Skip to main content

Explaining Probation

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Probation
  • 1277 Accesses

Abstract

Most of the contributions to this collection deal with questions about probation that have obvious and immediate practical importance not just for scholars and students of the subject but also for policymakers and practitioners—and even for the wider public. This chapter is a little different, though we would suggest that it is no less important. Here, our focus is on the question: ‘How we can best account for probation’s emergence and development as a penal institution and as a set of connected penal discourses and practices?’ In essence, we aim to set out some possible approaches to developing a sociological account of probation. This matters—and has real contemporary import—because if we fail to understand the social, cultural and political conditions which gave rise to and subsequently have shaped probation’s development, and how they have done so, then we will remain poorly placed to assess or affect its prospects. The evolution of policy and practice is always and everywhere profoundly affected, not just, for example, by arguments about technical effectiveness (and cost effectiveness) but also by the extent to which a given policy or practice proposal ‘fits’ with the zeitgeist or spirit of the times.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    In this Page echoes Garland’s development of the concept of ‘penality’: ‘It involves discursive frameworks of authority and condemnation, ritual procedures of imposing punishment, a repertoire of penal sanctions, institutions and agencies for the enforcement of sanctions and a rhetoric of symbols, figures, and images by means of which the penal process is represented to its various audiences’ (Garland 1990, p. 17).

References

  • Allen, F. (1981). The decline of the rehabilitative ideal: Penal policy and social purpose. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bottoms, A. (1980). An introduction to ‘The Coming Crisis’. In A. Bottoms & R. Preston (Eds.), The coming penal crisis. Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cavadino, M., Dignan, J., & Mair, G. (2013). The penal system: An introduction (5th ed.). London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, S. (1983). Social-control talk: Telling stories about correctional change. In D. Garland & P. Young (Eds.), The power to punish. Aldershot: Gower.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, S. (1985). Visions of social control: Crime, punishment and classification. Cambridge, UK: Polity and Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Giorgi, A. (2013). Punishment and political economy. In J. Simon & R. Sparks (Eds.), The Sage handbook of punishment and society. London and New York: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donzelot. (1977). La Police des Familles [The Policing of Families]. Paris: Edition de Minuit.

    Google Scholar 

  • Durkheim, E. (1958[1986]). The state. In E. Durkheim (Ed.), Durkheim on politics and the state (pp. 45–50). Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Durkheim, E. (1973). Two laws of penal evolution. Economy and Society, 2(3), 285–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Durkheim, E. (1984). The division of labour in society. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Feeley, M., & Simon, J. (1992). The new penology: Notes on the emerging strategy of corrections and its implications. Criminology, 30, 449–474.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feeley, M., & Simon, J. (1994). Actuarial justice: The emerging new criminal law. In D. Nelken (Ed.), The futures of criminology. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison [English translation 1977]. London: Allan lane.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garland, D. (1985). Punishment and welfare: A history of penal strategies. Aldershot: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garland, D. (1990). Punishment and modern society: A study in social theory. Oxford: Clarendon.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Garland, D. (2001). The culture of control: Crime and social order in contemporary society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garland, D. (2010). Peculiar institution: America’s death penalty in an age of abolition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garland, D. (2013a). Punishment and social solidarity. In J. Simon & R. Sparks (Eds.), The Sage handbook of punishment and society. London and New York: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garland, D. (2013b). Penality and the penal state. Criminology, 51(3), 475–517.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garland, D., & Young, P. (Eds.). (1983). The power to punish: Contemporary penality and social analysis. Aldershot: Gower.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gottschalk, M. (2013). The carceral state and the politics of punishment. In J. Simon & R. Sparks (Eds.), The Sage handbook of punishment and society. London and New York: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hannah-Moffatt, K. (1999). Moral agent or actuarial subject: Risk and Canadian women’s imprisonment. Theoretical Criminology, 3(1), 71–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ignatieff, M. (1983). State, civil society and total institutions: A critique of recent social histories of punishment. In S. Cohen & A. Scull (Eds.), Social control and the state. Oxford: Martin Robertson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lacey, N. (2008). The prisoner’s dilemma: Political economy and punishment in contemporary democracies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • McNeill, F., Burns, N., Halliday, S., Hutton, N., & Tata, C. (2009). Risk, responsibility and reconfiguration: Penal adaptation and misadaptation. Punishment and Society, 11(4), 419–442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McNeill, F., & Dawson, M. (2014). Social solidarity, penal evolution and probation. British Journal of Criminology, 54(5), 892–907.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mahood, L. (1991). Policing gender, class and family in Britain, 1950-1940. London: UCL Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mathieson, T. (1983). The future of control systems: The case of Norway. In D. Garland & P. Young (Eds.), The power to punish: Contemporary penality and social analysis. Aldershot: Gower.

