Risk Management and/or Punishment in the Community: Supervising Conditional Sentences
| Author | Denis C. Bracken |
| Pages | 71-82 |
Risk Management And/Or Punishment In The C ommunity: Supervising Conditional Sentences
71
RISK M A N AGEM EN T A N D/OR
PU N ISHM EN T I N T H E CO M MU N I T Y :
SUPERV I SIN G CON DI T I ON A L
SEN TEN CES
Denis C Bracken, Associate Professor, University of Manitoba and
Visiting Lecturer, Glasgow School of Social Work, Universities of
Glasgow and Strathclyde
A b st r a ct
This paper is based on a small, qualitative study of probation officers’ perceptions of the
supervision of offenders sentenced to a conditional sentence. A conditional sentence is
imposed in Canada when a judge deems custody to be an appropriate disposition, but feels
that the sentence could be safely served in the community. Probation officers perceived
the tension between focusing supervision on compliance with the punitive conditions
which frequently are part of a conditional sentence, and developing a strategy for
intervention based in the What Works principles of risk assessment, identification of
criminogenic need, and responsivity-based interventions.
Keywords: conditional sentence, probation supervision, compliance
Int r od uct ion
The introduction of what has been termed the W hat Works or Effective Practice
frameworks for offender management has placed considerable emphasis on assessment of
risk to re-offend, determination of individual factors which influence offending, and
strategies of programmatic interventions as the foundations for contemporary practice
with offenders. Risk assessment instruments are a basic tool for those who manage
offenders in custody as well as in the community. (A ndrews, Bonta & Wormith, 20 06;
Maurutto & Hanna-Moffat, 20 06). T he identification of criminogenic needs, the targets
of intervention designed to lower the risk of re-offending, follows from risk assessment.
The importance of the responsivity principle (matching intervention with offender
learning style) is emphasized in the W hat Works/Effective Practice initiati ves, as well as in
the supportin g literature. Interventions should be focused on those offenders in the ‘high’
or ‘medi um’ risk category, and resources allocated in terms of both monitoring and
program provision mostly to those offenders. T hose with a low risk score sh ould receive
minimal attention and resources. (Ch apman & Hough, 1998) .
Discussions on the use of these instruments have also focussed on how suc h technologies
of risk have made an impac t on the way in which offenders are viewed. Offenders are
thought amenable to ‘treatment’ as part of a risk-based case management strategy.
To continue reading
Request your trial