A Returning Probation Officer's Thoughts on the Erosion of Professionalism in Offender Management and the Transforming Rehabilitation Agenda
Author | Julia Norton |
Pages | 189-190 |
189
THOUGHT PIECE
'Thought Pieces' are papers which draw on the author's personal knowledge and
experience to offer stimulating and thought provoking ideas relevant to the aims of the
Journal. The ideas are located in an academic, research, and/or practice context and all
papers are peer reviewed. Responses to them should be submitted to the Journal in the
normal way.
A RETURNING PROBATION OFFICER'S THOUGHTS ON
THE EROSION OF PROFESSIONALISM IN OFFENDER
MANAGEMENT AND THE TRANSFORMING
REHABILITATION AGENDA
Julia Norton, Probation Officer
Professionals are often defined as those who have their k nowledge certified by way of
examination and that practice is grounded in theory. Traditionally Probation Officers have
shared a set of core values which are underpinned by the notion of working for the
greater good whilst recognising the intrinsic wor th of the individual. My own view is that
the Probation Officer qualification now serves as a ‘badge of competency’, is government
driven and should be viewed in the context of a capit alist state. To this end it is important
to consider if officers are being taught competency in specific tasks rather than intellectual
development. The bookshelves in probation offices used to cont ain published academic
works from practitioners, sadly these authors a re not being replaced by their younger
counterparts. One considers if this was part of the plan a ll along to place officers in an
increasingly restrained environment where ‘doing the job’ becomes the only prio rity. The
pre-sentence report, arguably one of the most important analytical documents, has now
in the main been reduced to a series of tick boxes in an electronic format which prohibits
any creative alteration of text: ‘computer says no’. Surely investment in the promotion of
autonomy and the intellectual potential of staff ensures continued professional
development, and this is not necessarily satisfied by the generic ‘one size fits all’ training.
Ideally one would prefer employers to con sider sponsoring staff to complete higher
qualifications and foster an environment where their own research in forms practice.
Arguably practitioners now perceive that their role is bein g devalued and that rather than
the MOJ raising standards, there is a determined effort being made to undermine
British Journal of Community Justice
©2013 Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield
ISSN 1475-0279
Vol. 11(2-3): 189-190
To continue reading
Request your trial