Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
J. Pratt (1987)
Dilemmas of the alternative to custody concept: Implications for New Zealand penal policy in the light of international evidence and experience1Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 20
F. Biestek (1957)
The casework relationship.
M. Tonry, Norval Morris (1980)
Crime and justice : an annual review of research
J. Hackler, A. Morris, H. Giller (1987)
Understanding juvenile justice
P. Raynor (1985)
Social work, justice and control
E. Glover (1949)
Probation and Re-EducationMental Health, 9
J. Pratt, Phillip Treacher (1988)
Law and order and the 1987 New Zealand electionAustralian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 21
H. Walker, Bill Beaumont (1981)
Probation Work: Critical Theory and Socialist Practice
R. Fox (1987)
Dr Schwitzgebel's machine revisited: Electronic monitoring of offendersAustralian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 20
J. Hough, P. Mayhew (1983)
The British crime survey: First report
A. Morris (1980)
Justice for Children
D. Haxby (1978)
Probation a Changing Service
J. Pratt (1985)
Juvenile Justice, Social Work and Social Control. The Need for Positive ThinkingBritish Journal of Social Work, 15
Michael Phillipson (1971)
Sociological Aspects of Crime and Delinquency
A. Bottoms, W. Mcwilliams (1979)
A Non-Treatment Paradigm for Probation PracticeBritish Journal of Social Work, 9
AUST & NZ JOURNAL OF CRIMINOLOGY (June 1990) 23 (105-116) 105 THE FUTURE OF THE PROBATION SERVICE IN NEW ZEALAND} John Pratt* Introduction What do probation officers do? If this is a simple question to ask, it is quite a difficult one to answer, as far as most members of the public are concerned. Of course, everyone knows what judges do, and what they look like, for that matter: they wear robes and a wig and pronounce sentence on offenders. Similarly, the police wear uniforms, arrest people and bring them to court. Solicitors are the ones who wear suits, prepare court briefs and so on. But what do probation officers do and how might we be able to identify them? Historically, their task has been defined as being to "advise, assist and befriend'? - which no longer has a very clear ring to it. At the same time, they are much more anonymous than the rest of the professional groups involved in the criminal justice system. In themselves this lack of a public image and loosely defined professional task may not matter too much. Yet, at a time of significant change and rethinking on penal policy in New Zealand,
Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology – SAGE
Published: Jun 1, 1990
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.