Assessing and Addressing Offender Behaviour

Abbott notes the importance of integrating theory and practice by asserting that professional expert knowledge, discretion and judgement rest at the interface between the work or tasks involved and the skill achieved through on-the-job training and practice and the abstract knowledge or theory that underpin this (Abbott 1988). This assignment will focus on a specific case (MS) that I have supervised during my traineeship and I will demonstrate my ability to assess, supervise, plan, intervene, review and evaluate a case by following the ASPIRE model of case management (Home Office 2005). MSs offence of theft was of an acquisitive nature, he stole a pair of trainers to sell on in order to fund his alcohol misuse. MS was sentenced at Rotherham Magistrates Court, for an offence of theft and was made subject to a twelve month Community Order under the Criminal Justice Act 2003. The following two requirements were imposed MS must attend Supervision to address his offending behaviour and an Alcohol Treatment Requirement to address his alcohol misuse. The reasons given behind this were that such a sentence would allow him to work with a Probation Officer in respect of the rehabilitation element. This proposal fits neatly with the anti-custody values of the Probation Service whose underlying concern is to deal with offenders in constructive ways which do not damage or degrade them. This is also related to other probation values of client self-determination and potential for change (Williams B 1995). Probation Orders are seen as punishments in themselves. Wasik and Taylor assert that the Criminal Justice Act 1991 introduced the Probation Order as a sentence of the court in its own right (Wasik and Taylor 1991 Pg48). Dunbar and Langdon argue that this Act was passed at a time when a major aim or criminal justice policy was to reduce prison numbers and ensure that sentences and the public saw community sentences as a viable option (Dunbar and Langdon 1998 Pg74). The