A Supportive Role
| Author | Bill Beaumont |
| Published date | 01 September 1976 |
| Date | 01 September 1976 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/026455057602300305 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
73
Professional
organisations
have
an
important
part
to
play
in
articulat-
ing
and
reinforcing
the standards
and
beliefs
of
the
Service
but
we
may
also
need
to
develop
something
which
will
give
national
focus
to
our
activities
yet
respects
our
independence.
There
is
a
substantial
body
of
knowledge
emerging
from
research,
practical
experience
of
work
with
offenders
and
administration,
which
needs
to
be
retained
and
extended.
Quite
what
form
it
should
take
has
no
place
in
this
paper
but
I
fear
that
unless
there
is
a
structure
outside
the
Home
Office
which
represents
probation
affairs
we
shall
become
fragmented
and
fail
to
make
the
impact
we
should
on
either
social
work
or
the
penal
system.
A
Supportive
Role
BILL
BEAUMONT
Inner
London
I
HOPE
I
am
not
the
only
contributor
to
this
special
edition
of
Probation
rournal
to
conclude
that
the
search
for
a
&dquo;philosophy
of
probation&dquo;
is
a
fruitless
one.
The
Probation
and
After-Care
Service
is
an
arm
of
the
state-it
is
given
a
job
to
do
and,
by
and
large,
it
does
it.
Probation
officers
do
not
like
being
reminded
of
this
(as
they
were
in
the
last
issue
of
this
journal)
but
when
we
try
to
ignore
this
simple
fact
we
often
appear
vague
and
precious,
creating
a
mystifying
wonderland
where
&dquo;professional&dquo;
values
and
judgments
flourish
without
political
constraints.
The
Probation
Service
cannot
be
viewed
in
isolation
from
the
society
which
it
serves
and
it
is
surely
not
a
body
which
could
conceivably
possess
or
operate
a
discrete
philosophy
of
its
own.
This
does
not
mean
that
we
cannot
examine
carefully
the
job
we
are
expected
to
do,
the
methods
we
adopt
for
doing
it
and
the
effect
of
our
efforts.
Such
examination
is
particularly
needed
now
when
all
the
old
certainties
seem
to
be
disintegrating.
Probation
officers
used
to
feel
morally
secure
in
knowing
what
was
&dquo;right
behaviour&dquo;
and
at
least
their
aims
were
clear.
The
introduction
of
wider
political
and
sociologi-
cal
perspectives
has
removed
such
comforting
certainty.
Even
when
their
aims
became
less
clear,
probation
oflicers
could
feel
safe
in
the
knowledge
that
they
had
a
method,
an
unchallengeable
professional
ex-
pertise-they
believed
in
the
efficacy
of
psychoanalytically
orientated
case-work.
Their
faith
in
this
method
has
proved
peculiarly
persistent
although
it
must
have been
evident
early
that
this
method
was
inappro-
priate
in
the
great
majority
of
cases
with
which
the
Probation
Service
deals.
Most
probation
clients
are
reluctant
conscripts
to
the
treatment
pro-
cess,
unmotivated
towards
introspection,
unused
to
verbalising
their
feelings
and
unconvinced
that
fault
he5
with
them.
Even
for
the
min-
ority
of
clients
drawn
to
the
casework
method,
the
probation
officer
is
usually
structurally
constrained
from
offering
the
time
the
method
is
generally
acknowledged
to
require.
Now
it
seems
few
probation
officers,
retain
a
strong
belief
in
this
approach,
and
operate
it
half-heartedly
To continue reading
Request your trial