Mission Impossible? The professionalisation of Austrian probation between desistance and “what works”
| Published date | 01 April 2019 |
| DOI | 10.1177/2066220319852372 |
| Author | Veronika Hofinger |
| Date | 01 April 2019 |
| Subject Matter | Original Articles |
https://doi.org/10.1177/2066220319852372
European Journal of Probation
2019, Vol. 11(1) 1 –13
© The Author(s) 2019
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/2066220319852372
journals.sagepub.com/home/ejp
Mission Impossible? The
professionalisation of Austrian
probation between desistance
and “what works”
Veronika Hofinger
Institut fuer Rechts- und Kriminalsoziologie, Wien, Austria
Abstract
Over the last few years, desistance research has gained importance as an alternative
to the risk-based “what works” approach. When significant proponents speak of a new
desistance-paradigm arising, it has to be borne in mind that their analyses focus mainly
on the practice of probation in the UK where dramatic restructuring and cost-cutting
were implemented under the “what works” label. This paper presents the results of a
research project investigating the implementation of a cognitive behavioural programme
in probation in Austria. This programme, developed on the basis of “what works” and
Risk-Need-Responsivity ("RNR")-principles, is assessed from a desistance perspective.
Probationers themselves reflect on what helped them to “go straight” and what role the
programme played in the desistance process. It is shown that the “what works”- and the
desistance-perspective may complement each other under specific circumstances, even
if certain conceptual differences remain.
Keywords
Cognitive behavioural programme, desistance, probation, professionalisation,
recidivism, risk, what works
Introduction
The Austrian probation service is currently undergoing a fundamental transformation. In
the post-war period and the golden age of the conservative-corporatist model of the wel-
fare state (Esping-Andersen, 1990), probation in Austria was based on psychoanalytic
concepts and focused primarily on the relationship between the probationer and their
probation officer, allowing freedom in the choice of methods and approaches. At the
Corresponding author:
Veronika Hofinger, Institut fuer Rechts- und Kriminalsoziologie, Museumstr. 5, Wien 1070, Austria.
Email: veronika.hofinger@irks.at
852372EJP0010.1177/2066220319852372European Journal of ProbationHonger
2019
Original Article
To continue reading
Request your trial