Sunday 26 January 2014

The Clients

As more 'sifting and sorting' letters continue to try and divide a whole profession, here's two contributions from yesterday that serve to remind us what it's all about:-

The true legacy of 100+ years of Probation is not found in corporate achievement but in the tens of thousands of stories of men and women with whom we have worked who have tried to change. Most have failed again and again, each relapse contributing to the learning that was required to secure the change. Then, one day, the stars are aligned and the Probation Officer/PSO was there, ready to do what was required to support the individual, to give them the best possible chance to make the changes necessary to stop the destructive cycles of behaviour that had blighted their lives. 

The successes for Probation are not found in corporate reports, annual business plans or performance statistics, they are found in recovering alcoholics, in former addicts, drug free at last after 11 failed attempts, in the tears of a man who has admitted his abusive childhood for the first time and started on a road that will help him to recovery, in the child protected from offences that will never take place because a diligent PO acted decisively. 

These tens or even hundreds of thousands of stories will remain untold because they absolutely should remain untold. They are not the business of PR people and journalists, nor even for politicians to wave around at the Dispatch Box. They are for those involved and those alone. 

But we know. Every CEO/ACO/SPO/PO/PSO and admin worker in every Probation office in the country knows. 

The strength of Probation is not that it always succeeds but that it always tries. Until Politicians realise that, they will never be able to recognise it's value and will never be comfortable with advocating for the abstract. Concrete thinkers need concrete outcomes where there may be none.


I am not at all religious but, to my mind, Probation is and always has been, first and foremost, an act of faith. Everyone knows punitive sentencing is futile in terms of changing behaviour. Someone realised this, 100 years ago, and thought 'let's try something else'. It worked, more often than not because, more often than not, that act of faith is rewarded by effort and investment on the part of the offenders.

*****************
We are all sounding rather weary....I agree entirely with Rob Palmer -'tis true we have never sought the limelight, content to go on our way, assisting, befriending, protecting without fuss and without public recognition. As a profession, we have always been rather understated, the complete opposite of most I have met in this line of work. Probation staff - who are larger than life, hugely funny, immensley brilliant show offs, and similarly, hugely enigmatic, brilliant, funny and complex clients...

I know not if I am to be a CRC or NPS, but whatever I am, and wherever they send me, I will take myself, as I always have, with the same commitment and desire to encourage and support people to change. To be frank, if I thought I would have to compromise on that, I'd be looking for another job.


17 comments:

  1. Great stuff thanks - as I have said elsewhere this morning: -

    it is "NOT TO LATE TO SAVE #PROBATION - contracts are not let - #ORB not enacted

    http://www.napo2.org.uk/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=449

    Brilliant PR Info available"

    Andrew Hatton

    ReplyDelete
  2. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/exclusive-parole-system-failing-prisoners-and-close-to-be-overwhelmed-lawyers-warn-9085487.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. England and Wales’s parole system is on the brink of a crisis that will result in reformed prisoners being detained months after they should have been released, The Independent on Sunday can reveal.

      Staff cuts together with a groundbreaking Supreme Court ruling about the way parole hearings are conducted are causing expensive delays. As a result, lawyers are warning, the Parole Board is close to being overwhelmed. The problem has been compounded after video equipment used to conduct parole hearings repeatedly failed.

      A ruling in October that prisoners were entitled to face-to-face hearings means the Parole Board must now conduct thousands more oral rather than paper-based hearings, exposing its lack of manpower after cutting staff last year.

      Claire Bassett, the Parole Board’s chief executive, has told MPs the ruling has “huge” implications which she forecasts will lead to the number of oral hearings increasing from about 4,500 a year to 12,000 to 14,000. The oral hearings are considered to be fairer than cheaper paper-based applications for parole – which the board was previously able to insist upon in the vast majority of cases – as the inmate can appeal his or her case in person.

