Exploring risk management in probation practice: Contemporary developments in England and Wales

Punishment & Society

Volumn 4, Issue 1, 2002, Pages 5-25

  Robinson, Gwen ^a  

^a SWANSEA UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

penality; probation; rehabilitation; risk

Indexed keywords

EID: 84993767790     PISSN: 14624745     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/14624740222228446     Document Type: Article

References (75)

1. Alaszewski, A. and J. Manthorpe (1991) ‘Literature review: Measuring and managing risk in social welfare’, British Journal of Social Work 21: 277-290.
2. Andrews, D. and J. Bonta (1995) The level of service inventory - revised: Manual. New York: Multi-Health Systems Inc.
3. Association of Chief Officers of Probation (ACOP)(1994) Guidance on management of risk and public protection. London: ACOP.
4. Beck, U.(1992) Risk society: Towards a new modernity. London: Sage.
5. Bonta, J.(1996) ‘Risk-needs assessment and treatment’, in A.T. Harland (ed.) Choosing correctional options that work, pp. 18-32. London: Sage.
6. Bottoms, A., L. Gelsthorpe and S. Rex (2001) Community penalties: Change and challenges. Cambridge: Willan.
7. Burgess, R.G.(1982) ‘Elements of sampling in field research’, in R.G. Burgess (ed.) Field research: A sourcebook and field manual, pp. 75-78. London: Allen & Unwin.
8. Burgoyne, J.G.(1994) ‘Stakeholder analysis’, in C. Cassell and G. Symon (eds) Qualitative methods in organizational research, pp. 187-207. London: Sage.
9. Castel, R.(1991) ‘From dangerousness to risk’, in G. Burchell, C. Gordon and P. Miller (eds) The Foucault effect: Studies in governmentality, pp. 281-298. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
10. Clear, T.R. and D.M. Barry (1983) ‘Some conceptual issues in incapacitating offenders’, Crime and Delinquency 29(4): 529-545.
11. Cohen, S.(1979) ‘The punitive city: Notes on the dispersal of social control’, Contemporary Crises 3: 339-363.
12. Cohen, S.(1985) Visions of social control. Cambridge: Polity Press.
13. Deleuze, G.(1995) ‘Postscript on control societies’, in G. Deleuze Negotiations: 1972-1990, pp. 177-182. New York: Columbia University Press.
14. Feeley, M. and J. Simon (1992) ‘The new penology: Notes on the emerging strategy of corrections and its implications’, Criminology 30(4): 449-474.
15. Feeley, M. and J. Simon (1994) ‘Actuarial justice: The emerging new criminal law’, in D. Nelken (ed.) The futures of criminology, pp. 173-201. London: Sage.
16. Foucault, M.(1977) Discipline and punish. London: Allen Lane.
17. Foucault, M.(1991) ‘Governmentality’, in G. Burchell, C. Gordon and P. Miller (eds) The Foucault effect: Studies in governmentality, 87-104. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
18. Garland, D.(1985) Punishment and welfare. Aldershot: Gower.
19. Garland, D.(1990) Punishment and modern society. Oxford: Clarendon.
20. Garland, D.(1995) ‘Penal modernism and postmodernism’, in T.G. Blomberg and S. Cohen (eds) Punishment and social control, pp. 181-209. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
21. Garland, D.(1996) ‘The limits of the sovereign state: Strategies of crime control in contemporary society’, British Journal of Criminology 36(4): 445-471.
22. Garland, D.(1997 a) ‘“Governmentality” and the problem of crime: Foucault, criminology, sociology’, Theoretical Criminology 1(2): 173-214.
23. Garland, D.(1997 b) ‘Probation and the reconfiguration of crime control’, in R. Burnett (ed.) The probation service: Responding to change, pp. 2-10 (Proceedings of the Probation Studies Unit First Colloquium: Probation Studies Unit Report No. 3.) Oxford: University of Oxford Centre for Criminological Research.
24. Garland, D.(2001) The culture of control. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
