On Probation: Pickled and Nothing to Say

Mantle, Greg; Moore, Stephen

doi:10.1111/j.1468-2311.2004.00329.x

Cited by 10 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 58 publications

(41 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A theme that is always at the centre of attention in literature concerning (quasi-) compulsory treatment is motivation and its relation to coercion (Mantle and Moore 2004). The absence of motivation of the client is often seen as an obstacle for the inclusion of a treatment component in alternative sanctioning (Sia et al 2000).…”

Section: Need For Knowledge and Informationmentioning

confidence: 99%

All in Favour? Attitudes of Stakeholders and Drug Users Towards Judicial Alternatives

Wree

Ruyver

Verpoest

et al. 2008

Eur J Crim Policy Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Different judicial alternative sanctions and measures exist on the three levels of the criminal justice system. These alternative sanctions and measures can be applied to a specific target group, namely drug users. The current study is a qualitative assessment of the application and execution of alternative measures and sanctions for drug users, based on semi-structured face-to-face interviews in which stakeholders (magistrates, judicial assistants and social workers) and drug users were asked for their attitudes towards these sanctions and the factors that influence them in their convictions and beliefs. In conclusion we can state that the interviews have increased the insight in the attitudes of decision makers, social assistants, judicial assistants and drug users towards alternative sanctioning. From the interviews we learn that there are strong similarities between the three profiles, which provide for a strong basis for the continued functioning of alternative sanctioning.

show abstract

Section: Need For Knowledge and Informationmentioning

confidence: 99%

All in Favour? Attitudes of Stakeholders and Drug Users Towards Judicial Alternatives

Wree

Ruyver

Verpoest

et al. 2008

Eur J Crim Policy Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While for many (see, for example, Pease, 1999;Hudson, 2001;Mantle and Moore, 2004), Morgan's depiction of offenders might reflect the 'corruption of care' now considered to be firmly established within the probation service, for Morgan, to gloss over this reality reflects the 'seriously woolly thinking within the probation service'; which, if allowed to prevail, severely 'prejudices its future operation' (Morgan, 2003: 8).…”

Section: Consumers: Who Is Buying Probation?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Consumer society, commodification and offender management

McCulloch

McNeill²

2007

Criminology & Criminal Justice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article aims to set current developments in `offender management' services in England and Wales and in Scotland within the contexts first of a discussion of Bauman's analysis of crime and punishment in consumer society and second of wider debates about the commodification of public services. Rather than examining the formal commodification of offender management through organizational restructuring, `contestability' and marketization, the authors examine the extent to which the substantive commodification of offender management is already evidenced in the way that probation's products, consumers and processes of production have been reconfigured within the public sector. In the concluding discussion, they consider both some limitations on the extent of commodification to date and the prospects for the containment or moderation of the process in the future

show abstract

“…That distance learning was not seen by academics as a potentially dangerous step might become an uncomfortable footnote in the service's history. Mantle and Moore (2004) noted that the most apparent absence from the current New Labour probation agenda is any recognition that working with people who are experiencing difficult personal circumstances should require inter-personal skills. New Labour's drive for bureaucratic managerialism has ensured that the importance of people has long been sidelined.…”

Section: 'New' Probation Training or 'New Labour' Probation Training?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Probation Education, Why the Hush? A Reply to Stout and Dominey's December 2006 Counterblast

Treadwell

Mantle

2007

The Howard Journal of Criminal Justice

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article is a response to a 'Counterblast' concerning the delivery of probation training (Stout and Dominey 2006). The authors mounted a 'defence of distance learning', as a method for training probation officers, and took issue with assertions earlier made by us on the subject of distance learning. Our article is intended to clarify our position on distance learning (which previously amounted to no more than a few words) and to clarify the basis of some of our reservations. In doing this, we make more general, critical observations concerning the state of New Labour's probation training programme and about the current crises in which the service, and its training arrangements have become embroiled.In their first sentence, Stout and Dominey (2006) refer to 'probation education' and, in their penultimate one, to 'training for offender managers'. Our view is that these are two different things and this leads us to take a different position as to where preparation for practice should take place. Whereas we agree wholeheartedly that probation officer education should remain in higher education (HE), whether or not 'training for offender managers' (p.539) should be similarly rooted in HE appears to be a more taxing question and, as a result, our answer is more equivocal. Working professionally with people subject to court orders and prison licences in order to help them live as peacefully as possible in their community requires a university education. Something similar, albeit less convincing, can be argued for delivering 'what works' correctional services. 'Managing offenders' in the context of a misguided, Home Office-driven fixation on 'public protection' needs staff who can tick boxes and press buttons. If risks are to be avoided, never to be taken, then a university education seems superfluous.Stout and Dominey bewail the absence of a suitable place to debate criminal justice education. There may be some truth in this, although the

show abstract

On Probation: Pickled and Nothing to Say

Cited by 10 publications

References 58 publications

All in Favour? Attitudes of Stakeholders and Drug Users Towards Judicial Alternatives

All in Favour? Attitudes of Stakeholders and Drug Users Towards Judicial Alternatives

Consumer society, commodification and offender management

Probation Education, Why the Hush? A Reply to Stout and Dominey's December 2006 Counterblast

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About