Are Hope and Possibility Achievable in Prison?
| Author | BETHANY E. SCHMIDT,BEN CREWE,KATHERINE AUTY,ELINOR LIEBER,MARTHA MOREY,DEBORAH KANT,JUDITH GARDOM,ALISON LIEBLING,BEN LAWS |
| Published date | 01 March 2019 |
| Date | 01 March 2019 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/hojo.12303 |
The Howard Journal Vol58 No 1. March 2019 DOI: 10.1111/hojo.12303
ISSN 2059-1098, pp. 104–126
Are Hope and Possibility Achievable
in Prison?
ALISON LIEBLING, BEN LAWS, ELINOR LIEBER,
KATHERINE AUTY, BETHANY E. SCHMIDT,
BEN CREWE, JUDITH GARDOM, DEBORAH KANT
and MARTHA MOREY
Alison Liebling is Director, Prisons Research Centre and Professor of
Criminology and Criminal Justice, University of Cambridge; Ben Laws is
Associate Lecturer in Criminology, University of Cambridge and University of
Leicester; Elinor Lieber is PhD Candidate and Research Assistant, University
of Cambridge; Katherine Auty is Research Associate, University of Cambridge;
Bethany E. Schmidt is PhD Candidate and Research Associate, University of
Cambridge; Ben Crewe is Deputy Director, Prisons Research Centre, University
of Cambridge; Judith Gardom is PhD Candidate and Research Assistant,
University of Cambridge; Deborah Kant is PhD Candidate, University of
Cambridge; Martha Morey is PhD Candidate, University of Cambridge
Abstract: There is both hope and frustration in this article. A recent research exercise in a
prison found it to be inspirational in its ethos, relationships and mission. Prisoners talked
passionately about their experiences in it and its impact on their personal development.
But prisoners received very little resettlement support and things sometimes went wrong
as soon as they were released, not because of any ‘moral failings’ on their part, but
because they could not even navigate the journey ‘home’. It looked like everything we
know cumulatively about ‘better prisons’, but its prisoners were failed as they transitioned
out. More ‘tragic imagination’ is required in penal policy.
Keywords: culture; hope; moral climate; prison; progression
Hope is everywhere . . . Fromthe minute you get off the bus. They shake your hand
and give you a cup of tea. They say good morning to you. You see guys moving
on. There is humanity here . . . People treat you like you’re a person, like a person
who has potential. (prisoner)
It’s a prison where you can see the light at the end of the tunnel. It’s up to you if
you want to step into that light, they give you the choice. (prisoner)
We allow the men to be who they are really are. They don’t have to pretend
here . . . Everyone lives and works side by side. What we’re trying to do is create a
real community. (staff member)
104
C
2019 The Authors. The Howard Journal of Crime and Justice published by Howard League
and John Wiley & Sons Ltd
This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which
permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
The Howard Journal Vol58 No 1. March 2019
ISSN 2059-1098, pp. 104–126
It shouldn’t be about performance targets and numbers. Weshould be about values
and changing lives. (staff member)
HMP Warren Hill is a small, highly impressive prison on the Suffolk coast
with a distinctive ethos and a unique regime. Most of the 244 prisoners are
serving imprisonment for public protection (IPP) or life sentences and are
not eligible for open conditions, since the introduction of a rule excluding
those with any history of absconding from future release on temporary
license or transfer to open prisons. Warren Hill offers this population a
tailor-made ‘progressive’ regime in closed conditions. The prison hosts a
Therapeutic Community (TC) and a Psychologically Informed Planned
Environment (PIPE) unit. The TC and PIPE have been awarded Enabling
Environment (EE) status, and the prison as a whole is currently working
towards this. The culture throughout Warren Hill strongly embodies the
values of an ‘EE’: an environment that ‘creates and sustains a positive
and effective social environment’, meeting ten standards of: belonging,
boundaries, communication, development, involvement, safety, structure,
empowerment, leadership, and openness (see Benefield et al. 2018; Haigh
et al. 2012; Royal College of Psychiatrists 2013).
The prisoner population is long term and prisoners have complex
therapeutic and resettlement needs. Warren Hill quietly and flexibly
rescues these mainly over-tariff Category C adults and recalled Category
Ds,1imaginatively balancing risk reduction with trust-building work.
This balancing act is achieved through outstanding relationships between
officers and prisoners, and a pragmatic, transparent approach to risk
management. The prison prides itself on a ‘forgiving’ but educational
ethos: staff have boundaries and are not overly permissive, but in conver-
sation repeatedly emphasised the importance of second chances, and of
establishing the reasons for setbacks. Most of all, Warren Hill is a place
of hope, a word that we encountered repeatedly over the course of our
research. The most serious challenge faced by prisoners is resettlement.
Its population does not have the opportunity to become accustomed to,
or make adequate preparations for, life outside. The lack of eligibility
for release on temporary license (ROTL) denies long-term prisoners the
chance to demonstrate risk reduction, acclimatise to a changing world,
and accrue transferable skills. Staff and prisoners are aware that current
policies limited what the prison can do to address this issue.
The Research
In January 2018, a team of nine researchers from Cambridge University’s
Prisons Research Centre (PRC) conducted a ‘Measuring the Quality of
Prison Life-Plus’ (‘MQPL+’) exercise in HMP Warren Hill, a Category C
prison for men in Suffolk. This is an in-depth examination of the cultural
and moral climate of a prison, which relies on a variety of methods and
on the cumulative expertise of the team. It is a methodology we have de-
veloped over many years, which we call ‘ethnography-led measurement’
(Liebling 2015b). Painstakingly-devised MQPL surveys were administered
to prisoners in focus groups, with additional surveys given to individual
105
C
2019 The Howard League and John Wiley & Sons Ltd
To continue reading
Request your trial