Space, place and supervision
| DOI | 10.1177/0264550518772358 |
| Published date | 01 June 2018 |
| Date | 01 June 2018 |
| Author | Nicola Carr |
| Subject Matter | Editorial |
Editorial
Space, place
and supervision
The spaces and places where community sanctions and measures (CSM) are
enacted are important. As the descriptor suggests, ‘community’ is one of the
defining features of CSMs, but the multiple facets of community – encompassing
space, place and a sense of belonging or otherwise – make it a hard concept to
define. With much attention within probation focused on the interpersonal relations
between the supervised and the supervisee, arguably the wider community
dimension of practice is neglected (Bottoms, 2008). The spaces and places where
supervision occurs and, more importantly, where people live when subject to
supervision, merits closer analysis. This is particularly the case for Approved Pre-
mises (also known as Probation Hostels), which occupy a liminal space between
prison and community.
Approved Premises (APs) are a relatively invisible part of the criminal justice
system, despite the fact that they play an important role in people’s transitions from
prison to community, particularly where there are public protection concerns. In
England and Wales there are just over 100 Approved Premises, accommodating
approximately 2000 people. Most of those resident in APs are subject to post-
custodial licence conditions and the vast majority are assessed as presenting a
high risk of serious harm. A recent inspection report by HM Inspectorate of Pro-
bation found that APs were exceptional at protecting the public, but that the quality
of resettlement and rehabilitation services was mixed (HMIP, 2017). There are too
few hostels and provision is geographically patchy. In terms of overall capacity,
women are particularly poorly served – there are just six hostels for women in
England and Wales (HMIP, 2017).
The role of probation hostels has clearly evolved over time, but despite their
important function, they have received relatively limited academic attention (Burnett
and Eaton, 2004; HMIP, 2017). In this journal there have been some contributions
on the topic including considerations of ‘model regimes’ in Approved Premises
(Cherry and Cheston, 2006), and a study on the resettlement prospects of residents
with mental health needs moving from hostels back into the community (Stevens
et al., 2011). However, compared to other areas of probation practice it is true to
say that there has been relatively limited coverage of hostels in the pages of this
journal. We are therefore particularly pleased to announce that the winner of the
Probation Journal’s best paper prize for 2017 is Keir Irwin-Rogers for his article
‘Staff-resident relationships in Approved Premises: What a difference a door
Probation Journal
2018, Vol. 65(2) 131–134
ªThe Author(s) 2018
Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0264550518772358
journals.sagepub.com/home/prb
The Journal of Community and Criminal Justice
To continue reading
Request your trial