The Development of a Mixed Group
| Author | Peter D. Ashley |
| Published date | 01 September 1965 |
| DOI | 10.1177/026455056501100304 |
| Date | 01 September 1965 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
previously enlightened, when they discover that the phrase might not even imply
an individual contact with the probation officer.
Some of these difficulties would be lessened if magistrates could be helped to
understand and sympathise with the group method. Others would be removed
by combining individual interviews with group work, but quite apart from the
time which this would take, there may be technical objections to it, especially
if the individual session became a way of escape for the client from the full
rigours of group interaction. The mutual articulation of the group and individual
approaches-in what kinds of case to use each, and under what circumstances
and in what way to use them jointly-is the most urgent of all these outstanding
problems.
THE DEVELOPMENT
OF A MIXED GROUP
Peter D. Ashley
[An account of a series of discussion groups
held in the Plymouth Probation Office between a number of young men
and women under supervision, originally given
to the South Western Branch Conference in September, 1963]
I HAVE PREVIOUSLY reported on a series of discussions between an all-male
group of probationers and others, in PROBATION (March 1962). The series of
discussions with which this paper is concerned was a continuation of the first
one, which was in fact adjourned during a period of staff shortage. This group
began again in November 1961, with some of the first group, plus others.
There was very much the same kind of discussion as before, and the group
showed many of the same characteristics. Topics were similar: for example,
crime, criminals, parents, politics, religion, films, work and &dquo;women&dquo;.
The meetings were held weekly at the probation ofhce and each lasted for
approximately one hour. The boys were, as before, invited to attend these
discussion groups as an alternative, and sometimes a supplement, to their ordinary
one-to-one probation supervision. No sanctions were imposed if they failed to
attend, although if one were absent for a conspicuous period some follow-up
would be undertaken. The group would simply meet and discussion start spon-
taneously. I did not suggest topics to discuss, nor did I offer opinions on the
subjects raised, despite not infrequent attempts by the group to get me to do this.
My role was, as before, rather like that of a catalyst in a chemical process, in
that I believe I enabled the reactions to go on between the group members
without becoming directly involved in them, though I cannot press this analogy
too far since a catalyst, at the end of the reaction, remains unchanged, and this
was certainly not so in my case. I did, from time to time, attempt to bring
together their viewpoints and verbalise their feelings when these seemed to be
becoming obscure.
During the ninth meeting of this group the seven boys who were present had
been talking about films, notably &dquo;Twist Around The Clock&dquo;, and this had
brought them to discussing the twist and its sexual connotations. They led
94
from this to discussion of sexual promiscuity and were getting quite involved in
their feelings about sexual matters. At this point I was asked to express my
opinion, this being an attempt by the group to secure the opinion of some
authority external to themselves, and the group discussed then my role in the
Group. Immediately after this one of the members said, &dquo;What about having
girls in?&dquo; This was taken up immediately by the rest of the group with great
interest. Various points of view were put forward and these I later summarised
as follows:
1. They felt that the topics might have to be limited to exclude sex.
2. One member felt this would be impossible; he also thought that such a
limitation would affect the spontaneity of discussion.
3. There would have to be a female probation officer present.
4. This being so, and because there was no female probation ofhcer with
experience of groups they felt one should come in and sit in at one of
their discussions before-hand.
5. They might get the wrong sort of girl in-&dquo;the tearaways&dquo;, but this point
of view was contested by some who thought that no doubt the girls would
think the same about them.
6. The number in such a combined group would be important. One suggestion
...
To continue reading
Request your trial