'In the best interests ...' Dear Sir
| DOI | 10.1177/026455058202900115 |
| Date | 01 March 1982 |
| Published date | 01 March 1982 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
32
to
take
a
prison
wife
to
see
her
husband
is
a
case
of
&dquo;role
strippmg&dquo;
leaves
me
somewhat
aghast
as
I
would
have
thought
that
to
most
people
it
was
seen
in
terms
of
offering
a
service,
perhaps
a
new
service,
and
the
proper
utilisation
of
scarce
professional
resources.
Burn-
ham
comments
that
&dquo;role
stripping&dquo;
also
has
associations
with
the
defeat
&dquo;of
the
campaign
for
a
single
salary
scale
in
1977&dquo;,
a
statement
which
leaves
me
absolutely
nonplussed
-
it
would
have
been
easier
to
have
accepted
this
link
with
the
defeat
of
the
French
armies
at
Waterloo
rather
than
the
example
which
he
cites.
Mr
Burnham’s
views
on
specialisation
and
his
perception
that
this
approach
will
lead
to
further
&dquo;role
stripping&dquo;
similarly
seem
to
be
out
of
touch
with
the
tenor
of
current
attitudes,
for
whilst
not
doubt-
ing
the
tension
which
does
exist
between
the
specialist
and
non-specialist
approach
to
issues,
I
would
draw
his
attention
to
the
fact
that
some
two-thirds
of
the
Loughborough
sample
indicated
that
something
should
be
done
to
create
more
specialist
posts
to
provide
more
oppor-
tunities
for
the
development
of
careers,
etc.
My
own
view
is
that
a
much
stronger
influence
is
also
around
in
the
Service
which
relates
to
the
development
of
the
specialist
approach
and
which
stems
not
from
any
perspective
as
to
whether
it
is
related
or
not
related
to
&dquo;role
stripping&dquo;
but
a
pursuit
in
terms
of
whether
we
can,
by
the
provision
of
specialist
services,
offer
a
better
service
delivery
to
clients.
I
do
sincerely
believe
that
when
we
fail
to
question
the
effectiveness
of
the
structure
of the
Service
then
it
must
ring
warning
bells.
It
is
my
view,
however,
that
such
debates
need
to
be
conducted
on
the
basis
of
evidence
and
not,
as
in
Mr
Burnham’s
article,
on
the
basis
of
pursuing
doctrinaire
views.
Yours
sincerely,
H.
A.
THOMAS
Assistant
Chief
Probation
Officer,
Nottinghamshire
’In
the
best
interests ...’
Dear
Sir,
Thank
you
for
a
very
interesting
and
thought
provoking
’Comment’
in
Proba-
tion
Journal
Vol
28
No
4
December
1981.
This
whole
issue
of
care
and
control
permeates
our
role
as
probation
officers
to
such
an
extent
that
your
article
seemed
to
go
some
way
in
succinctly
expressing
the
narrow
divide
(if
there
is
one)
between
the
two
strands
of
thinking
and
practice
presently
seen
in
our
ser-
vice.
Be
this
as
it
may,
I
was
left
won-
dering
why
you
undermined
for
me
the
strength
of
your
argument
by
unequi-
vocally
ruling
out
the
possibility
of
there
ever
being
a
situation
in
which
it
would
be
right
to
recommend
custody.
Why
should
it
be
that
in
considering
what
is,
as
you
legitimately
suggest,
’in
the
best
interests’
of
the
defendant
officers
ought
to
be
blinkered
in
considering
this
dilemma?
To
think
that
we
can
consider
what
is
&dquo;in
the
best
interests
of&dquo;
the
defen-
dant
is
in
itself
quite
presumptuous,
but
to
do
so
and
at
the
same
time
pretend
we
are
blind
and
ignorant
of the
avail-
ability
of
custody,
is
for
me
a
contra-
diction
which
helps
the
service
lose
credibility.
What
do
we
do
if
custody
is
actually
felt
to
be
’in
the
best
interest’
of
a
defendant?
Yours
sincerely
J.
McCARTNEY
Probation
Officer,
HM
Prison,
Acklington
"...
hectoring
and
one-sided
...’
Dear
Sirs,
I
feel
I
must
write
to
warn
agamst
the
increasingly
hectoring
and
one-sided
tone
which
NAPO
appears
to
be
adopting.
*
First,
the
&dquo;Punishment
or
help?&dquo;
editorial
in
the
Dec
1981
issue;
whilst
ostensibly
discussing
the
limits
of
&dquo;con-
trol&dquo;,
and
referring
to
&dquo;some
persons
knowing
what
is
best for
others&dquo;,
the
Owing
to
the
large
amount
of
correspondence
in
this
edition,
the
1981
INDEX
will
appear
in
June.
To continue reading
Request your trial