Abstract
Priestly and Vanstone have collected a vast and diverse range of extracts for (re)publication with a view to shedding light on the issue of rehabilitation. Set in the context of the continued rise of punitive responses to crime within the UK and US, this book seeks to stimulate debate about how best to rehabilitate those who transgress society’s rules in the 21st century. The question in the title is, of course, rhetorical, with the editors clearly favouring the term ‘citizen’ given the implied respect for the individual and openness to positive futures.
The book is divided into three sections, covering three roughly distinct time periods from the perspective of the rehabilitation theme. Part One focuses on the historical roots and early forms of rehabilitation. The section begins by exploring the interchange between religion and science through the eyes of Beccaria and Bentham before going on to explore the origins of probation work through the concept of recognizance and its practical application in 19th century courts on both sides of the Atlantic. Contrasting attitudes to determinism and free will are considered, culminating in the compromise offered by Salleille which encourages a focus on the differing levels of freedom exercised by those who commit criminal acts. The emergence of casework and the primary role given to psychological processes as a vehicle for intervention is evidenced in a range of articles from the early to mid 20th century. Practice examples, theoretical arguments and explorations of casework values all contribute to a detailed picture of the developing orthodoxy.
Part Two explores the various challenges to rehabilitation that arose during the latter half of the 20th century. The section begins with various criticisms of the treatment ideal including CS Lewis’ focus on human rights and Barbara Wootton’s criticism of psychoanalysis as a means of dealing with bad behaviour. Despite these concerns, examples are given of a continuing conventional approach to probation practice and also the emergence of evidence as necessary to support claims to expertise. Under growing criticism from academics about the efficacy of probation in relation to reducing reoffending, alternative practice frameworks are explored including the social work model and the non-treatment paradigm. The rise of group-work is also charted through a range of experimental initiatives developed by probation areas, culminating in Ross’ direct challenge to the rehabilitation sceptics with the identification of cognitive behavioural approaches as effective. Finally, the persistence and eventual dominance of the punitive response to crime is explored.
Part Three focuses on the question of whether the idea of rehabilitation can be rescued from the damage inflicted during the latter half of the 20th century. The focus is not on simply restoring the past, but rather forging ahead, re-imagining the rehabilitative tradition in a 21st century context. A commitment to social justice is identified as a useful starting point and examples of democratic prison living units and prison college education are highlighted as good examples. Working with people as individuals is also considered, with a range of articles discussing morality, rights, active participation and the balance between consent and coercion. The overlapping approaches of community justice and restorative justice are then discussed, exploring the rediscovery of the victim, justice as redress, peace-making and the rise of the problem-solving approach to criminality.
Space is also given to three of the most significant areas of recent theoretical development within the rehabilitation field, namely, ‘What Works’, desistance and re-entry. The ‘What Works’ movement is praised for its identification of cognitive-behavioural approaches as the most effective method for reducing reoffending, and for highlighting the value research can bring to modern day correctional services. Knowledge gaps within the field are also highlighted, including the role of one-to-one supervision in the rehabilitation process and also the problems associated with scaling up an intervention beyond carefully run pilot projects. Desistance theory is discussed as an interesting alternative approach with its focus on why individuals stop committing crime. Maruna highlights the ‘subjective autobiography’ (p. 243) as central to the positive interpretation of significant life changes whilst Ward and Brown promote a ‘strengths-based’ approach (p. 263) within rehabilitation services. Finally, the importance of the transition process from custody back into the community is explored with a focus on promoting citizenship amongst ex-offenders.
As a probation practitioner who retains an ongoing interest in the theoretical side of the work I would certainly recommend this book. For those interested in rehabilitation the collection provides an excellent introduction, covering a wide range of perspectives and developments. However, this book does far more than simply appraise the reader of the relevant issues. Whilst Parts One and Two provide an interesting and necessary historical context to the present, Part Three is an invitation to engage with current ideas and partake in the process of rescuing rehabilitation as a legitimate response to crime. Within the National Probation Service at present there is much talk of the rise of professional judgement and an increasing focus on ‘payment by results’ with a view to driving innovation and development. In such a context it is important that those interested in rehabilitation make their voices heard. This book goes some way to providing both the knowledge and inspiration required for such a task.