Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Access Criminology and Criminal Justice journals now

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Probation Journal
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Lewis, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Rehabilitation: Headline or footnote in the new penal policy?

Sam Lewis

University of Leeds, lawsjl{at}leeds.ac.uk

This article examines the role of ‘rehabilitation’ in contemporary penal policy. Drawing on the work of Cullen and Gilbert (1982), and Rotman (1990), it advances a rights-based approach to rehabilitation. It is suggested that the vision of rehabilitation contained in recent policy documents and legislation does not match up to the theoretical model that is outlined, and that current rehabilitative efforts are window-dressing on an overly punitive ‘managerialist’ system.

Key Words: managerialism • ‘new rehabilitationists’ • rehabilitation • ‘state-obligated rehabilitation’ • strengths-based approaches • ‘What Works’

Probation Journal, Vol. 52, No. 2, 119-135 (2005)
DOI: 10.1177/0264550505052645
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Punishment SocietyHome page
G. Robinson
Late-modern rehabilitation: The evolution of a penal strategy
Punishment Society, October 1, 2008; 10(4): 429 - 445.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Sex AbuseHome page
Human Rights and the Assessment and Treatment of Sex Offenders: General Comments
Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, September 1, 2007; 19(3): 205 - 216.
[PDF]

Home page
 Criminal JusticeHome page
T. McCulloch and F. McNeill
Consumer society, commodification and offender management
JCriminology and Criminal Justice, August 1, 2007; 7(3): 223 - 242.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Br J CriminolHome page
T. McSweeney, A. Stevens, N. Hunt, and P. J. Turnbull
Twisting Arms Or a Helping Hand?: Assessing the Impact of 'Coerced' and Comparable 'Voluntary' Drug Treatment Options
Br. J. Criminol., May 1, 2007; 47(3): 470 - 490.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Probation JournalHome page
G. Robinson and P. Raynor
The future of rehabilitation: What role for the probation service?
Probation Journal, December 1, 2006; 53(4): 334 - 346.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Probation JournalHome page
K. Davies
Case management and Think First completion
Probation Journal, September 1, 2006; 53(3): 213 - 229.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Criminal JusticeHome page
F. McNeill
A desistance paradigm for offender management
JCriminology and Criminal Justice, February 1, 2006; 6(1): 39 - 62.
[Abstract] [PDF]