From Crime to Rehabilitation M. J. A. GLICKMAN Gower, 1983; unpriced
| Author | Huw Rees |
| Published date | 01 December 1983 |
| Date | 01 December 1983 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/026455058303000409 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
144
himself
should
assume
responsibility
for
the
payment
of the
fine,
compensation
or
costs,
or for
part
of
it;
the
relationship
between
the
child
or
young
person
and
the
parent
or
guardian
and
the
likely
effect
on
that
relationship
of
ordering
that
the
parent
or
guardian
pay
the
sums
adjudged ;
and
the
respective
means
of the
child
or
young
person
and
the
parent
or
guardian.’
The
paragraph
con-
cludes :
’The
Act
leaves
the
assessment
of
what
was
reasonable
or
unreasonable
m
the
circum-
stances
to
the
discretion
of
the
court;
but
the
Government
believes
that
considerations
such
as
those
mentioned
above
may
well
be
among
those
to
which
courts
will
wish
to
have
regard
in
coming
to
their
decision
as
to
what
constitutes
un-
reasonableness
in
a
particular
case.’
In
other
words,
if
it
seems
likely
that relation-
ships
between
a
parent
and
a
child
would
be
wrecked
by
transferring
the
fine;
or
if
the
court
believes
that
a
child
should
learn
to
take
responsi-
bility
for
his
actions,
and
at
the
same
time
earn
re-
acceptance
by
paying
some
compensation
for
the
harm
caused
to
his
victim;
then
the
court
can
reasonably
require
the
child
to
pay,
and
it
should
not
be
bamboozled
by
the
Act
into
doing
other-
wise.
Probation
officers
may
wish
to
make
sure
courts
are
aware
of
this.
REFERENCES
1
’Criminal
Law
Act
1977:
time
to
think
again ’
Howard Journal
1978 17(1
),
5-6
2
Kilbrandon
Report
Children
and
young
persons.
Scotland
Cmnd
2306.
HMSO
1964
3
H
Wilson
’Parental
responsibility
and
delin-
quency.
reflections
on
a
White
Paper
proposal.’
Howard Journal,
21(1),
23-34
1982
From
Crime
to
Rehabilitation
M.
J.
A.
GLICKMAN
Gower,
1983;
unpriced.
The
title
of
this
book
is
a
statement
which
has
been
severely
questioned
recently.
’The
collapse
of
the
rehabilitative
ideal’
has
seemed
to
many
to
cast
serious
doubt
on
the
continuance
of
the
Probation
Service
m
its
present
form. This
book
will,
I think,
contribute
significantly
to
the debate
on
rehabilitation
and
as
I
read
it,
provide
material
from
which
practitioners
may
build
in
the
future.
It
is
not
exactly
a
success
story.
The
’Unit’
was
set
up
in
1974
in
Cambridge
by
NACRO
and
funded
by
the
Home
Office
initially
for
3
years.
It
eventually
lasted
for
5
years
and
in
the
6th
year
was
transferred
into
a
Probation
Hostel.
The
seed
of the
idea
was
probably
with
Douglas
Curtis
(an
ex-offender
whose
educational
success
became
notorious)
but
many
others
besides
Curtis
believed
that
lack
of
educational
opportunity
could
be
a
cause
of
crime.
These
included
Nicholas
Hinton
and
the
then
chairman
of
the
Parole
Board.
NACRO
appomted
a
non-residential
project
leader
and
recruited
in
all
48
people
from
the
penal
system.
They
were
offered
the
’chance
to
break
back
into
formal
education
in
the
hope
of
gaining
a
qualification’.
They
were
provided
with
a
bed
sitting
room
each
and
opportunities
to
study
at
the
Tech
and
receive
concentrated
teaching
at
the
Umt
to
’0
and
’A’
level.
Ghckman
was
appointed
as
researcher
in
1975.
He
is
a
sociologist
who
has
devised
an
interesting
and
novel
framework
for
analysing
the
policy
processes
and
the
careers
of
the
residents.
Occasionally
he
departs
from
the
role
of
researcher
and
becomes
involved
in
the
lives
of residents,
but
he
emerges
as
a
trenchant,
forthright,
but
not
un-
sympathetic
cntic
of the
project.
He
does
not
spare
the
long-suffenng
project
leader
nor
the
ex-public
school
teacher
who
seemed
a
most
inappropriate
choice
for
the
post
of
tutor
His
conclusions
are
interesting.
Among
these
are
the
following:
1)
Rehabilitation
did
take
place
in
at
least
5
cases.
(Rehabilitation
is
defined
as
’becoming
more
law-abiding’.)
2)
Removal
from
accustomed
environment
may
have
a
rehabilitative
influence.
3)
Education
m
itself
is
not
rehabilitative.
Commtment
to
education
as
rehabilitative
has
not
been
disproved,
but
commitment
to
other
areas
of
action
such
as
marriage,
may
be
just
as
effective.
4)
The
main
needs
of
ex-offenders
who
wish
to
return
to
education
are
not
a
core
cumculum
and
formalised
learning
such
as
the
Unit
msisted
on,
but
opportunities
to
acquire
study
skills,
learrung
how
to
learn
formally
and
help
in
dealing
with
the
teachmg
and
social
require-
ments
of
traditional
education
institutions.
These
conclusions
are
certainly
not
what
NACRO
hoped
for
-
but
they
are
to
be
com-
mended
for
sponsonng
the
project
and
for
mviting
Glickman
to
research
it.
The
unintended
conse-
quences
of
the
project
and
its
evaluation
may
be
as
valuable
as
anythmg
else
that
came
out
of
it.
The
case
studies
will
be
read
with
interest
by
probation
officers
who
will
recognise
the
ring
of
truth
m
them,
but
the
study
is
a
valuable
contribution
to
the
literature
of
rehabilitation,
sheds
light
on
some
dark
places,
and
on
the
whole
should
bring
hope
rather
than
despair
to
all
those
who
ponder
the
problems
of
crime.
Huw
REES
London
School
of Economics
To continue reading
Request your trial