Critically assess the key principles which currently guide the National Probation Service. Which principle(s)do you think should be dominant and why?

Authors Avatar

Critically assess the key principles which currently guide the National Probation Service.  Which principle(s) do you think should be dominant and why?

 

Introduction

The answer to the essay question revolves around the two conflicting roles of the probation service.  Historically there has been a battle within and surrounding the service between the social work ethos focused at reforming the offender and that of controlling and punishing the offender i.e. a more punitive system.  To illustrate the change in ideals of the new National Probation Service and to predict where the service may be going in the future the essay offers a brief history of probation work within the UK before the main body of the essay begins.  

During the course of discussing the topic area, I will examine the recent developments in probation, centring heavily on the government document entitled ‘A New Choreography – An Integrated Strategy for the National Probation Service for England and Wales’.  The aims and long term objectives as set out in this directive will be discussed and looked at in context of the ever increasing standardisation of the service.  The essay will look at the five aims listed and critically evaluate the nine stretch objectives, this, along with evaluating government spending within the service will allow the reader to see the key principles and overall aim of the new service.  

Finally, it will outline all discussion areas within the and offer some conclusions toward an effective service that can realise its aims through implementation of objectives without neglecting or undermining the human aspect of the service.

HISTORY

The rehabilitative roots of the modern probation service lie in the late nineteenth century when religiously driven volunteers attended courts and sought to ‘advise, assist and befriend’ adult offenders in an effort to ‘rescue’ them and their souls from a life of sin, drunkenness and crime.”  (McLaughlin and Muncie, 274:2000).  Since its early inception as a purely Christian driven endeavour, probation has been struggling between the two ideals of control and care, and progressively from the 1960’s and into the twenty first century, government agenda has required a constant re-working and toughening up of the service.

         “The 1991 Criminal Justice Act [was] widely recognised as a crucial watershed in the shift from a predominately rehabilitative logic to a more punitive rationale for community-based sanctions.” (McLaughlin and Muncie, 2001: 278).  As well as this shift towards a more punitive role of the probation service the Act also served to increase the centralisation of the service applying national standards to the service for the first time.  In April 2001, the National Probation Service (NPS) for England and Wales was established and it replaced the network of local probation boards working in line with national standards by creating a single, central authority for probation.  

The NPS is an executive agency of the Home Office and is centralised under a National Directorate controlling 42 probation services (matching police force area boundaries). Chief probation officers are responsible for the day-to-day running and management of the service in each area. Local probation boards supervise the work of the probation service in each area within the national framework.  (Source adapted from ) **

So from its inception in the early 1900’s to a present day centralised National Service, probation has come a long way, but it is a service not without its flaws.  It is the purpose of this essay to look at the structure of the current service and analyse which principle should be its guiding light…so, to begin.

Join now!

The five aims of the new NPS are as follows:

  • protecting the public;
  • reducing offending;
  • the proper punishment of offenders in the community;
  • ensuring offenders awareness of the effects of crime on the victims of crime and the public; and
  • rehabilitation of the offender.

“These are defensible aims, although it helps, I think, if they are considered as segments of a circle, each of equal weight, rather than as a list with rehabilitation in fifth place”.  (Mike Nellis,  www.humancity.org**)

Unfortunately the way the new service is set up, it is ...

This is a preview of the whole essay