12. Memorandum submitted by
the Centre for Crime and Justice Studies
1. The Centre for Crime and Justice Studies
(ISTD) is a charity affiliated to the School of Law at King's
College London. Its task is to provide information about crime
and the criminal justice system both to those working in criminal
justice and related professions, and to a wider audience. As far
as possible it adopts an objective standpoint. The Centre welcomes
the Home Affairs Committee's decision to conduct an inquiry into
this important issue and is delighted to have the opportunity
to make a submission.
Overcrowding
2. In the call for submissions the Home
Affairs Committee recognises that the prisons are overcrowded.
Overcrowding is certainly a major problem for some prisons but
is unevenly spread. It places great pressure on the local prisons,
which means that they are unable to undertake some of the constructive
work they might do, and cannot accommodate prisoners reaching
the ends of longer sentences near to home to facilitate their
resettlement. In the long term and training prisons, where the
problem of overcrowding is less apparent, there is no reason why
rehabilitative work should normally be impaired by the system
being overburdened.
Offending Behaviour Programmes
3. The development of offending behaviour
programmes, and particularly cognitive behavioural programmes,
has been at the heart of a new belief that it is possible to change
and rehabilitate offenders after many years of "nothing works"
nihilism. OBPs were adopted with zeal, though recently published
research on the impact of cognitive skills programmes and the
sex offender treatment programme on reconviction rates is less
positive.[11]
There are a number of possible reasons for the fact that the results
of these studies conflict with previously published research,
and further work is undoubtedly needed.
4. As OBPs were in their ascendancy a number
of important factors were almost overlooked as the desire to ensure
that prisoners were able to access programmes that met the stringent
accreditation standards applied to OBPs took hold. The Prison
Service became increasingly reluctant, for a while, to recognise
that the practical support offered by a large number of voluntary
sector agencies had much of a place. Now that trend has been reversed
and the Prison Service is to be congratulated on demonstrating
a strong commitment to working closely with voluntary sector and
other community based agencies assisting in the rehabilitation
of prisoners.
Strong partnerships
5. Many of these community based agencies
can help with the most basic building blocks necessary for resettlement—the
maintenance and development of social networks (be they family
or friends), housing, employment, and help with alcohol and drug
problems. Some prisons have successfully adopted a multi-agency
approach and the projects working with repeat offenders at Canterbury
prison (where police, prison, probation education and social services
work together), Blakenhurst and Bristol are examples of good practice
in this area.
Short-term prisoners
6. Rehabilitation work with short-term prisoners
is particularly challenging because of the time-scales involved
and the fact that prisoners serving sentences of less than 12
months are not subject to statutory licence requirements on release.
A recent evaluation of Pathfinder programmes, some managed by
the Probation Service and others by voluntary sector organisations,
demonstrated that effective work can be undertaken with this group
if adequate resources are available.[12]
It emphasised the importance of strong prison/probation/voluntary
sector partnerships, greater access to services in the community
and attention to offenders' thinking and motivation.
7. Short-term prisoners may not spend long
in prison, but it can be enough to cause the loss of their accommodation,
employment and relationships—key factors in their rehabilitation.
This will not change with the introduction of the "Custody
Plus" proposals in the current Criminal Justice Bill. If
prisoners serving short sentences were diverted into community
provision, work necessary for their rehabilitation could be carried
out in the communities where all the pressures which support their
offending exist.
The role of prison staff
8. Partnerships between agencies working
with prisoners should also allow some flexibility in terms of
role. At the moment prison staff are constrained from continuing
work with prisoners they have developed good and trusting working
relationships with after release. This seems to be an artificial
and unhelpful rule and changing it would allow for more creative
and imaginative approaches.
The role of prisoners' families
9. Apart from prisoners themselves the people
with the greatest direct interest in effective rehabilitation
are prisoners' families. They represent an important resource
which is not brought into play in any systematic way at present.
