kemshall, H. (1998a). Risk in probation practice. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  21. Kemshall, H. (1998b). Risk assessment and risk management: A training pack for social workers. The assessment and management of risk in social work services. Edinburgh: Scottish Office.Google Scholar
  22. Kemshall, H. (1998c). The assessment and management of risk: A training manual and guidance to probation staff. London: Home Office.Google Scholar
  23. Kemshall, H. (1998d). Defensible decisions for risk: Or it’s the doers wot get the blame. Probation Journal, 45(2), 67–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kemshall, H. (2003). Understanding risk in criminal justice. Buckingham: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Kemshall, H. (2008). Understanding the community management of high risk offenders. New York: Open University Press/McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  26. Kemshall, H. (2009). Working with sex offenders in a climate of public blame and anxiety: How to make defensible decisions for risk. Journal of Sexual Aggression, 15(3), 331–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kemshall, H. (Ed.) (2012). Crime and social policy. Hoboken: Wiley Blackwell.Google Scholar
  28. Kemshall, H. (2014, July 4). Conflicting rationalities of risk: Disputing risk in social policy-reflecting on 35 years of researching risk. Health, Risk and Society, 16(5–6), 398–416. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13698575.2014.934208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kemshall, H., & Maguire, M. (2001). Public protection, partnership and risk penalty: The multi-agency risk management of sexual and violent offenders. Punishment and Society, 3(2), 237–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kemshall, H., & Weaver, B. (2012). The sex offender public disclosure pilots in England and Scotland: Lessons for ‘marketing strategies’ and risk communication with the public. Criminology and Criminal Justice, 12(5), 549–565.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kemshall, H., & Wood, J. (2007). High-risk offenders and public protection. In L. Gelsthorpe & R. Morgan (Eds.), Handbook of probation (pp. 381–397). Cullompton: Willan.Google Scholar
  32. Kemshall, H., & Wood, J. (2008). Community strategies for managing high risk offenders: The contribution of multi-agency public protection arrangements. In A. Beech, L. Craig, & K. Browne (Eds.), Assessment and treatment of sex offenders: A handbook. Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
  33. Kemshall, H., Wood, J., & Westwood, S. (2010). Child Sex Offender Review (CSOR): Public disclosure pilots, a process evaluation. London: Home Office. http://rds.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs10/horr32c.pdf. Accessed 11 January 2016.Google Scholar
  34. Kemshall, H., Kelly, G., & Wilkinson, B. (2012). Child sex offender public disclosure scheme: The views of applicants using the English pilot disclosure scheme. Journal of Sexual Aggression, 18(2), 164–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. London Metropolitan Police (2014). http://www.met.police.uk/foi/pdfs/disclosure_2014/december_2014/2014110000735.pdf Accessed 3 December 2015.
  36. Mackenzie, G. (1999). Public protection, potentially violent offenders and the role of senior managers. In H. Kemshall & J. Pritchard (Eds.), Good practice in working with violence (pp. 231–240). London: Jessica Kingsley.Google Scholar
  37. Martinson, R. (1974). What works? Questions and answers about prison reform. The Public Interest, 10, 22–54.Google Scholar
  38. McNeill, F., Burns, N., Halliday, S., Hatton, N., & Tata, C. (2009). Risk, responsivity, and reconfiguration: Penal adaptation and misadaptation. Punishment and Society, 11(4), 419–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Ministry of Justice. (2010). Draft structural reform plan. London: HM Government, TSO. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/98647/pdf-version.pdf. Accessed 3 December 2015.Google Scholar
  40. Mythen, G., Walklate, S., & Kemshall, H. (2012, September 26). Decentralizing risk: The role of the voluntary and community sector in the management of offenders. Criminology and Criminal Justice. http://crj.sagepub.com/content/early/2012/09/24/1748895812458295. Accessed 11 January 2016.
  41. Nash, M. (1999). Enter the ‘polibation officer’. International Journal of Police Science and Management, 1(4), 360–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. News of the World. (2000, 30 July). Sign here for Sarah, p. 1.Google Scholar
  43. News of the World. (2001, 16 December). Named. Shamed, p. 1.Google Scholar
  44. Probation Circular. (1998). Plan for the probation service 1998–1999. London: Probation Unit, Home Office.Google Scholar
  45. Silverman, D., & Wilson, I. (2002). Innocence betrayed: Paedophilia, the media and society. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
  46. Speak Up for Justice. (2015). Probation service under attack. http://speakupforjustice.org/the-attack-on-justice/probation-services-under-attack/. Accessed 3 December 2015.
  47. Stout, B., Kemshall, H., & Wood, J. (2011). Stakeholder ambivalence: How to gain stakeholder support for a sex offender public disclosure scheme. Howard Journal, 50(4), 406–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Thomas, T. (2011). The registration and monitoring of sex offenders. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  49. Wall, L. (2012). Child sex offender disclosure scheme, 18 months on. Presentation under the ESRC Sex Offender Public Disclosure Learning from the England and Wales Knowledge Exchange Network. http://www1.uwe.ac.uk/hls/research/sexoffenderpublicdisclosure/outputs.aspx. Accessed 3 December 2015.
  50. Weaver, B., & Barry, M. (2014). Managing high risk offenders in the community: Compliance, cooperation and consent in a climate of concern. European Journal of Probation, 6, 278–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Applied Social SciencesDe Montfort UniversityLeicesterUK

Personalised recommendations