1 / 13

Rehabilitation, Revolution and Roadblocks London Practitioner Forum, 1 st May 2013

Rehabilitation, Revolution and Roadblocks London Practitioner Forum, 1 st May 2013. Fergus McNeill Fergus.McNeill@glasgow.ac.uk Twitter: @fergus_mcneill http://blogs.iriss.org.uk/discoveringdesistance/. Structure. Introducing the rehabilitation ‘ fankle ’ De-fankling rehabilitation

candra
Download Presentation

Rehabilitation, Revolution and Roadblocks London Practitioner Forum, 1 st May 2013

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Rehabilitation, Revolution and RoadblocksLondon Practitioner Forum, 1st May 2013 Fergus McNeill Fergus.McNeill@glasgow.ac.uk Twitter: @fergus_mcneill http://blogs.iriss.org.uk/discoveringdesistance/

  2. Structure • Introducing the rehabilitation ‘fankle’ • De-fankling rehabilitation • The five forms • Their inter-dependencies • The Discovering Desistance project • The Road from Crime • Conclusions

  3. Rehabilitation: A bit of a fankle?

  4. Raynor and Robinson (2009) • ‘the action of restoring something to a previous (proper) condition or status’ (OED) • An action • That restores • To a desirable state • Implies… • [judgement against some normalising standard] • [third party intervention]

  5. A criminological definition • ‘…taking away the desire to offend, is the aim of reformist or rehabilitative punishment. The objective of reform or rehabilitation is to reintegrate the offender into society after a period of punishment, and to design the content of the punishment so as to achieve this’ (Hudson, 2003: 26).

  6. Problems • Does this conflate the objective (reintegration) with the mechanism (changing the ‘offender’)? • Does the nature of the mechanism matter? • Does rehabilitation come after punishment? • Does it shape punishment? • Is it an alternative to punishment?

  7. Late-modern rehabilitation? • Not Rotman’s moral or principled reformation, but a technical correction? • Robinson’s (2008) analysis of ‘the evolution of a penal strategy’: • Utilitarian rehabilitation • Managerial rehabilitation • Expressive rehabilitation • Punitive • Communicative

  8. The pains of rehabilitation • Crewe (2009) on ‘soft power’ • Lacombe (2008) on sex offender programs • Cox (2012) ‘Doing program or doing me?’ But what may be peculiarly demanding for the late-modern penal subject is that, rather than being left to deal, before God, with his or her own sinfulness and redemption, s/he is compelled to display the malleability of his or her riskiness, to perform the reduction and the manageability of his or her riskiness. At least in some risk-based systems, it is the credibility of this performance which will determine progression in and release from punishment. In those circumstances, rehabilitation is both disciplinary and punishing in a particularly potent way…

  9. Five forms?

  10. Time for a real rehabilitation revolution? ‘We want land, bread, housing, education, clothing, justice and peace’

  11. For more information, contact: • Fergus.McNeill@glasgow.ac.uk • Follow the Desistance Knowledge Exchange blog: • http://blogs.iriss.org.uk/discoveringdesistance • Download ‘The Road from Crime’ at: • http://www.iriss.org.uk/resources/the-road-from-crime

More Related