Developments in the Probation Service: A Personal View
| Author | Nicholas Hinton |
| Published date | 01 September 1976 |
| Date | 01 September 1976 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/026455057602300310 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
90
Developments
in
the
Probation
Service:
A
Personal
View
NICHOLAS
HINTON
Director
of
NACRO
I
WAS
told
recently
of
recommendations
made
to
the
Finnish
govern-
ment
suggesting
the
abolition
of
Finland’s
Probation
Service.
The
ad-
vocates
of
such
a
course
of
action
apparently
argued
that
care
and
con-
trol
were
uneasy
bedfellows
illogically
combined
in
one
agency:
the
function
of
caring
belonging
to
social
workers,
that
of
control
to
the
police.
Perhaps
rashly
I
spoke
of
Finland’s
plans
to
an
English
probation
officer.
Somewhat
defensively
he
assured
me
that
our
probation
Service
had
come
to
terms
with
any
such
conflicts
and
if
I
was
suggesting
other-
wise
I
should
think
again.
Recalling
the
debates
that
have
taken
place
recently,
particularly
the
debate
surrounding
the
Younger
Report
of
1974
on
suggested
means
of
providing
for
the
young
adult
offender,
I
found
it
hard
to
share
this
pro-
bation
officer’s
conviction
that
the
&dquo;care
versus
control&dquo;
controversy
is
settled.
Nor
indeed
are
a
number
of
other
related
issues
about
the
philosophy
of
the
Probation
and
.After-Care
Service;
issues
that
have
occupied
many
people
in
recent
years.
Such
debates
seem
to
have
one
thing
in
common,
namely
their
inconclusiveness.
This,
it
appears
to
me,
stems
from
a
lack
of
an
appreciation
of
the
major
tasks
facing
the
Ser-
vice
today
and
a
lack
of
an
awareness
of
its
relationship
to
other
sectors
of
the
criminal
justice
system.
England
and
Wales
now
have
the
highest prison
population
of .
all
time:
just
short
of
42,000.
The
actual
figure
has
assumed
some
signifi-
cance
since
the
Home
Secretary
said
in
July
1975,
&dquo;the
prison
population
now
stands
at
40,400.
It
has
never
been
higher.
If
it
should
rise
to
say
42,000
conditions
in
the
system
would
approach
the
intolerable
and
dramatic
action
to
relieve
the
position
will
be
inescapable&dquo;.
This
relent-
less
rise
in
the
prison
population
has
happened
despite
the
rapid
ex-
pansion
of
the
Probation
Service
and
despite
legislation
which
has
en-
abled
the
development
of
a
greater
variety
of
alternatives
to
prison
than
ever
before.
Ministers
of
whichever
party,
prison
staff,
probation
officers
and
others
responsible
for
our
penal
system
all
agree
first
that
the
pre-
sent
prison
population
is
far
too
high,
and
secondly
that
it
contains
many,
probably
a
majority,
who
could with
safety
be
contained
in
the
community.
Meanwhile
thousands
of
men
and
women
are
incarcerated
in
conditions
which
are
a
degrading
insult
to
a
society
which
in
many
other
fields
takes
pride
in
its
civilised
behavour.
Sir
Winston
Churchill
when
Home
Secretary
claimed
that
a
country’s
civilisation
could
be
measured
by
the
way
it
treated
its
criminals.
Mr
Roy
Jenkins
very
re-
cently
made
a
similar
comment
describing
the
manner
in
which
we
treated
offenders
as
a
hallmark
of
our
civilisation.
The
size
of
our- pre-
sent
prison
population
is
brought
into
sharp
focus
when
compared
with
that
of
our
neighbouring
European
countries.
For
every
~100,U00
of
the
total
population
Holland
has
21
in
prison;
Norway
39;
Sweden
43;
France. 52;
Denmark.54;
Belgium
58;
England
and
Wales
75;.BVest
Ger-
many
81:
Faced
with
such
a
problem
and
acknowledging
that
solutions
To continue reading
Request your trial