A New Play
| Published date | 01 September 1955 |
| Date | 01 September 1955 |
| DOI | 10.1177/026455055500701104 |
| Subject Matter | A New Play |
A
NEW
PLAY
Readers might be interested to hear
of
a new three-act
play
called
“
On Probation,” written
by
two members
of
a Repertory Company, namely, the Court Players, and
produced
for
the
first
time at the Empire Theatre, March,
Cambs., recently.
The play aims at showing the reactions
of
a London
youth placed on probation
for
his
part in a robbery with
violence to
a
complete change
of
environment-the home
of
the probation officer-a Vicarage in Sussex. The whole
action
of
the play takes place in the Vicarage and covers
in all
a
period
of
about flve weeks. During this time the
youth meets ‘‘a
bit”
who lives in nearby Lewes;
is
suspected
of
stealing the wages
of
the housekeeper;
absconds, and -ally
is
believed to have committed
murder.
Throughout the play the probation officer sticks to
his
belief
in
his
experiment and despite moments
of
doubt
as
to
his
wisdom he
is
eventually vindicated in
his
actions. We are shown the usual difficulties that a boy
with
a
record (albeit a small one: drunk and disorderly
and robbery with violence!) has to face
by
way
of
tempta-
tion, and
a
scene where the probation omcer tears a
strip
off
the lad
is
really very good.
The
parents
of
the probation omcer are depicted as a
typical country parson and wife. He
is
a little dubious
about
the
effect
of
a
Cockney on the serenity
of
the
village, she having complete faith in her probation
omcer son. The wife
is
a
French girl, whom he met
during the war and whilst backing him up in all his work
she eventually
(as
do
so
many probation omcers’ wives)
takes him to task
for
forgetting his domestic obligations.
There were,
of
course, technical error-
boy
of
18
is
not placed on probation
by
a juvenile court, neither
would he be sent to an approved school. There are too,
criticisms that could be made
of
the
case-work.
The
introduction
of
the Vicar and his wife and the prospec-
tive employer
is
heavy. The Vicar preaches a sermon,
then he and
his
wife get the lad
to
tell them
his
back-
ground, all within
a
matter
of
minutes
of
his
entrance.
The interview
of
the
lad respecting the loss
of
the house-
keeper’s money, was done in front of the rest
of
the
family, though the probation omcer had the foresight to
tell them
to
keep quiet. One wonders what
the
next
move would
be
when, after telling the lad that murder
Committed during a period
of
amnesia would only aesult
in
his
going
to
“
a place where he would receive treatment
for
his
mental condition
as
he was mentally
ill
at
the
time
”
and needs specialist treatment,
it
transpires that
the
lad
was
not
guilty
after all!! Finally, and perhaps
the
wont
error
of
all
is
the probation oIRcer’s statement
that
if
hi8
boy
failed
to
report
to
the Vicarage after being
allowed
to
go to London
to
see
his
aick father, he would
resign
hk
appointment because
of
his failure with this
special
cue.
On
the
other
hand
there
is
much to commend this play
The
authors’ aim
is
to
try
to show another side
of
the
problem
of
delinquency; they feel that such plays as
“
Cosh
Boy,”
“
Pick-up
Qirl,”
etc., stress too much the
glamour, and they have contrived to show the probation
OmCer‘S aide
of
the
work.
I
felt
that
they had done
B
good
job
and
rendered
a
valuable contribution to the
Probation Service. The probation omcer’s
faith
in
his
Fork,
the emphasis on the personal aspect of the work
leave one in no doubt as to €he value
of
probation. It
was pleasing to see the probation officer, who was an
active and energetic young man, handling a lad
of
18
rather than a juvenile, since
so
many people have
the
wrong impression that our work
is
done amongst little
boys.
A.H.H.
-
PROBATION
FORUM
EQUAL PAY
(Continued)
I
am grateful
to
your correspondents who replied
to
my little
note
on equal pay. Despite the eloquent
pleading
of
special cases
by
Mrs.
Balfour and
Miss
King,
I
remain unconvinced and unrepentant. In
1953
the
average case-load
for
men was
58.2;
for women
it
was
40.8.
I
do
not
think
we need argue further over this.
It
is
interesting, however,
to
note that both
Miss
King
and
Mrs. Balfour urge special consideration
for
the differing needs and capacities
of
their female cases.
I
am happy
to
concede them
this
consideration, but
I
cannot understand
why
they
wish
to exempt themselves
and their lady colleagues from similar consideration.
My
point-for the beneflt
of
T.E.P.-is that women
should accept smaller case-loads and lower pay,
as
they have done
in
the past. Women doctors are sensible
about
this.
Readers
of
Dr.
Stephen Taylor’s book,
“
Good
General Practice,”
will
know
that most
of
them recog-
nise that they can do better work
with
smaller panel
lists
and
that, in any case, with less family commit-
ments they have not the same need
as
men to work
so
strenuously.
I
will not dwell on the unfairness that equal
pay
involves in
giving
an equal response to differing needs.
That a family man should be expected to keep, four,
five
or
more people on the same salary that
a
single
woman requires to keep herself
is
obviously absurd.
(Please don’t tell me that single women keep mothers.
Married men have dependent mothers too-and mothers-
in-law).
The real tragedy
of
equal pay
is
that
it
is
a direct
blow at family life. Single women are going to hesitate
before lowering their standards
of
living
by
getting
married. Married women are going to hesitate before
having children and then staying at home
to
look after
them, when they could be out earning
as
much
as
their
husbands. The report
of
the United Nations Congress
at aeneva stresses
the
vital
importance
of
.the
Pamily
in preventing delinquency*. We spend much
of
our
working lives in trying to improve family relationships,
Yet we are subscribing to a social policy which works
against the family. We ought to know better!
[‘Also
of
the payment
to
social workers
of
salaries
commensurate with their training and experience, duties
and
responsibilities.-E~rro~.I
From
Mr.
F.
V.
Jarvis’ contribution under
“Probation
Forum” in the May-June issue
of
N.A.P.O.,
it
would
appear that he
is
in some fear lest women ofacers
will
object
to
equal work for equal pay. Surely such a fear
is
unfounded. Those women omcers
who
in
the past
carried a heavier case load than
did
their male
colleagues
will
welcome the relief which equality brings
:
others will no doubt accept loyally the new position
a8
a fair and logical corollary
of
the rate for the job.
F.
V.
JARVIS.
JEAN
0.
STEVEN.
To continue reading
Request your trial