A typology of prison officer approaches to care
| Date | 01 November 2011 |
| Author | Sarah Tait |
| Published date | 01 November 2011 |
| DOI | 10.1177/1477370811413804 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
European Journal of Criminology
8(6) 440 –454
© The Author(s) 2011
Reprints and permission: sagepub.
co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1477370811413804
euc.sagepub.com
A typology of prison officer
approaches to care
Sarah Tait
University of Cambridge, UK
Abstract
This article presents a typology of prison officer approaches to caring for prisoners, based
on qualitative fieldwork in one men’s and one women’s prison. Five distinct approaches were
identified: true carer, limited carer, old school, conflicted and ‘damaged’. Officers with each caring
style shared a particular view of prisoners as a group, and varied in their adherence to traditional
prison officer cultural norms. Length of experience and gender were related to caring approach,
as were work environment and experience of trauma. I argue that all prison officers contended
with care in their work, and I consider the personal and institutional factors that shaped the
quality of care for prisoners.
Keywords
care, prison culture, prison officers, staff–prisoner relationships
Introduction
The concept of ‘care’ is not often associated with prison life, but it is nonetheless central
to staff–prisoner relationships. Although there has been increasing official recognition of
officers’ welfare responsibilities, what this means in practice remains unclear. This study
is the first systematic exploration of how officers conceptualize and operationalize ‘care’
in their work. I present a typology of prison officer approaches to care, based on qualita-
tive fieldwork in two contrasting prison settings.
Research on prison staff has tended to emphasize the conflict between providing
support and maintaining authority and control (Cheek and Miller, 1983; Johnson, 1977;
Sykes, 1956). Several authors have noted the structural limits on the extent of officer
involvement with prisoners, such as their role in surveillance and administration of
punishment (Hannah-Moffat, 1995), accusations of sexual relations with inmates
(Zimmer, 1986) and lack of support for officers to express their emotions about working
Corresponding author:
Dr Sarah Tait, Visiting Scholar, Institute of Criminology, University of Cambridge, Sidgwick Avenue,
Cambridge CB3 9DA, UK.
Email: sarahltait@gmail.com
413804EUC8610.1177/1477370811413804TaitEuropean Journal of Criminology
Article
To continue reading
Request your trial