Facilitators of probation-based domestic violence perpetrator programmes: ‘Who’s in the room?’
| Author | Nicole Renehan |
| Published date | 01 September 2021 |
| Date | 01 September 2021 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/02645505211025083 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Article
Facilitators of
probation-based
domestic violence
perpetrator
programmes: ‘Who’s
in the room?’
Nicole Renehan
University of Manchester, UK
Abstract
The role that probation practitioners play in the desistance process has begun to
receive much needed attention. Yet, the experiences of facilitators of probation-based,
domestic violence perpetrator programmes have long been neglected. This article
explores the experiences and wellbeing of eight facilitators from one cohort of the
Building Better Relationships (BBR) programme in England. Drawing upon five-
months’ observations and in-depth interviews, I demonstrate how working with
domestically violent men with insufficient knowledge, experience, or support, exa-
cerbated within the context of Transforming Rehabilitation reforms, impacted signifi-
cantly on facilitator well-being, professional identities, and practice. Practice
implications are discussed.
Keywords
building better relationships, domestic violence perpetrator programmes, facilitators,
skills, well-being
Corresponding Author:
Nicole Renehan, Centre for Criminology and CriminalJustice,UniversityofManchester, Williamson
Building, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9PL, UK.
Email: nicole.renehan@manchester.ac.uk
Probation Journal
ªThe Author(s) 2021
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/02645505211025083
journals.sagepub.com/home/prb
The Journal of Community and Criminal Justice
2021, Vol. 68(3) 310–329
[There is] an increasing recognition that how probation interventions are delivered and
by whom is equally if not more important than what is being delivered in terms of
affecting positive outcomes.
Burke (2014: 1)
Introduction
The above quote captures the growing sentiment amongst desistance-focused pro-
bation practitioners and researchers that skills, personal attributes, and relationality
are key features in motivation and offender outcomes (Burke, 2014). What is cur-
ious, then, is the lack of attention more generally directed at facilitators of probation-
based behavioural change programmes who are, arguably, the most significant
agents of change. Building Better Relationships (BBR) is an accredited criminal
justice programme in England and Wales, targeted towards men in heterosexual
relationships who are assessed at medium to high risk, and have been convicted of
assaulting a female partner. BBR, alongside the supervision of low-to-medium risk
offenders, was transferred to the private sector in 2013 and was delivered by
programmes teams within Community Rehabilitation Companies (CRCs). The
Transforming Rehabilitation (TR) agenda has now ended following (although not
necessarily as a result of) a damning inspection in which Her Majesty’s Inspectorate
of Probation concluded that the part-privatisation model of probation services was
‘irredeemably flawed’ (HMIP, 2019). The consequences for probation services and
the wellbeing of probation practitioners has received growing attention (Burke and
Collett, 2016; Burke et al., 2020; Kirton and Guillaume, 2015; Phillips et al.,
2016; Tidmarsh, 2020a, 2020b). However, to date, there has been no research
that has considered the impact of these organisational changes on facilitators who
deliver accredited programmes within CRCs or, crucially, how working with high-
risk domestic abuse perpetrators impacts on them.
A thematic inspection of CRCs found that, while most programmes teams were
‘well trained and experienced’ and ‘enthusiastic’ about their work, other less
experienced staff ‘felt unprepared or unsupported’ (HMIP, 2018). The domestic
abuse inspection offered a rare glimpse into the ‘black box’ of probation-based
Domestic Violence Perpetrator Programmes (DVPPs) and an opportunity to consider
what could be done to strengthen the quality of service being provided. Never-
theless, the central policy recommendation to emerge was to increase referrals and
evaluate programme effectiveness. However, this is unlikely to reveal much about
the impact this work has on those who facilitate BBR or whether they themselves
affect outcomes in any way. In sum, we still do not get to know who is ‘in the room’
(Burke, 2014).
This article addresses this gap in knowledge and calls for a dialogue about the
experiences of a group of practitioners who have all but been forgotten in the
debate between programme fetishism and probation supervision (Durnescu, 2012).
Given there is little known about facilitators of probation based DVPPs, this article
311
Renehan
To continue reading
Request your trial