25. Gibbs, A.(1999) ‘The assessment, case management and evaluation system’, Probation Journal 46(3): 182-186.
26. Giddens, A.(1990) The consequences of modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press.
27. Giddens, A.(1991) Modernity and self-identity. Cambridge: Polity Press.
28. Hacking, I.(1986) ‘Making up people’, in T.C. Heller, M. Sosna and D.E. Wellbery (eds) Reconstructing individualism. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
29. Hannah-Moffatt, K.(1999) ‘Moral agent or actuarial subject: Risk and Canadian women's imprisonment’, Theoretical Criminology 3(1): 71-94.
30. Hanson, R. and D. Thornton (2000) ‘Improving risk assessments for sex offenders: A comparison of three actuarial scales’, Law and Human Behaviour 24(1): 119-136.
31. HM Inspectorate of Probation (HMIP)(1995) Dealing with dangerous people: The probation service and public protection. London: Home Office.
32. HM Inspectorate of Probation (HMIP)(1997) ‘Risk management guidance’, in Management and assessment of risk in the probation service, pp. 227-300. London: Home Office.
33. HM Inspectorate of Probation (HMIP)(1998) Exercising constant vigilance: The role of the probation service in protecting the public from sex offenders. London: Home Office.
34. Home Office(1984) Probation service in England and Wales: Statement of national objectives and priorities. London: Home Office.
35. Home Office(1992) National standards for the supervision of offenders in the community. London: Home Office.
36. Home Office(1995) National standards for the supervision of offenders in the community. London: Home Office.
37. Home Office(1996) Guidance for the probation service on the Offender Group Reconviction Scale (OGRS) (Probation Circular 63/1996). London: Home Office.
38. Home Office(1998) Joining forces to protect the public: Prisons-probation. London: Home Office.
39. Home Office(1999) The correctional policy framework. London: Home Office.
40. Home Office and Association of Chief Officers of Probation (ACOP)(1997) ‘Combining risk of reoffending and needs assessment: Information on the tools available and under development to assist Chief Probation Officers to decide their strategy’, in Management and assessment of risk in the probation service, pp. 1-26. London: Home Office.
41. Hood, R. and S. Shute (2000) The parole system at work: A study of risk based decision-making (Home Office Research Study 202). London: Home Office.
42. Kemshall, H.(1995) ‘Risk in probation practice: The hazards and dangers of supervision’, Probation Journal 42(2): 67-72.
43. Kemshall, H.(1998) Risk in probation practice. Aldershot: Ashgate.
44. Kemshall, H. and M. Maguire (2001) ‘Public protection, partnership and risk penality: The multi-agency risk management of sexual and dangerous offenders’, Punishment and Society 3(2): 237-264.
45. Kemshall, H., N. Parton, M. Walsh and J. Waterson (1997) ‘Concepts of risk in relation to organizational structure and functioning within the personal social services and probation’, Social Policy and Administration 31(3): 213-232.
46. Lynch, M.(1998) ‘Waste managers? The new penology, crime fighting, and parole agent identity’, Law and Society Review 32(4): 839-869.
47. Lynch, M.(2000) ‘Rehabilitation as rhetoric: The ideal of reformation in contemporary parole discourses and practices’, Punishment and Society 2(1): 40-65.
48. McGuire, J. and P. Priestley (1995) ‘Reviewing “what works”: Past, present and future’, in J. McGuire (ed.) What works: Reducing reoffending, pp. 3-34. Chichester: Wiley.
49. McWilliams, W.(1987) ‘Probation, pragmatism and policy’, The Howard Journal 26(2): 97-121.
50. Maguire, M., H. Kemshall, L. Noaks, K. Sharpe and E. Wincup (forthcoming) Risk assessment and management of sexual and dangerous offenders (Home Office Research Study). London: Home Office.