    Google Scholar 

  • McWilliams, W. (1983). The mission to the English Police Courts 1876-1936. Howard Journal, 22, 129–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McWilliams, W. (1985). The mission transformed: Professionalisation of probation between the wars. Howard Journal of Criminal Justice, 24(4), 257–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McWilliams, W. (1986). The English probation system and the diagnostic ideal. Howard Journal of Criminal Justice, 25(4), 241–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McWilliams, W. (1987). Probation, pragmatism and policy. Howard Journal of Criminal Justice, 26(2), 97–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Melossi, D. (1998). The sociology of punishment: Socio-structural perspectives. Aldershot: Dartmouth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nellis, M., Beyens, K., & Kaminski, D. (Eds.). (2012). Electronically monitored punishment: International and critical perspectives. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Page, J. (2013). Punishment and the penal field. In J. Simon & R. Sparks (Eds.), The Sage handbook of punishment and society. London and New York: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pease, K. (1980). The future of the community treatment of offenders in Britain. In A. E. Bottoms & R. H. Preston (Eds.), The coming penal crisis. Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phelps, M. (2013). The paradox of probation: Community supervision in the age of mass incarceration. Law and Policy, 35(1–2), 55–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, G. (2002). Exploring risk management in the probation service: Contemporary developments in England and Wales. Punishment and Society, 4(1), 5–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, G. (2008). Late-modern rehabilitation: The evolution of a penal strategy. Punishment and Society, 10(4), 429–445.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, G. (2016) ‘The Cinderella complex: Punishment, society and community sanctions’. Punishment and Society 18(1): 95-112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, G., & McNeill, F. (Eds.). (2015). Community punishment: European perspectives. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rusche, G., & Kirchheimer, O. (1939[2003]). Punishment and social structure. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scull, A. (1983). Community corrections: Panacea, progress or pretence? In D. Garland & P. Young (Eds.), The power to punish: Contemporary penality and social analysis. Aldershot: Gower.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, J. (1993). Poor discipline: Parole and the social control of the underclass 1890–1990. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sirianni, C. (1984). Justice and the division of labour: A reconsideration of Durkheim’s A Division of Labour in Society. Sociological Review, 32(3), 449–470.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Snacken, S. (2010). Resisting punitiveness in Europe? Theoretical Criminology, 14(3), 273–292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, E.P. (1977) Whigs and Hunters: The Origin of the Black Act. Harmondsworth: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vanstone, M. (2004). Mission control: The origins of a humanitarian service. Probation Journal, 51(1), 34–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker, H., & Beaumont, W. (1981). Probation work: Critical theory and socialist practice. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Young, P. (1976). A sociological analysis of the early history of probation. British Journal of Law and Society, 3, 44–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Copyright information

© 2016 The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

McNeill, F., Robinson, G. (2016). Explaining Probation. In: McNeill, F., Durnescu, I., Butter, R. (eds) Probation. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-51982-5_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-51982-5_12

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-137-51980-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-137-51982-5

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics