A desistance paradigm for offender management

F. McNeill

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    341 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    In an influential article published in the British Journal of Social Work in 1979, Anthony Bottoms and Bill McWilliams proposed the adoption of a ‘non-treatment paradigm’ for probation practice. Their argument rested on a careful and considered analysis not only of empirical evidence about the ineffectiveness of rehabilitative treatment but also of theoretical, moral and philosophical questions about such interventions. By 1994, emerging evidence about the potential effectiveness of some intervention programmes was sufficient to lead Peter Raynor and Maurice Vanstone to suggest significant revisions to the ‘non-treatment paradigm’. In this article, it is argued that a different but equally relevant form of empirical evidence—that derived from desistance studies—suggests a need to re-evaluate these earlier paradigms for probation practice. This reevaluation is also required by the way that such studies enable us to understand and theorize both desistance itself and the role that penal professionals might play in supporting it. Ultimately, these empirical and theoretical insights drive us back to the complex interfaces between technical and moral questions that preoccupied Bottoms and McWilliams and that should feature more prominently in contemporary debates about the futures of ‘offender management’ and of our penal systems.

    LanguageEnglish
    Pages39-62
    Number of pages24
    JournalCriminology and Criminal Justice
    Volume6
    Issue number1
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - Feb 2006

    Fingerprint

    offender
    probation
    paradigm
    management
    evidence
    social work

    Keywords

    • desistance
    • effectiveness
    • ethics
    • offender management
    • nontreatment paradigm
    • probation

    Cite this

    McNeill, F. / A desistance paradigm for offender management. In: Criminology and Criminal Justice. 2006 ; Vol. 6, No. 1. pp. 39-62.
    @article{672b917ae7b147b381e11b35b3414242,
    title = "A desistance paradigm for offender management",
    abstract = "In an influential article published in the British Journal of Social Work in 1979, Anthony Bottoms and Bill McWilliams proposed the adoption of a ‘non-treatment paradigm’ for probation practice. Their argument rested on a careful and considered analysis not only of empirical evidence about the ineffectiveness of rehabilitative treatment but also of theoretical, moral and philosophical questions about such interventions. By 1994, emerging evidence about the potential effectiveness of some intervention programmes was sufficient to lead Peter Raynor and Maurice Vanstone to suggest significant revisions to the ‘non-treatment paradigm’. In this article, it is argued that a different but equally relevant form of empirical evidence—that derived from desistance studies—suggests a need to re-evaluate these earlier paradigms for probation practice. This reevaluation is also required by the way that such studies enable us to understand and theorize both desistance itself and the role that penal professionals might play in supporting it. Ultimately, these empirical and theoretical insights drive us back to the complex interfaces between technical and moral questions that preoccupied Bottoms and McWilliams and that should feature more prominently in contemporary debates about the futures of ‘offender management’ and of our penal systems.",
    keywords = "desistance , effectiveness, ethics, offender management , nontreatment paradigm, probation",
    author = "F. McNeill",
    year = "2006",
    month = "2",
    doi = "10.1177/1748895806060666",
    language = "English",
    volume = "6",
    pages = "39--62",
    journal = "Criminology and Criminal Justice",
    issn = "1748-8958",
    number = "1",

    }

    A desistance paradigm for offender management. / McNeill, F.

    In: Criminology and Criminal Justice, Vol. 6, No. 1, 02.2006, p. 39-62.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - A desistance paradigm for offender management

    AU - McNeill, F.

    PY - 2006/2

    Y1 - 2006/2

    N2 - In an influential article published in the British Journal of Social Work in 1979, Anthony Bottoms and Bill McWilliams proposed the adoption of a ‘non-treatment paradigm’ for probation practice. Their argument rested on a careful and considered analysis not only of empirical evidence about the ineffectiveness of rehabilitative treatment but also of theoretical, moral and philosophical questions about such interventions. By 1994, emerging evidence about the potential effectiveness of some intervention programmes was sufficient to lead Peter Raynor and Maurice Vanstone to suggest significant revisions to the ‘non-treatment paradigm’. In this article, it is argued that a different but equally relevant form of empirical evidence—that derived from desistance studies—suggests a need to re-evaluate these earlier paradigms for probation practice. This reevaluation is also required by the way that such studies enable us to understand and theorize both desistance itself and the role that penal professionals might play in supporting it. Ultimately, these empirical and theoretical insights drive us back to the complex interfaces between technical and moral questions that preoccupied Bottoms and McWilliams and that should feature more prominently in contemporary debates about the futures of ‘offender management’ and of our penal systems.

    AB - In an influential article published in the British Journal of Social Work in 1979, Anthony Bottoms and Bill McWilliams proposed the adoption of a ‘non-treatment paradigm’ for probation practice. Their argument rested on a careful and considered analysis not only of empirical evidence about the ineffectiveness of rehabilitative treatment but also of theoretical, moral and philosophical questions about such interventions. By 1994, emerging evidence about the potential effectiveness of some intervention programmes was sufficient to lead Peter Raynor and Maurice Vanstone to suggest significant revisions to the ‘non-treatment paradigm’. In this article, it is argued that a different but equally relevant form of empirical evidence—that derived from desistance studies—suggests a need to re-evaluate these earlier paradigms for probation practice. This reevaluation is also required by the way that such studies enable us to understand and theorize both desistance itself and the role that penal professionals might play in supporting it. Ultimately, these empirical and theoretical insights drive us back to the complex interfaces between technical and moral questions that preoccupied Bottoms and McWilliams and that should feature more prominently in contemporary debates about the futures of ‘offender management’ and of our penal systems.

    KW - desistance

    KW - effectiveness

    KW - ethics

    KW - offender management

    KW - nontreatment paradigm

    KW - probation

    U2 - 10.1177/1748895806060666

    DO - 10.1177/1748895806060666

    M3 - Article

    VL - 6

    SP - 39

    EP - 62

    JO - Criminology and Criminal Justice

    T2 - Criminology and Criminal Justice

    JF - Criminology and Criminal Justice

    SN - 1748-8958

    IS - 1

    ER -