51. Mair, G.(1997) ‘Community penalties and the probation service’, in M. Maguire, R. Morgan and R. Reiner (eds) The Oxford handbook of criminology, 2nd edn, pp. 1195-1232. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
52. Mair, G. and C. Lloyd (1989) ‘Prediction and probation: An introduction’, in G. Mair (ed.) Risk prediction and probation: Papers from a research and planning unit workshop, pp. 1-11 (Research and Planning Unit Paper 56.) London: Home Office.
53. Mathiesen, T.(1983) ‘The future of control systems - the case of Norway’, in D. Garland and P. Young (eds) The power to punish: Contemporary penality and social analysis, pp. 130-145. London: Heinemann Educational Books.
54. Nash, M.(1999) Police, probation and protecting the public. London: Blackstone.
55. Nash, M.(2000) ‘Deconstructing the probation service: The Trojan Horse of public protection’, International Journal of the Sociology of Law 28: 201-213.
56. O'Malley, P.(2001) ‘Crime, risk and prudentialism revisited’, in K. Stenson and R.R. Sullivan (eds) Crime, risk and justice, pp. 89-103. Cullompton, Devon: Willan.
57. O'Malley, P., L. Weir and C. Shearing (1997) ‘Governmentality, criticism, politics’, Economy and Society 26(4): 501-517.
58. Patton, M.Q.(1990) Qualitative evaluation and research methods. London: Sage.
59. Raynor, P.(1996) ‘Effectiveness now: A personal and selective overview’, in G. McIvor (ed.) Working with offenders, pp. 182-193. London: Jessica Kingsley.
60. Raynor, P.(1997) ‘Evaluating probation: A moving target’, in G. Mair (ed.) Evaluating the effectiveness of community penalties, pp. 19-33. Aldershot: Avebury.
61. Raynor, P.(1998) Implementing the level of service inventory - revised in Britain: Report 3: Risk and need assessment in the five pilot areas. Dinas Powys: University of Wales Swansea and Cognitive Centre Foundation.
62. Raynor, P., J. Kynch, C. Roberts and S. Merrington (2000) Risk and need assessment in probation services: An evaluation (Home Office Research Study 211). London: Home Office.
63. Reichman, N.(1986) ‘Managing crime risks: Toward an insurance based model of social control’, Research in Law, Deviance and Social Control 8: 151-172.
64. Richie, J.H., D. Dick and R. Lingham (1994) The report into the care and treatment of Christopher Clunis. London: HMSO.
65. Roberts, C., R. Burnett, A. Kirby and H. Hamill (1996) A system for evaluating probation practice (Probation Studies Unit Report No. 1). Oxford: University of Oxford Centre for Criminological Research.
66. Robinson, G.(1999) ‘Risk management and rehabilitation in the probation service: Collision and collusion’, The Howard Journal 38(4): 421-433.
67. Robinson, G.(2001) ‘Power, knowledge and “what works” in probation’, The Howard Journal 40(3): 235-254.
68. Rose, N.(1999) Powers of freedom: Reframing political thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
69. Shearing, C.D. and P.C. Stenning (1985) ‘From the panopticon to Disney World: The development of discipline’, in A.N. Doob and E.L. Greenspan (eds) Perspectives in criminal law, pp. 335-349. Ontario: Canada Law Book.
70. Simon, J.(1987) ‘The emergence of a risk society: Insurance, law and the state’, Socialist Review 95: 61-89.
71. Simon, J.(1988) ‘The ideological effects of actuarial practices’, Law & Society Review 22(4): 771-800.
72. Simon, J.(1993) Poor discipline: Parole and the social control of the underclass 1890-1990. London: University of Chicago Press.
73. Stenson, K.(1999) ‘Crime control, governmentality and sovereignty’, in R. Smandych (ed.) Governable places: Readings on governmentality and crime control, pp. 45-73. Aldershot: Ashgate.
74. Vanstone, M.(2000) ‘Cognitive-behavioural work with offenders in the UK: A history of influential endeavour’, The Howard Journal 39(2): 171-183.
75. Yin, R.K.(1994) Case study research: Design and methods, 2nd edn.London: Sage.