Search Results
This chapter introduces the idea that in modern times, the rehabilitation of offenders has been fused with ideas around their risk to others. Consequently, we now understand working with offenders to change their behaviour through a rehabilitation-risk paradigm, rather than through any notions of their rights or welfare. The author discusses the centrality of rehabilitation and more recently, risk in contemporary criminology and criminal justice. Finally, the chapter explores through various discourses how rehabilitation and risk have been joined together, rather than replaced in punishment.
This chapter seeks to uncover and make sense of the theoretical underpinnings of multi-agency arrangements by analysing approaches to criminal justice policy which move beyond the state or what Rhodes has called the ‘governance’ of societal problems. Rhodes (1995: 1) states that ‘governance signifies a change in the meaning of government, referring to a new process of governing; or a changed condition of ordered rule; or the new method by which society is governed’. As such, the governance of crime control includes discourses relating to a wide ranging participation in partnership, contestability, marketisation and privatisation arrangements. As Pierre and Peters (2000) note, these new strategies will increasingly centre on the government’s efforts to steer the crime control endeavours of others. The chapter attempts to move beyond a mere tracing and description of the different institutional arrangements that serve to identify how, for example policing has changed. Rather, the chapter connects the development of complex multi-agency arrangements, found in antisocial behaviour and preventative work, the policing of public and private space and the punishment and rehabilitation of offenders with political and societal developments particularly in relation to the nature of contemporary government and the fluid relationships between the state and law and order (Crawford, 1999).
In order to achieve this, the chapter will utilise theoretical insights and perspectives which centre on the multiplicity of ways by which governments seek to control and shape organisations and citizens’ conduct afforded through the lens of Foucault’s notion of governmentality. This chapter firstly details the backdrop to recent societal, economic and political changes which challenge established and rational modernist criminological thought.
Restorative justice (RJ) and restorative approaches (RAs) are becoming increasingly valued as a way of responding to a wide range of conflicts, including problem and offending behaviours. The growth in the use of RJ and RAs has been described as a ‘global social movement’ that sets out to repair harm, reduce conflict and harmonise civil society. This report takes a close look at the implementation of an RJ approach in the challenging environment of children’s residential care homes. It will appeal to people who are interested in the use of RJ, particularly its use with children and young people, as well as those interested in problem and offending behaviours in relation to children in care.
Multi-agency working continues to be a core focus in criminal justice and allied work, with the government investing significantly in training criminal justice professionals. This fully revised and expanded edition of this comprehensive text brings together probation, policing, prison, social work, criminological and organisational studies perspectives, and is an essential guide for students and practitioners in offender management and other managed care environments. The contributors provide critical analysis of the latest theory, policy and practice of multi-agency working and each chapter includes case studies, key points, exercises and further reading.
This chapter reviews some of the main themes within the vast literature on restorative justice (RJ). It traces the rise of the concept and the main areas where RJ is seen as a more satisfactory way to respond to harmful and criminal behaviour than the conventional criminal justice system. It looks at the various guises that the paradigm has taken to date, focusing on key values, processes and outcomes required for a thorough understanding of how to conceptualise RJ. The chapter highlights some of the key evidence about impact and outcomes, noting an increased emphasis on reducing recidivism in policy formulations of the approach, as well as reviews of the available research. It also explores the place of RJ within contemporary youth justice systems. Finally, the chapter considers the specific application of RJ and the context of the current research — children’s residential care.
This chapter considers the particular setting in which restorative justice (RJ) as a response to conflict and offending behaviour was applied in the current research, focusing on children and young people in residential care. It examines the evolving policy context for children in care more broadly (as children move between different forms of care), connecting the circumstances of coming into care, or being in care, with the behaviours that might be addressed by using an RJ approach. The chapter first traces the origins of the care system and how this relates to poverty, vulnerability and social exclusion, and how this interconnects with conflict and offending behaviour. It also describes the concept of risk management in relation to these circumstances and behaviours, within the broader policy discourse about risk. It then presents evidence about a range of relevant ‘outcomes’ from the care experience. Finally, it outlines the contemporary focus on improving outcomes from care through the Care Matters White Paper, within the overall framework of Every Child Matters.
This chapter describes the situation in residential care in the case study of the local authority in the United Kingdom at the time of the field research, reflecting on the changes observed since research was undertaken in the same local authority in the mid-1990s. It considers comments made by care staff during the course of this field research, along with documentary evidence and observation. Other research has tracked the changes in the residential care environment by revisiting children’s care homes. This can be a useful way of identifying how policy and practice influences the everyday living environment of children in residential care. After explaining the nature and context of children’s residential care in this local authority, the chapter outlines the approach taken in the research and the range of data collected in the research. It also tackles issues related to the education of children in care, their health and wellbeing and behaviour management. Finally, it examines the decision to introduce a restorative justice approach into residential care in the local authority.
This chapter looks at the various forms of evidence about the nature, prevalence and trends in problem behaviour as well as offending behaviour in ten children’s care homes in the United Kingdom. The sources of data are based on four sets of organisational records: incident records from care staff (2001–2007); police call-outs to homes (2001–2007); number and proportion of children looked after for more than a year with a record of offending (2001–2007); and use of the out-of-hours service in two comparable periods during the field research (2006 and 2007). When interpreting this trend data, the chapter makes a reminder that all staff were trained in the use of a restorative justice approach during 2005, with some staff completing the course in early 2006. In addition, the chapter cites evidence from staff interviews to highlight issues relating to managing problem and offending behaviours in residential care.
This chapter describes the experiences, views and perceptions of managers and care staff in the United Kingdom regarding their use of restorative justice (RJ) in managing problem behaviour and offending behaviour in children in residential care. Their views were collated in four main ways: by questionnaires administered in autumn 2006 and again in autumn 2007; by structured group discussions with care staff within the same two time periods; by individual interviews with unit managers, again in the same two periods; and, throughout the research by participation in staff meetings that included presentations of interim findings to managers and key staff involved in implementing the RJ approach. This level of interaction with practitioners helped maintain interest in the research and ensure the relevance of questions asked. This chapter also considers staff training and the principle of voluntarism in the restorative justice approach.
This chapter summarises the findings of 43 interviews with children and young people, along with 38 examples of fieldwork in the form of staff interviews, conducted during autumn 2006 and 2007. The questionnaires focused on young people’s perceptions of care staff’s management of behaviour within the care homes and how a particular problem had been ‘sorted out’. After exploring perceptions of how staff set boundaries and responded to the behaviour of children and young people, the chapter considers whether the young people knew what restorative justice (RJ) meant. The children were also asked to give an example of a situation where staff had been involved in ‘sorting out a problem’ and whether they thought the staff response to ‘sorting out a problem’ constituted RJ. Questions about RJ were therefore asked within the broader framework of young people’s perceptions of how problem behaviour and conflict was managed by staff within the residential care environment.
