Purity or Expediency?
| Published date | 01 March 1982 |
| DOI | 10.1177/026455058202900109 |
| Author | Nigel Walker |
| Date | 01 March 1982 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
24
PURITY
or
EXPEDIENCY?
Extracts
from
a
Presidential
Address
Professor
Nigel
Walker
President
of
NAPO
Many
people
were
impressed
and
stimulated
by
Prof
Walker’s
address
to
Conference
last
October
and
we
have
received
several
requests
to
reprint
it.
We
are
happy
to
print
two
extracts
here,
and
are
grateful
to
Nigel
Walker
for
permission
to
do
so.
The
first
deals
with
the
thorny
question
of
expediency
and
eclecticism
versus
single-minded
moral
or
theoretical
approaches;
the
second
with
a
peculiarly
British
injustice:
our
apparent
lack
of
concern
to
protect
the
anonymity
of
defendants.
I
would
like
to
be
allowed
to
com-
ment
on
an
issue
which
seems
to
underlie
several
developments
which
have
disturbed
the
Probation
and
After-
Care
Service
during
the
quarter
of
a
century
for
which
I
have
been
involved
in
its
affairs.
(It is
a
quarter
of
a
cen-
tury,
because
in
the
middle
of
the
nine-
teen-fifties
I
was
concerned
with
the
affairs
of
the
Scottish
Probation
Service,
although
I
cannot
claim
credit
for
any-
thing
that
happened
there.)
The
issue
I
am
talking
about
is
between
influence
through
personal
relationships
and
influence
through
expedients.
By
expedients
I
mean
any-
thing
from
hostels
to
day
training
centres,
from
community
service
to
72-
hour
recalls
(you
remember
that
much-
execrated
proposal
of
the
Younger
Committee
which
provoked
the
phrase
&dquo;screws
on
wheels&dquo;?).
It
seems
that
there
is
still
a
tension
between
those
who
would
like
probation
or
after-care
to
rely
entirely-or
at
least
as
entirely
as
is
humanly
possible-on
whatever
rela-
tionship
can
be
established
with
the
offender,
and
those
who
are
prepared
to
rely
on
whatever
expedients-within
limits
of
course-seems
to
help
keep
him
out
of
trouble.
Where
do
you
draw
the
line?
If
that
is
the
nature
of
the
issue
or
tension,
I
have
several
questions
to
raise.
The
first
is
for
those
who
are
prepared
to
rely
on
what,
for
want
of
a
better
word,
I
call
’expedients’,
not
meaning
to
imply
any
criticism.
&dquo;Where
do
you
draw
the
line?&dquo;
is
an
obvious
question.
Do
you
draw
it
so as
to
exclude
72-hour
custody,
or
required
daily
attendance
at
a
centre?
And
so
on.
But
the
important
question,
whatever
line
you
draw,
is
&dquo;Why
do
you
draw
it
there
or
anywhere
else?&dquo;
Are
you
drawing
it
on
policy
grounds
or
on
ethical
grounds?
By
’policy
grounds’
I
mean
the
belief
that
in
the
short
or
long
run
you
will
get
better
results
if
you
rule
out
the
expedient
in
question.
By
ethical
grounds
I
mean
the
belief
that
even
if
Interesting
and
important
things
happen
at
Conference
...
make
sure
to
book
this
year’s
date
for
Brighton:
’14-17
October.
To continue reading
Request your trial