Pains of Probation: Effective Practice and Human Rights

Abstract

This article explores the experience of offenders while under probation supervision and analyses the "pains of probation" in connection to rehabilitation aspirations. The article has two main parts. In the first part of the article, the experiences of probationers are examined using thematic analysis, and eight different pains of probation are identified. In the second part of the article, these pains of probation are examined from two different perspectives: human rights and the Good Lives Model. The conclusion is that these two perspectives support each other and can help reduce the frustrations and deprivations experienced by individuals on probation. By implementing these two perspectives, probation services may overcome the obstacles toward desistance and earn more legitimacy in the eyes of probation recipients.

The impact of supervision on the pains of community penalties in England and Wales: An exploratory study

“…Payne and Gainey, 1998;Gainey and Payne, 2000;Durnescu, 2011). Despite this long delay, the emergence of 'pain analysis' in the non-custodial penal imagination is most welcome.…”

Good cop, bad cop, both? Examining the implications of risk based allocation on the desistance narratives of intensive probationers

“…Their supervision sessions with their NPS offender manager centered around offence based work, and as such was seen as a negative experience by the high risk probationers in the sample. Drawing parallels with the research conducted by Durnescu (2010) with probationers in Romania, probationers in this sample suggested that their NPS supervision required them to discuss their offending history with a new supervisor. Going over their offending history required probationers in the sample to return to offences which they were attempting to move on from, which was regarded by some as a painful experience 5 .…”

Experiencing penal supervision: A literature review

“…Generally, the studies of pains of penal supervision can be divided between those that deal exclusively or primarily with probation supervision -that is, with mandatory one-to-one social work-style meetings with a probation officer, which may be supplemented by groupwork, psychiatric interventions, educational classes, and other such rehabilitationoriented activities (Durnescu, 2011;Hayes, 2015;and compare Nugent and Schinkel, 2016;and Durnescu et al, 2018, both of which offer similar insights but relating to wider subject-matter) -and those that focus exclusively or primarily upon electronically monitored curfews as a more directly liberty-depriving form of noncustodial punishment (Payne and Gainey, 1998;Gainey and Payne, 2000;Vanhaelemeesch, 2015). perceived procedural unfairness, the pain of being a 'usual suspect' known to police, and the challenges inherent in the prosecution and conviction processes themselves (see also Feeley, 1979); and (f) stigmatisation effects, from family members, friends, and strangers (particularly potential employers).…”