‘Once a finger is pointed at you, that part of you has gone’: The completion of Horizon programme in the community and carceral citizenship for men with sexual convictions
| Published date | 01 March 2024 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/02645505231221198 |
| Author | Andrew Fowler,Peter Brown,Thomas Bickley |
| Date | 01 March 2024 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
‘Once a finger is
pointed at you, that
part of you has gone’:
The completion of
Horizon programme in
the community and
carceral citizenship for
men with sexual
convictions
Andrew Fowler
Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield, UK
Peter Brown
Probation Service, Rotherham, UK
Thomas Bickley
Project Collaborator, UK
Abstract
This study presents an analysis of the experiences of 15 men convicted of sexual
offences, from England and Wales, who have completed the Horizon treatment pro-
gramme in the community, facilitated by The Probation Service. We found that whilst
men felt initially coerced into the programme, finishing the programme was experi-
enced as a significant loss of support. Beyond the programme, the men described
the constraints on their citizenship, difficulty accessing support, and rejection in soci-
ety due to their offence. We conclude by discussing the limitations of personal
Corresponding Author:
Andrew Fowler, Department of Law and Criminology, Sheffield Hallam University, Heart of the Campus
Building, Collegiate Crescent, Collegiate Campus, Sheffield S10 2BQ, UK.
Email: a.fowler@shu.ac.uk
Article The Journal of Communit
y
and Criminal Justice
Probation Journal
2024, Vol. 71(1) 6–25
© The Author(s) 2024
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/02645505231221198
journals.sagepub.com/home/prb
rehabilitation, the need for social rehabilitation, including tailored support beyond the
programme, the importance of user voice and a ‘community integration paradox’.
Keywords
community integration, shame, stigmatisation, citizenship, sexual offending
Introduction
This paper analyses community integration following the completion of the Horizon
programme by men on licence and on community sentences and –more widely –
probation supervision through the lens of carceral citizenship (Miller and Stuart,
2017) and four forms of rehabilitation (McNeill, 2012; McNeill and Graham
2021; Renehan and Henry, 2022). We consider what integration looks like and
argue that the end of Horizon and probation supervision should be considered as
a significant stage in the process of community integration. There is limited qualita-
tive research about men convicted of sexual offences on community sentences in
England and Wales.
A challenge for this article has been to find the appropriate terms to describe the
process or status for someone who has completed the Horizon programme in the
community and their relationship with society or the community. If the participants
were leaving prison there are a range of familiar terms to describe this process,
for example, re-entry, reintegration and resettlement. This article uses the term
‘community integration’(see McCartan, 2022: 9–10; McCartan et al., 2021;
Winder, 2022: 12), which does not presume the participants were integrated
before sentencing and is inclusive of people on community sentences or custodial
sentences. The term community is considered essential to the reintegration of men
convicted of sexual offences (McAlinden, 2011, 2016; McNeill, 2012; McNeill
and Graham, 2021). We consider the role of Horizon in this community integration
process through the experiences of the participants in the research.
In research with men convicted of sexual offences, the reintegration process gen-
erally focuses on the period following the person’s re-entry to society from prison
which is only partially helpful for our understanding of the cohort in this research
because those on community penalties –who do not leave prison as part of their
reintegration process –are rendered invisible. The end of probation supervision
or an intervention has received little attention in academic literature. HM
Inspectorate of Probation (2020) draws attention to the evidence base that supports
the importance of effective relationships with mandated clients to change attitudes
and behaviours, adopting the term ‘working alliance’when considering the evi-
dence base for supervision skills. Whilst rooted in psychotherapy (see Bordin,
1979; Raynor, 2014), the relationship between the probation practitioner and
person on probation differs from the therapeutic relationship by, for example,
having no requirement for consent (see Raynor, 2014). Renehan and Henry
(2022: 71) characterise the relationship between the group programme facilitator
and group member as a ‘therapeutic alliance’. Importantly, in psychotherapy
Fowler et al. 7
To continue reading
Request your trial