Community Justice Files 38
| Author | Dr Nick Flynn, Ross Little |
COST Action: 'Offender Supervision in Europe - Bridging Research, Policy and Practice'
On 11th-12th March 2016 the final conference of the international research network Cost Action (IS1106) on 'Offender Supervision in Europe' took place at the Free University of Brussels. Against the backdrop of a rapid increase in the numbers of offenders subject to supervision across Europe (an increase which cannot be explained by crime rates and which has not impacted to any significant extent on the use of imprisonment), this four year research collaboration has been guided by a concern that the small amount of research undertaken into the rapidly growing numbers of offenders supervised in the community has failed to engage with policy and practice. To address this, it has sought to develop new research projects and research methods, and more generally to facilitate cooperation across European countries between researchers, academics, practitioners and policy makers. Six pilot research projects have been developed:
• The Eurobarometer project - a survey instrument to compare across jurisdictions the experience of those subject to supervision
• The Supervisible project - the use of photography to represent the experience of supervision
• Comparative vignette methodology - the construction of case scenarios to explore decision-making processes related to breach and the management of compliance
• Visualising practice - the use of photography to represent and compare supervision
• Observing practice - to compare across European countries the practice of conducting first meetings between supervisors and supervisees
• Practice diaries - to compare across European countries the professional lives and routine practices of supervisors.
As described in the final report, the key findings of the project are as follows:
• Although most people who experience supervision find it helpful and affirm the support of supervisors, experience varies from country to country especially in relation to assistance provided on employment, housing, finances and offending.
• Supervision hurts, even when it is considered to be constructive and helpful. The experience of being supervised is often represented as being painful in a variety of ways. Themes of constraint, losing time, waste, and being condemned to further sanctions should they be judged as somehow failing were all common themes expressed by people under supervision.
• There is a lack of research on decision making processes and forms of supervision by different agencies across Europe. For example, breach and revocation are under-researched in relation to significant variations in procedures and the extent to which discretion is exercised. Similarly, there appears to be a blanket decision in some countries to exclude certain groups from receiving community sanctions: foreigners and mentally ill people for example.
• Research on the comparative practice of offender supervision is also limited. Evidence was found of significant variation in practice but also of a 'habitus', or a consistent approach and disposition common to practitioners in different jurisdictions and settings.
Finally, the report presents the implications for future policy, practice and research:
• Since supervision hurts, the principle of proportionality should guide decisions on its imposition, length, form and requirements. Unintended and unnecessary pain should be avoided.
• Supervisory sanctions should be made more accessible to marginalised and vulnerable groups such as foreign nationals and people with mental health problems.
• Considerable discretion is necessary to maintain the dignity of persons subject to supervision in order to fulfill the spirit of the law as well as the letter of the law.
• Working fairly and helpfully with people under supervision supports constructive relationships and encourages desistance.
• Further research should be carried out on: the experience of supervision...
To continue reading
Request your trial