Prison visits are all too often seen as something which has to
be provided for the prisoner, and a security headache, but it
is through visits that relationships are maintained. For many
prisoners their families represent reasons not to re-offend, and
they provide emotional support and accommodation. Prison visits
are frequently tense encounters where everyone tries to suppress
their feelings of anger, concern and vulnerability. After release
these unresolved feelings can surface and cause family break-up,
homelessness and a "reason" to return to drug or alcohol
use. At HMP Norwich the Ormiston Children and Families Trust piloted
some pre-release work during which family members and prisoners
engaged in structured discussion, identifying problem areas and
thinking of how they could be dealt with. This work has now been
discontinued because of resource problems, and was never evaluated
in terms of reconviction rates or any other post-release outcomes,
but it pointed the way to a more active way of recruiting prisoners'
families as allies in a positive effort to assist crime-free resettlement.
Similar work has been tried at other prisons, but this sort of
approach needs to be systematically undertaken and properly evaluated.
Learning to cope with imprisonment
10. Over the last few years there has been
an increasing emphasis on resettlement, and an interest in preparing
prisoners for release starting from their induction into the prison.
It is certainly true that years ago pre-release courses were not
routinely offered and frequently seemed like some sort of afterthought
provided in the last few weeks of the sentence. Preparing for
eventual freedom is, of course, important, but there is no "one-size
fits all" way of doing it. Long term prisoners may be almost
unable to look so far ahead, and for them, in the early stages
of their sentences, activities which enable them to keep their
brains active, maintain or improve their self-esteem and prevent
them becoming too institutionalised are a vital part of their
eventual rehabilitation. In such a situation frequent mention
of preparation for release is both tantalising and unhelpful,
they need to be able to learn to live in prison in such a way
that they emerge as unscathed as possible from the experience.
Sex offenders
11. The "Circles of Support and Accountability"
work, pioneered in the UK by the Hampton Trust, the Lucy Faithfull
Foundation and the Thames Valley Partnership, and originally developed
in Canada, provides a very interesting way of supporting the rehabilitation
of sex offenders in the community. A group of trained volunteers
has daily contact with the offender both individually and as a
group, and help with practical and social reintegration while
also holding him to account for his actions in terms of relapse
prevention.
Not a panacea
12. More systematic work to rehabilitate
prisoners is now underway than ever before. Drug programmes, basic
skills courses and offending behaviour programmes all contribute
to the impression that prisons are places where people can change.
These opportunities are also available in the community, but there
may sometimes be problems caused by limited resources. The Prison
Service is rightly proud of its achievements, but there is a real
danger that as they publicise their achievement sentencers will
perceive prison as a place where offenders can be "cured".
This is not a new problem—40 years ago it was felt that
it was only worthwhile sending young people to borstal for more
than three years because shorter periods would not allow them
to be adequately "trained".
CONCLUSION
13. Much has been achieved over recent years
but there is still a great deal which could be done to reduce
re-offending through the rehabilitation of prisoners. Starting
points are:
— Further development of a "mixed
economy" of offending behaviour programmes, education and
training and support from a wide range of agencies, supported
by good partnerships to offer the building blocks of effective
rehabilitation—social networks, accommodation, drug and
alcohol provision and employment.
— Prison staff should be able to continue
work started in prison once prisoners are released.
— Prisoners' families should seen as
allies in the rehabilitative effort and routinely be offered opportunities
to become involved in rehabilitation work.
— Rehabilitation work should not be
release-focused for prisoners for whom freedom is a distant prospect.
— Offenders should not be sent to prison
because of the programmes available there—equivalent facilities
should always be available in the community.
October 2003
The Prison Based Sex Offender Treatment Programme—an
evaluation C Friendship, R Mann and A
Beech, Home Office Research Findings 205, 2003.
11 Searching For "What Works": an evaluation
of cognitive skills programmes L Falshaw, C Friendship, R Travers
and F Nugent, Home Office Research Findings 206, 2003. Back
12
The resettlement of short-term prisoners: an evaluation of seven
Pathfinder programmes S Lewis, M Maguire, P Raynor, M Vanstone
and J Vennard, Home Office Research Findings 200, 2003. Back
| 