      This comes at a time of cost-cutting in which Parole Board staff numbers have been reduced by nearly one in five. Many of those staff supported 232 Parole Board members who are paid per hearing and include psychiatrists and psychologists. To cope with the sudden surge of oral hearings, many are now taking place by video link from the Parole Board’s Grenadier House headquarters in London to prisons around the country. But reliability issues have dogged the system.

      Criminal defence solicitor Simon Rollason said two of his clients have had their hearings postponed by up to four months because the video technology broke down on the day, adding that the Parole Board was now “inundated”. He said the system was “close to crisis” and that the Ministry of Justice must increase the board’s £12.5m funding to hire additional parole board members.

      Mr Rollason said: “More members really has got to be the way forward to reduce the backlog of people who should be released from custody who are eligible for parole. I’ve got a gentleman where all the indications were that he should be released, but the video link failed on 3 January. His hearing will now take place in May at a cost to the taxpayer. Given it costs £22,000 to keep someone like him in jail for a year, that’s nearly £10,000 extra just for him. Using technology is a false economy because it is failing.”

      Delete
    2. Laura Janes, legal co-director at the Howard League for Penal Reform, added that the video system has “proved to be pretty chaotic” because of the difficulties of integrating sophisticated technology with “one of the greatest remaining paper-based systems in the country”.

      Ms Janes says it is essential the Parole Board’s resources are at least trebled to meet the predicted increase in hearings. She added: “It’s ironic as the Parole Board seemed to be getting itself on an even keel by reducing delays [for hearings], but this feels like all of that progress is going to be undone.”

      Mark Day, head of policy at the Prison Reform Trust, said: “On the grounds of fairness and justice, the Supreme Court has made clear the right of most prisoners to an oral hearing by the Parole Board. This will require a significant increase in resources for the Parole Board, who are already facing a growing backlog of cases as a result of the rapid growth in indeterminate sentenced prisoners. England and Wales have by far the highest number of indeterminate sentenced prisoners in Europe – more than France, Germany and Italy added together – with a growing number held beyond their tariff expiry date.”

      Giving evidence to the House of Commons’ Justice Select Committee last month, Parole Board chairman Sir David Calvert-Smith said: “All bets are off now until we sort out the consequences of Osborn [the Supreme Court case]. There are bound to be delays in the short term.” He added that what have been traditionally three people on any one hearing panel might have to be reduced to two or even one.

      “When the Parole Board was set up, it was all on paper. You just got a letter from the minister saying, ‘Sorry, you have not got parole this time round’, signed by the Home Secretary. We have developed to oral hearings from paper.”

      A Parole Board spokeswoman said: “We’re in early days [post-Osborne] and are trying to understand what the impact will be and what the changes will mean.”

      Delete
    3. Is there anyone out there that can give an example of any part of the Criminal Justice System that is not broken or not in total turmoil or chaos?

      Delete
    4. There will even more parole board delays as there will be less PO availability for parole reports and oral hearings following privitisation

      Delete
    5. I have stopped bothering to ask to take part in hearings via video link after the last three failed. Two were switched to phone conferences, and the third went ahead without my evidence (to be fair, in that case it was a straightforward decision). Now I just book the transport and claim it back later. Yes it's time consuming, but I think the results are better. But I agree entirely with Anon at 18:54 - let's just sit back and wait for even more delays caused by Grayling's TR, as his false economies in one part of the system cause more expense somewhere else

      Delete
  3. Ive been attending oral hearings since 2005 and have come to realise that them current system of 'cross examination' is significantly flawed and on some occasions thoroughly unnecessary-fat better to have offender managers sitting on the panel and actively involved in the decision making process than be asked to justify why an offender committed an offence x number of years ago....how many times in the absence of relevant cogent questions being asked have you found yourself having to respond to an irrelevant series of questions??

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And being grilled to death by an over zealous solicitor (in some cases). Got more of this shit to look forward to in the NPS but grateful of having more job security than if I was in CRC.

      Delete
    2. The behaviour of the Parole Board towards Probation Officers has deteriorated to the point where it is almost professionally abusive. I am a veteran of oral hearings and can not believe how we are treated. Six hour hearings without a break ( yes honestly). God help you if you oppose release! Yes that is sometimes our role and you can tell immediately what the PB has already decided because they try to break you down rather than actually listen to your evidence. If anyone wants to know what respect there is for probation, just attend an Oral Hearing because in my experience there is NONE.

      Delete
    3. I find this very surprising indeed - what's the experience of other officers?

      Delete
    4. Over the last 5 years or so my previous high regard for the Parole Board's integrity and decision making has plummeted to contempt. It is supposed to be inquisitorial, but ends up very adversarial and without a balance as the SoS rarely sends a rep.

      They seem to give POs a hard time to show they're being fair to the client, there is no enquiry into behaviour if there hasn't actually been a conviction or adjudication, on the contrary, the event is determined not to have happened.

      They give disproportionate weight to the evidence of whoever agrees with their preconceptions. Apologies to any OS reading this, but "over the three weeks I've known him he's been polite" is not an assessment of risk.

      I know a number of colleagues who have been traumatised by their treatment by the Board and blame themselves for not getting across the real risks posed by some individuals whose releases have been ordered.

      I gave evidence of a threat to life made in an interview where an independent witness was present. The Board decided my account could not be trusted and adjourned for a further hearing so that person could be called to corroborate. They did so, but the client's explanation that we both misheard was believed and release ordered.

      I don't know if it's political pressure to get prison numbers down or the notion that to prove your independence you must make daft decisions, but the Parole board is pretty messed up.

      Delete
  4. This is one of the reasons that I chose CRC. I find cervical smears less excruciating than attending oral hearings. After travelling down south (a few hours on train) on numerous occasions for these hearings I have had solicitors grill me over my risk assessments, the same way a CPS Barrister would interrogate someone who is on trial for murder. Whilst the prisoner hardly gets asked about their behaviour. If I had to attend these hearings more often than I currently do, I think I would be reaching for Prozac.

    ReplyDelete
  5. agree with above,my regret at being selected NPS is that I will still have to deal with the Parole Board. Impartial yes respectful of probation no. I so agree that they try to prove their independence by metaphorically beating up on the probation officer. I have actually been ridiculed for my professional assessment in front of a client I am then expected to work with on licence. They have no understanding that probation officers can not make the prison deliver sentence planning targets. Also, prisons are coping with increasing waiting lists for Sex Offender Treatment Programmes by issuing Non Selection Reports ( in essence removing wait listed prisoners who have already been assessed as needing/suitable for SOTP because prison resources can not deliver it!). It makes a total nonsense of the whole process but it is the Offender Manager who is left to explain this to the Parole Board.. Yes Mr X needs this so he can safely be released but no, he can't have it.

    ReplyDelete
  6. The worst part of my job is dealing with the Parole Board.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Please don't stereotype OSs. Yes a lot of prisons have shifted prison officers into the jobs without retraining hence the 'he keeps his cell tidy, you should release him' type of assessment. Equally a lot of us are still seconded POs or other experienced staff who do carry out a full and thorough risk assessment. Having shared all the negative experiences of the parole board described above (and as I attend oral hearings most weeks, you can imagine this gets quite harrowing! ) OSs and OMs would be better off cooperating rather than forming negative judgements of each other's competence.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Yes its tough, but we have (as PRobation staff) yet again been let down and fed to the lions with iral hearings by having no appropriate training. Yes, its tough, but with suitably developed skills we could manage these hearings much more successfully. Most boards are chaired by judges with barristers across the table, so it becomes a game on their terms. We're simply not geared up for such high level adversarial exchanges. We're not trained for it, we're not practised at it - its how many if our clients and their victims must feel in court. I find it exhilarating, but tiring - and made more complex by the lack of support or preparation time.

    ReplyDelete