Modern Penological Trends – About the Concept of Risk and Need Assessment
Keywords:
new penology, convicts, risk and needs assessment, OASysAbstract
The development of modern society and the general trend of globalization, have led to the development of new ideas and practices in the criminal justice system and penology. The new penology, as it is often called in the literature, led to the abandonment of the earlier concept of resocialization, which was the approach to offender treatment and practice, and the transition to more moderate forms of punishment, which are characterized by different policy approaches to prison management and different access to prisoners. The moral aspect of the punishment was reduced to a rational assessment of the understanding of the costs, benefits, and effects of interventions. The concept of risk and needs assessment emphasizes the identification, classification and routing to the appropriate form of treatment and treatment programs perpetrators, based on the level of identified risk, aimed at their reduction and the protection of society. This paper aims to analyze the changes that the new penology tendencies produced in the practice of the treatment of prisoners, assessment instruments based on risk and need, and their advantages and disadvantages.
References
Aubrey, R., & Hough, M. (1997). Assessing offenders’ needs: Assessment scales for the probation service (Home Office Research Study 166). Home Office.
Fitzgibbon, D. (2007). Risk analysis and the new practitioner: Myth or reality? Punishment & Society, 9(1), 87–97.
Home Office. (2002). National probation service for England and Wales: Enforcement, rehabilitation and public protection. Home Office.
Home Office. (2005). The NOMS offender management model. Home Office.
Horsfield, A. (2003). Risk assessment: Who needs it? Probation Journal, 50(4), 374–379.
Kemshall, H. (2003). Understanding risk in criminal justice. Open University Press.
Lancaster, E., & Lumb, J. (2006). The assessment of risk in the National Probation Service of England and Wales. Journal of Social Work, 6(3), 275–291.
Mair, G., Burke, L., & Taylor, S. (2006). “The worst tax form you’ve ever seen”? Probation officers’ views about OASys. Probation Journal, 53, 7–23.
Robinson, G. (2005). What works in offender management? The Howard Journal, 44(3), 307–318.
Ricijaš, N. (2010). Instrumenti procjene kriminogenih rizika i potreba u probaciji. In III hrvatski kongres socijalnih pedagoga. Zagreb.
Soković, S., & Vasiljević-Prodanović, D. (2007). Nova penologija – stara praksa sa novim imenom. Socijalna misao, 14(1), 127–135.
Stevanović, Z. (2006). Mogućnosti i ograničenja izgradnje savremenog zatvorskog sistema. In D. Radovanović (Ed.), Novo krivično zakonodavstvo: Dileme i problemi u teoriji i praksi (pp. 581–589). Institut za kriminološka i sociološka istraživanja i Viša škola unutrašnjih poslova.
Stevanović, Z. (2009a). Upravljanje zatvorima. Revija za kriminologiju i krivično pravo, 47(2).
Stevanović, Z. (2009b). Efekti institucionalnog tretmana u radu sa osuđenim licima i prevencija kriminala. In M. Blagojević & Z. Stevanović (Eds.), Prevencija kriminala i socijalnih devijacija (pp. 149–160). Institut za kriminološka i sociološka istraživanja.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors retain copyright over their published works and grant the publisher a non-exclusive right to publish the article, to be identified as its first publisher in cases of reuse, and to distribute it in all forms and media. The articles will be distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution International (CC BY 4.0) license, unless otherwise stated.
