Changing Officers
| Author | Herman Norford |
| Published date | 01 March 1993 |
| Date | 01 March 1993 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/026455059304000121 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
50
LETTERS
Deadline
for
letters
in
our
June
issue
is
April
8th
Creeping
Demise
Mark
Drakeford’s
article
on
the
death
throes
of
home
visiting
expressed
so
well
the
impressions
I
have
been
get-
ting
for
some
time,
particularly
of
the
style
of
work
of
newer
entrants
into
the
Service.
I’ve
spoken
with
many
established
colleagues
who
find
it
equally
difficult
to
see
how
the
job
can
be
done
without
the
flexibility
and
willingness
to
home
visit.
In
my
view
the
creeping
demise
of
home
visiting
is
only
a
reflection
of
the
attack
on
social
work
with
offenders.
If
it
is
misguided
in
that
sense
it
is
also
misguided
under
the
’new
order’
style
of
work
as
it
limits
full
professional
assessment
and
understanding
of
the
choices
facing
our
clients.
Michael
Carney
Probation
Officer,
Sheffield
Changing
Officers
As
a
black
first
year
officer,
I
have
been
hoping
for
a
Citizens
Charter
in
the
Probation
Service
for
some
time.
It
was
therefore
refreshing
to
read
’Citizen-
ship,
Rights
and
the
Probation
Service’
~P, j
December
1992).
Any
measure
that
take$
a
step
toward
anti-discrimination,
empowering
Service
users
and
inform-
ing
them
of
their
rights
should
be
welcomed.
The
ideas
of
empowering
proba-
tion
officers
in
order
to
enable
them
to
empower
service
users
and
offer
them
a
fair
and
just
treatment
and
a
means
of
independent
redress
are
not
new
but
should
nevertheless
be
includ-
ed
in
any
Probation
Service
User’s
Citizens
Charter.
However,
I
must
express
an
objec-
tion
to
point 4
of
the
suggested
Service
User’s
Charter:
’A
right
to
change
pro-
bation
officers
(perhaps
twice
max-
imum
in
any
12
month
period),
without
explanation’.
My
objection
is
based
on
the
fact
that
black
probation
officers
sometimes
face
requests
from
Service
users
to
change
officer
merely
because
she
or
he
is
black.
My
guess
is
that
female
officers
may
have
ex-
perienced
similar
dubious
requests
merely
because
of
their
gender.
I
would
be
inclined
to
agree
that
a
user
should
have
the
right
to
change
their
probation
officer,
but
a
good
ex-
planation
should
be
given
and
examin-
ed
to
see
if
there
is
an
adequate
reason
for
a
change.
The
right
to
change
supervisor
without
explanation
would
play
into
the
hands
of
racist
and
sexist
service
users
and
legitimise
their
behaviour.
Herman
Norford
Probation
Officer,
Redditch
Faulty
Reasoning
It
is
a
pity
that
Mike
Neary,
in
his
criticism
of
Ross’s
R&R
programme
bases
the
validity
of
his
critique
in
a
’rigourous
scientific
analysis’
using
Marxist
theory
whilst
stating
that
this
does
not
constitute
a
moral
critique.
I
would
have
thought
that
a
moral
criti-
que
was
one
of
Marxism’s
few
remain-
ing
strengths
in
highlighting
the
way
capitalism
sustains
material
social
ine-
qualities.
By
claiming
that
such
a
criti-
que
is
based
on
’rigorous
science’,
Neary
falls
into
making
similar
generalisations
about
human
nature
as
does
Ross.
To continue reading
Request your trial