The Experience of Prison Recall in England and Wales
| Published date | 01 June 2019 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/hojo.12306 |
| Date | 01 June 2019 |
| Author | FLORA FITZALAN HOWARD |
The Howard Journal Vol58 No 2. June 2019 DOI: 10.1111/hojo.12306
ISSN 2059-1098, pp. 180–201
The Experience of Prison Recall
in England and Wales
FLORA FITZALAN HOWARD
Forensic Psychologist and Researcher, Her Majesty’s Prison and Probation
Service (HMPPS)
Abstract: The number of people recalled to custody in England and Wales has increased
in recent years. Improving successful re-release by engaging people in an effective recall
process would achieve better outcomes for prisons, probation, and the public. Analysing
in-depth accounts of seven men, recall was experienced as painful and damaging rather
than rehabilitative, lacking in credibility and legitimacy, and as a process faced alone.
Progression was inhibited by hopelessness and powerlessness. Some expressed motivation
for the future, but others intended to disengage from supervision. There is a need for
greater procedural justice, collaboration, autonomy, hope, and trust, in the recall process
and supervisory relationships.
Keywords: experience; prison; recall; rehabilitation
Introduction
In England and Wales, a system of early release exists whereby individuals
are released to serve the remainder of their sentences in the community
on licence under supervision. The primary aim of recall is public protec-
tion, and can be implemented for breaching licence conditions, for be-
haviour that gives cause for concern (increased risk of reoffending or risk
of serious harm) or for committing a further offence (National Offender
Management Service 2014). People who are recalled to prison represent a
sizeable group of Her Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS)1
caseload. On 30 June 2018, there were approximately 6,300 recalled pris-
oners in custody in England and Wales, accounting for 10% of the prison
population (Ministry of Justice 2018).
The total number of people being recalled to prison has increased in
recent years; in 2015 the number rose by 22% from the year before, to
around 21,500, remained around that level in 2016 and increased again
slightly in 2017, to around 21,900 (Ministry of Justice 2015, 2016a, 2017).
One of the main reasons for the increase in 2015 was licence supervision
being extended to people serving short sentences (of less than one year),
This article is published with the permission of the Controller of HMSO and the Queen’s
Printer for Scotland.
180
C
2019 Crown copyright. The Howard Journal of Crime and Justice C
2019 The Howard League
and John Wiley & Sons Ltd
The Howard Journal Vol58 No 2. June 2019
ISSN 2059-1098, pp. 180–201
under the Offender Rehabilitation Act (ORA) 2014. If these individuals
were excluded, the overall recall figure for 2015 would have decreased
from 2014 (Ministry of Justice 2015).
The recall and re-release process differs depending on the original
sentence received. For determinate sentenced individuals, two types of
recall apply: the fixed-term recall (14 or 28 days in prison followed by
automatic re-release) and the standard recall (a recall potentially until
sentence end date, with re-release decisions made by the Parole Board
or HMPPS’s Safer Custody and Public Protection Group using Secretary
of State executive powers).2Indeterminate sentenced individuals are only
eligible for indeterminate recall, with re-release decisions governed by the
Parole Boa rd.
It is in the interests of HMPPS, the public, and recalled individuals, that
the decision making regarding recalled prisoners be as effective as possible,
and the rise in recall numbers be fully understood and, if possible, halted
or reduced. Profiling in 2014 (Fitzalan Howard et al. 2018) suggested that
recalled prisoners are at particularly high risk of reoffending, and of those
re-released under executive re-release powers, almost 50% are re-recalled
to custody again before their sentence is complete, supporting the need for
additional attention to be given to this group. In 2015, HMPPS commis-
sioned a programme of research to develop an evidence-based systematic
approach for the review and management of determinate sentenced stan-
dard recalled prisoners. This programme included the aforementioned
profile of the recalled prisoner population, qualitative investigations of the
experience of recalled men and recalled women, and a survey of commu-
nity offender managers (OMs) and recalled prisoners.
This study is one of the qualitative studies. It examines how recall is
experienced by men, with the ultimate aim of better understanding how
to engage recalled prisoners in an effective and rehabilitative recall process
and inform HMPPS practice.
Previous Research on Recall
Surprisingly little research, especially in England and Wales, has sought
to understand the in-depth experience of recalled prisoners. The first of
two such studies investigated the perceptions of procedural fairness of
20 recalled men convicted of sexual offences in England (Digard 2010).
Participants perceived recall to be procedurally unjust for a variety of rea-
sons, such as the perceived subjective nature of licence conditions, lack of
clarity over the purpose of recall and inconsistent decision making, the
inability to defend oneself or take part in decision making, the long wait
times for reviews, and the perceived insufficient authority of those instigat-
ing recall. Imprisonment on recall was subsequently interpreted and expe-
rienced as punitive, rather than rehabilitative or supportive, and five con-
cerning consequences of these perceptions were identified. Individuals are
likely to disengage and become less compliant, the quality of relationships
between prisoners and their probation officers declines, mental well-being
can be compromised by traumatic experiences of recall, individuals ‘give
181
C
2019 Crown copyright. The Howard Journal of Crime and Justice C
2019 The Howard
League and John Wiley & Sons Ltd
To continue reading
Request your trial