Questions

In trying to bring things back to probation rather than politics, I sense that in all sorts of ways we've reached a crossroads on here and its rather neatly summed up by this yesterday from regular contributor 123Me:-

Post Bank Holiday thoughts... I am retiring soon and have been wondering about post retirement for myself? Do I forget Probation and the difficult recent years as both a CRC and NPS worker? Probably not but there doesn't seem much out there for ex Probation Service and Probation Officers in retirement. Interested in what people think, is a WhatsApp group a possibility or some other way of connecting with like minded people? I am also interested in discussing why we need to be anonymous on this Blog - for many people this is solely necessary to prevent either CRC or NPS Managers coming after us. I shall also ditch my 123me confidentiality shortly before I retire as I can't see what else could be done by Management to further wreck my career in Probation...

*****

Good luck 123 your getting free. I was aware of a Napo group wanting retired members rights. I think it was started by one of the older reps clinging onto nothing. I don't think it took off. Whatever flag you fly I hope you continue to contribute to JB enjoy some of your views.

*****

It's all about privatisation & money - again!!

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/may/04/usman-khan-mentor-visits-stopped-weeks-before-terror-attack-inquest-told

The convicted terrorist Usman Khan stopped getting regular mentor visits aimed at preventing him reoffending because of a Home Office contract dispute weeks before his deadly attack at Fishmongers’ Hall, an inquest has heard.

In November 2019, within a year of being released from prison on licence, Khan killed Jack Merritt and Saskia Jones at prison education event at the hall. An inquest into their deaths was told that initially after his release Khan was “making progress” thanks in part to twice weekly visits from mentors under the government’s desistance and disengagement programme.

But these visits suddenly stopped in August due to a contractual dispute, the inquest was told. It also heard that this occurred at a “critical” stage when Khan was moving out of an approved probation hostel and struggling to find work. And weeks later police became alarmed about Khan becoming isolated, the inquest was told.

Phil Bromley, Khan’s counter-terrorism probation officer, confirmed to the inquest that Khan was progressing well with the help of the mentors in May 2019. Jonathan Hough, QC, counsel for the inquest, read out an assessment Bromley made of Khan at the time. He said: “On 15 May 2019 you record that: ‘Usman Khan continues to make good progress. Working with a practical mentor twice a week, although this may reduce to once a week. Also engages with religious mentor once a month’.”

Hough told the inquest at the Guildhall, London, how these mentor arrangements came to a sudden halt. He said: “He [Khan] had had these mentors coming to see him once or twice a week, and then it stopped, because I think of a contract issue between the companies that provide the mentors and the Home Office.”

Bromley confirmed the lack of mentors hampered Khan’s efforts to find work because under his licence arrangement he was not allowed to access the internet without supervision by a mentor. He said he and Khan’s main probation officer, Ken Skelton, tried but failed to find replacement mentors. He said: “I don’t think we came up with a solution because of the time and what happened. We were looking at potentially either Mr Skelton or potentially I think it was Ixion who are an agency that we were working with with Mr Khan … but we never got there.”

Henry Pitchers QC, counsel to the family of Jones, read an email from Bromley in September 2019 expressing concern about the lack of mentors following the contractual dispute. Bromley’s email said: “We are at a point of transition for Usman given he’ll be moving on from approved premises soon, which is always a critical stage. So the timing isn’t great. So I would certainly support him being assigned another mentor if possible.”

Pitchers said: “We know that no mentoring took place in September, October, November, and that that lack of mentoring, would mean an absence of potentially protective factor.”

Bromley replied: “Yes.” Weeks later police expressed concern about Khan becoming isolated and raised this at a multi-agency public protection arrangement (Mappa) meeting about Khan. Hough said: “Staffordshire special branch had concerns about him being socially isolated. And that was raised both in the Mappa meeting in November 2019, and in some email communications.”

Previewing evidence to come, Hough said: “We are likely to hear that seasoned professionals in this field had concerns or expressed concerns about Mr Khan being socially isolated, so not simply a business as usual matter but specific concerns.”

The inquest continues.

*****
I find this piece so sad on so many different levels. My heart goes out to the probation officers involved, the victims and indeed Mr Khan's family and friends.

My sadness is about the principle of "outsourcing" and how process driven probation has become - this is NOT a criticism of any staff members involved, rather how disposable and mechanistic services have become - so replacing one paid mentor with another, as if Mr Khan himself had no say in who he would spend his time with as someone was accompanying him to use the internet. 

I don't disagree at all that a strong mentor/mentee relationship can have powerful impact for some people...what I do disagree with is the disempowering of the probation/probationer relationship, which is no longer valued as itself a vehicle for such a relationship.

I look at these new "contracted out" services under the new "Target operating model" - ETE, housing, personal wellbeing, family support, drugs/alcohol, mental health services, GP, jobcentre, accredited programmes....is this new model expecting service users to attend with 9 different agencies/professionals? And if so, precisely what exactly is the role of the probation officer - to "manage the risk" I'm told - quite how anyone would want to engage with me when I myself, directly, have nothing practical to offer and therefore how can I be expected to "manage risk" when the service provision is so fragmented among so many different agencies I don't know? 

Can anyone else help me here? As I say, no, I don't consider that probation should "only" be delivered solely through one individual - but should I be worried about the case management approach which the Target Operating Model seems to aspire to?

I used to love delivering supervision sessions; an example might be practicing an interview let's just say, which has underlying links with addressing risk factors relating to gaining improved confidence, life skills, interacting appropriately with others, expressing yourself - or shall I just say "thinking skills" in OASYS speak. Nowadays, would I be criticised because my job is about "motivating him to attend ETE", or "referring him to TSP"? I'm aghast at what probation has become.

*****

Being 'in denial' doesn't mean one necessarily denies the existence of; it more commonly means one ignores, minimises or is avoidant of the issue in hand. 

It used to be a well-understood and common frustration faced by Probation Service staff. It was a very popular trait amongst sex offenders and domestic abuse perpetrators, i.e. something happened but it was never their fault, they weren't to blame, it was always someone else who caused it to happen, they were often heroically trying to stop it happening, etc etc etc, blah blah blah, lie lie lie.

*****

Did anyone see the last episode of Line of Duty? The point made is that corruption often parades as incompetence. He's right. It's there all the time. Probation, Senior Management, Parliament, the PM. It's a comfortable place to hide.