Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://bura.brunel.ac.uk/handle/2438/27178
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorCracknell, M-
dc.date.accessioned2023-09-13T14:47:37Z-
dc.date.available2023-09-13T14:47:37Z-
dc.date.issued2021-09-23-
dc.identifierORCID iD: Matt Cracknell https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9909-1173-
dc.identifier.citationCracknell, M. (2021) 'From the ‘seamless sentence’ to ‘through the gate’: Understanding the common threads of resettlement policy failures', British Journal of Community Justice, 17 (2), pp. 86 - 103. doi: 10.48411/pfz6-ba61.en_US
dc.identifier.issn1475-0279-
dc.identifier.urihttps://bura.brunel.ac.uk/handle/2438/27178-
dc.description.abstractContemporary criminal justice policy in England and Wales has witnessed various resurgences of political interest in resettlement and the short sentence population. This intermittent attentiveness has been mirrored in the circular re-iterations of policy initiatives ostensibly designed to bring greater continuity to the services that administer ‘through the gate’ work. These efforts include the ‘seamless sentence’ of the 1991 Criminal Justice Act; ‘end-to-end offender management’, the creation of The National Offender Management Service (NOMS) and the introduction of custody plus under New Labour; and the current Transforming Rehabilitation (TR) ‘through the gate’ reforms. It is important to analyse these attempts in order to understand why resettlement policy consistently fails to deliver an improved continuity between prisons and probation. This paper argues that resettlement policy has a common thread of issues that inhibit effective resettlement practice. This article will firstly consider the ‘essence’ (Senior and Ward, 2016) of resettlement practice, outlining several key principles that should be central elements for resettlement policy and practice, before providing an overview of these various policy initiatives; examining a common thread of failures in their realisation. This article will then look ahead at the next possible iteration of resettlement policy, ‘offender management in custody’ (OMiC), concluding that despite key changes, this latest policy continues to repeat the errors of past resettlement policy failures.en_US
dc.format.extent86 - 103-
dc.format.mediumPrint-Electronic-
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherManchester Metropolitan Universityen_US
dc.rightsCopyright © 2021 Manchester Metropolitan University. The journal’s policy is to own copyright of its contributions. The author has acknowledge transfer of copyright to the publisher and has been granted the right to re-use the material on this institutional repository. See: https://mmuperu.co.uk/bjcj/information-for-authors-2/.-
dc.rights.urihttps://mmuperu.co.uk/bjcj/information-for-authors-2/-
dc.subjectresettlementen_US
dc.subjectthrough the gateen_US
dc.subjectthe essence of probationen_US
dc.titleFrom the ‘seamless sentence’ to ‘through the gate’: Understanding the common threads of resettlement policy failuresen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.48411/pfz6-ba61-
dc.relation.isPartOfBritish Journal of Community Justice-
pubs.issue2-
pubs.publication-statusPublished-
pubs.volume17-
dc.identifier.eissn2755-4147-
dc.rights.holderManchester Metropolitan University-
Appears in Collections:Dept of Social and Political Sciences Research Papers

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
FullText.pdfCopyright © 2021 Manchester Metropolitan University. The journal’s policy is to own copyright of its contributions. The author has acknowledge transfer of copyright to the publisher and has been granted the right to re-use the material on this institutional repository. See: https://mmuperu.co.uk/bjcj/information-for-authors-2/.335.44 kBAdobe PDFView/Open


Items in BURA are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.