{"title":"缓刑服务在聚光灯下","authors":"N. Carr","doi":"10.1177/02645505231163766","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Probation Service in England and Wales has been under a critical spotlight in recent weeks following the publication of two reports by HM Inspectorate of Probation into Serious Further Offences (SFOs) committed by people who were under the supervision of probation services. SFOs are serious and violent and sexual offences committed by people on probation. They are relatively rare, constituting fewer than 0.5% of the probation caseload (HMIP, 2023b). The occurrence of an SFO leads to an automatic review of the supervision of the case prior to the offence being committed. Reviews are ordinarily carried out internally by the Probation Service and are not published, but in both the cases of Damien Bendall and Jordan McSweeney the Secretary of State for Justice requested that the Inspectorate carry out independent reviews. The publication of these reviews at the start of the year has led to increased political and media scrutiny of probation. Both independent SFO reviews deal with horrific cases and document shortcomings in probation practice. In the case of Damien Bendall, this included failures in risk assessment, inappropriate allocation of a complex case to untrained staff and insufficient attention towards child safeguarding and domestic abuse (HMIP, 2023a). The report into the management of Jordan McSweeney’s case also identifies inadequate risk assessment, as well as delays in case allocation and failure to action a timely recall to prison as shortcomings. In both cases, the backdrop of staff shortages, compounded by staff sickness and attrition, as well as stretched practitioners and their immediate managers, feature dominantly:","PeriodicalId":45814,"journal":{"name":"PROBATION JOURNAL","volume":"70 1","pages":"3 - 5"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Probation services in the spotlight\",\"authors\":\"N. Carr\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/02645505231163766\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The Probation Service in England and Wales has been under a critical spotlight in recent weeks following the publication of two reports by HM Inspectorate of Probation into Serious Further Offences (SFOs) committed by people who were under the supervision of probation services. SFOs are serious and violent and sexual offences committed by people on probation. They are relatively rare, constituting fewer than 0.5% of the probation caseload (HMIP, 2023b). The occurrence of an SFO leads to an automatic review of the supervision of the case prior to the offence being committed. Reviews are ordinarily carried out internally by the Probation Service and are not published, but in both the cases of Damien Bendall and Jordan McSweeney the Secretary of State for Justice requested that the Inspectorate carry out independent reviews. The publication of these reviews at the start of the year has led to increased political and media scrutiny of probation. Both independent SFO reviews deal with horrific cases and document shortcomings in probation practice. In the case of Damien Bendall, this included failures in risk assessment, inappropriate allocation of a complex case to untrained staff and insufficient attention towards child safeguarding and domestic abuse (HMIP, 2023a). The report into the management of Jordan McSweeney’s case also identifies inadequate risk assessment, as well as delays in case allocation and failure to action a timely recall to prison as shortcomings. In both cases, the backdrop of staff shortages, compounded by staff sickness and attrition, as well as stretched practitioners and their immediate managers, feature dominantly:\",\"PeriodicalId\":45814,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PROBATION JOURNAL\",\"volume\":\"70 1\",\"pages\":\"3 - 5\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PROBATION JOURNAL\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/02645505231163766\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PROBATION JOURNAL","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02645505231163766","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
最近几周,英格兰和威尔士的缓刑服务受到了批评,因为英国皇家缓刑监察局(HM Inspectorate of Probation)发布了两份报告,调查受缓刑服务监督的人犯下的严重进一步罪行(sfo)。sfo是由缓刑人员犯下的严重暴力和性犯罪。它们相对较少,占缓刑案件数量的不到0.5% (HMIP, 2023b)。一旦发生严重舞弊行为,当局会在罪行发生前自动检讨对案件的监管。审查通常由缓刑服务处在内部进行,不公布,但在达米安·本德尔和乔丹·麦克斯威尼两起案件中,司法国务大臣要求监察局进行独立审查。这些审查在年初发表,导致政治和媒体对缓刑的审查增加。这两项独立的SFO审查都涉及可怕的案件,并记录了缓刑实践中的缺陷。在Damien Bendall的案例中,这包括风险评估失败,将复杂案件不适当地分配给未经培训的工作人员,以及对儿童保护和家庭虐待的关注不足(HMIP, 2023a)。这份关于Jordan McSweeney案件管理的报告还指出了风险评估不足、案件分配拖延以及未能及时将其召回监狱等缺点。在这两种情况下,员工短缺的背景,加上员工生病和自然流失,以及从业者和他们的直接管理者捉襟见肘,都是主要的特点:
The Probation Service in England and Wales has been under a critical spotlight in recent weeks following the publication of two reports by HM Inspectorate of Probation into Serious Further Offences (SFOs) committed by people who were under the supervision of probation services. SFOs are serious and violent and sexual offences committed by people on probation. They are relatively rare, constituting fewer than 0.5% of the probation caseload (HMIP, 2023b). The occurrence of an SFO leads to an automatic review of the supervision of the case prior to the offence being committed. Reviews are ordinarily carried out internally by the Probation Service and are not published, but in both the cases of Damien Bendall and Jordan McSweeney the Secretary of State for Justice requested that the Inspectorate carry out independent reviews. The publication of these reviews at the start of the year has led to increased political and media scrutiny of probation. Both independent SFO reviews deal with horrific cases and document shortcomings in probation practice. In the case of Damien Bendall, this included failures in risk assessment, inappropriate allocation of a complex case to untrained staff and insufficient attention towards child safeguarding and domestic abuse (HMIP, 2023a). The report into the management of Jordan McSweeney’s case also identifies inadequate risk assessment, as well as delays in case allocation and failure to action a timely recall to prison as shortcomings. In both cases, the backdrop of staff shortages, compounded by staff sickness and attrition, as well as stretched practitioners and their immediate managers, feature dominantly: