The role of the Probation Officer frequently involves encountering individuals with numerous difficulties. Throughout the traineeship I have discovered that in the majority of cases offending behaviour has a direct result of a specific difficulty experienced by the individual. Two key examples highlighting such factors can be identified in the first two Pre-sentence reports (PSR’s) I have completed.
In the first PSR interview with MM he claimed that severe financial difficulties provided the catalyst for his offending behaviour. MM was charged with attempting to defraud the Department for Work and Pensions, and although the charge was a serious charge other issues immediately sprung to the forefront of the case. MM was a black male of French origin, and the PSR request form stated that he could only speak French. These circumstances bring anti discriminatory practice (ADP) to the forefront of this experience. The most obvious barrier was that of language, and even the use of an interpreter did not fully alleviate the possibility of discriminatory practice. An interpreter can only rephrase the language I use when questioning an individual from a differing culture, yet the potential for a loss of context or language when redirecting my questions to MM are significantly high. Furthermore the relaying back of the answers in English by the interpreter are again prone to a loss of context and language. This flow of information therefore leads to a question of the accuracy of information gained, could I produce an accurate, fair report on an individual who spoke a different language and whom relied on a further party to interpret, process and relay back to me his answers to my question. When thinking about the ADP mentioned above there is no obvious solution, and as a trainee I recognized the importance of minimizing the chances for information to be misunderstood or channeled in the wrong context. On this particular occasion it came to light that MM did actually understand English, and so the barrier of language was eradicated. However this experience has made me think about how I may approach similar situations in the future with specific reference to ADP. The interview revealed that MM had entered the country in 2000, but still had only refugee status in this country. Neither he nor his partner had a work permit and so could not gain employment, the benefits they received were less than substantial; and he had a wife and daughter to support. These pre-disposing factors embraced the fundamental difficulty highlighted by M – finance – which in turn influenced/motivated his offending behaviour. As opposed to the social difficulties demonstrated in the first example the second PSR interview indicated a different type of difficulty that influenced behaviour – emotions. HH was charged with a section 39 assault against his partner. In his interview he stated that he acted impulsively in response to a highly emotional confrontation with his partner. HH stated that he was unable to identify alternative strategies to deal with the emotional difficulties he experienced at that time, and so simply responded with violence.
These two key issues form part of a band of areas that relate to individual difficulties. With the emotional and social areas already highlighted, there are also physical and psychological areas of difficulty. As a Probation Officer part of the skill in effecting change is to identify these difficulties with the offender. However one must also maintain the theoretical shift of the service as it has moved away from ‘social work’ per se to that are enforcement – as in the immortal words of Paul Boeteng ‘ we are a law enforcement agency, its what we are and its what we do.’ Essentially my point here is that identifying these individual difficulties to effect change is only part of the Probationers role – we are also there to identify potential risks of harm posed by the offender to themselves and to the public, guidance of which was laid out in the 1991 C.J.A. Fundamentally rehabilitation plays a significant role in Probation work – and identifying and tackling difficulties experienced by individuals is key in effecting this.
In the case of MM I am currently supervising him on a 12 month Community Rehabilitation Order (CRO). Prior to meeting MM I knew that there was a history of schizophrenia from various psychiatric reports available in his previous case file. However MM himself failed to recognize the impact that the illness had on his current lifestyle, and I myself had little insight into his current level of mental and physical health. In order to understand his difficulties myself I felt that more information was needed, and so contacted his doctor who forwarded me a recent psychiatric report and his current medical status. Further discussions with MM’s parents and his previous case manager, KK, led me to believe that MM’s offending behaviour and current issues he is experiencing in his lifestyle were heavily influenced by mental health issues. However with no support networks in place and a failure by MM himself to understand his mental illness it was my firm belief that MM needed to not only understand his difficulty but to also identify the options he has to change and/or alleviate the impact of the illness on his lifestyle.
The primary aim of supervision was to discuss the impact of schizophrenia on MM’s life, and he informed me that he had previously been sectioned twice and was currently on medication which consisted of an injection once a fortnight. MM stated that when he felt depressed he failed to attend the doctors for that injection and thus the chances of him relapsing significantly rose. Through motivational interviewing techniques and aiming to help MM understand the consequences of relapsing it was a primary aim of supervision to assess the options and the possible outcomes – and finally to ascertain the importance of MM taking his injection regularly. By identifying MM’s difficulties in dealing with his mental illness it also became clear that his current housing location and situation also played an integral part in his depression, and again the options for MM were assessed within supervision.
As his order progressed an ADP issue surfaced – one of MM’s attitudes towards ethnic minorities. It became apparent that MM harboured racist attitudes and commonly used these terms when speaking about his neighbours. Despite MM’s need for support surrounding his mental health and physical well-being I felt that exploring such attitudes and challenging them became an important part of his supervision. ADP is a key part of Probation practice and challenging individuals attitudes and behaviours forms the backbone of enforcing ADP. Both I and MM found the work and advocacy sessions on racism and discrimination to be extremely important and informative.
However as supervision continued and MM increased his understanding and awareness of his difficulties it became apparent that the boundaries between friendship and Probationer/Offender began to blur. For example MM stated that he could live in the same area as myself and pop round when he needed something. The boundaries were quickly reinstated as I felt that MM began to see the relationship as friendship rather than professional. Having received a present from another of my clients, CB, my PDA advised caution in accepting gifts as it may again blur the boundaries. YY added that as the client was a woman I again had to exercise caution due to the possibilities of blurring boundaries.
In the case of OO she received a 12 month CRO for offences of theft from shops. Her difficulties explicitly linked to her offending behaviour through her emotional state at those specific times. Whilst on her current order OO has reconvicted twice and the order has been allowed to continue, however throughout supervision she had increasingly understood the triggers to her offending behaviour, and furthermore we have identified strategies to deal with the trigger behaviour other than stealing goods from shops. Having understood the link between her emotional states, her alcohol consumption and offending, throughout supervision myself and OO looked primarily at areas surrounding thinking skills, and I adopted the problem solving strategy from the Enhanced Thinking Skills programme. OO’s emotional state consisted of arguments with her partner over finances, and she herself identified employment as a potential release of emotional stress, and so a main focal point of further supervision was gaining CB employment.
OO’s attitude to employment was simple – she desperately wanted to work but found it extremely difficult to gain employment. She had no self esteem, felt her criminal record destroyed any chances of her working (equality of opportunity) and furthermore she had been unemployed for a significant amount of time. However through motivational work, SMART work sheets, referrals to basic skills agencies (guided by the basic skills policy), practicing work skills and lots of encouragement OO’s options dramatically increased.
The final example of difficulties encountered comes under the umbrella of social difficulties, which I encountered in a co-worked case with UU, a Probation Officer in the CRO team. GG had specific difficulties in engaging with people in social situations, and as a consequence could not express himself pro-socially to others. As a consequence of his lack of social skills his behaviour became anti-social and he received a 3 year CRO for arson and criminal damage. GG brought many difficulties to his supervising officer, but as a co-worker I specifically carried out six sessions on developing GG’s skills in social situations – including role plays and creative thinking exercises. The aims of the sessions were to identify social difficulties experienced by GG, identify the options available to GG and them act them out. However through discussion and evaluation the goal of each session was for GG to take positive action to address the specified difficulties. An example of this was a session devoted to the instant that GG walked out of his employment after an argument with his supervisor. We acted out what actually happened and then identified different strategies of dealing with the situation which would be beneficial to all, including GG keeping his job.
Thus far I have demonstrated how I, as a practitioner, have enabled myself and the individual to understand the difficulties they have or are currently experiencing. Furthermore I have also made explicit references as to the identity of numerous options to facilitate change for the individuals concerned. However beginning to facilitate change is not the completion of a Probationers work, there is also the need to put the understanding of a difficulty into a form of positive action. In the case of GG the action was demonstrated through the enactment of role plays, and in further sessions he was able to state that he had taken the skills gained from the sessions into real life situations. As a consequence of the skills sessions GG was able to demonstrate an active role of addressing his social difficulties.
Similar steps have been taken in the two previous cases already mentioned in this RPJ. For MM, whose difficulty was located in the area of mental health, the key areas of addressing this issue was to gain independent accommodation away from the problem area where he currently resides and to take his injections on a regular basis. A further step was to locate other support networks within the area of mental health to provide additional support. MM is currently back on his injections and has recently been re-assessed by the council with regards to moving home. These are positive steps taken to address his difficulties. In the case of OO her goal was to address her responsive behaviour to her emotional states. Again strategies were employed in real life situations (stop and think, consequential thinking) and OO stated that she felt more in control after arguments. Further related steps, in terms of her employment, were also tackled and after a lengthy process of motivation and guidance by her case manager OO has finally gained employment.
The difficulties highlighted in this RPJ were all key difficulties for those specific individuals. Of course it is the role of the Probation Officer to provide support to offenders in identifying and addressing their problems. However CRO’s are not simply about addressing difficulties, they are about enforcing national standards, monitoring risk and dealing with other issues that may appear throughout an order. In the case of MM I have already demonstrated his difficulties and how they were tackled. However other issues impeded upon addressing these difficulties in that further work needed to be done on issues of racism and sexual attitudes. MM has displayed racist attitudes and deviant sexual attitudes throughout his order, which were challenged and discussed by both he and his supervising officer, and so due to the nature of possible raised risk work in these areas had to take precedent. Challenging racism is a key aspect of anti-discriminatory practice and I found information on executing this type of supervision session from the NPS Policy on Promoting Racial Equality and from a handbook entitled ‘Routes of Racism.’
The theme that runs through this RPJ is that although addressing individuals difficulties is an important aspect of Probation work, there are underlying requirements of the service that must also be recognized and not lost to the social work ethic. Yes we are, as a service, here to rehabilitate and advise, assist and befriend – but more importantly we are here to enforce, monitor and supervise. This transition of the Probation service has been continuous since the 1970s, and its status now as a law enforcement agency was largely defined by the 1991 C.J.A and subsequent legislation. Consequently we as Probation Officers are to an extent limited to the time and energy spent on addressing difficulties posed by individuals, particularly if other enforcement or risk elements take precedent.
Copyright(C) 2007
- 2020. All rights reserved.