http://herzog-evans.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Cynthia-McDOUGALL.mp3
Pierre Lalande – Direction des programmes , Direction générale adjointe aux programmes, à la sécurité et à
l’administration , Direction générale des services correctionnels , Ministère de la Sécurité publique du Québec
Résumé
Si la criminologie québécoise a contribué à ses débuts au développement de la probation, sur le plan de la littérature scientifique cependant, et pour des raisons difficiles à expliquer, elle semble s’être retrouvée rapidement dans l’angle mort de la criminologie. Le présent texte vise deux objectifs. Le premier est de tracer les grandes lignes de l’évolution de la probation en dressant aussi un sommaire de la probation dans différents États, tels que la Grande-Bretagne, les États-Unis, le Québec, l’Écosse et certains pays d’Europe. Le deuxième objectif est de pouvoir ranimer chez les chercheurs un intérêt pour ces joueurs-clés que sont les services de probation dans le champ de la justice pénale.
http://www.securitepublique.gouv.qc.ca/probation_angle_mort.pdf
Si le lien est brisé: probation_angle_mort
Textes originaux et adaptation de l’anglais par Vincent Rossignol, (M.Ed) Superviseur clinique
L’entrevue motivationnelle: un guide d’intervention
1. Introduction
Ce guide est né du vide. Jusqu’à tout récemment, il existait en effet très peu d’écrits scientifiques en français portant sur l’entrevue motivationnelle (EM ) : Motivational Interviewing (Miller & Rollnick, 1991) en anglais. Pourtant, ce style d’intervention brève, développé par les docteurs William R. Miller (University of New Mexico) et Stephen Rollnick (University of Wales) jouit d’un certain appui au sein de la communauté scientifique et clinique oeuvrant en toxicomanie. Elle a recueilli des résultats empiriques fort intéressants lors de diverses études portant sur son efficacité (Miller, Sovereign & Krege, 1988 ; Bien, Miller & Boroughs, 1993 ; Miller, Benefield & Tonigan, 1993 ; Miller, Brown, Simpson, Handmaker, Bien, Luckie, Montgomery, Hester & Tonigan; 1995; Noonan & Moyers, 1997).
L’EM fut l’une des approches étudiées lors du projet MATCH américain (Project Match Research Group, 1997), une étude d’envergure jusque- là inégalée en toxicomanie (1,726 sujets) visant à comparer l’efficacité de trois styles d’interventions fréquemment utilisés auprès des personnes souffrant de dépendance à l’alcool. L’EM y recueille des résultats fort honorables Par contre, au sein de la francophonie, l’EM reste relativement peu connue et seuls quelques centres utilisent cette approche de façon systématique. Ce guide vise donc à présenter ce style de counselling aux intervenants francophones oeuvrant de près ou de loin dans le domaine de la modification de comportement.
Pour ce faire, nous vous présentons d’abord quelques réflexions préalables portant sur le changement et des considérations théoriques sur le processus de changement. Par la suite, comme l’EM fait partie de la famille des interventions brèves, nous étudions l’efficacité de telles interventions comparativement aux interventions plus longues. Quelques ingrédients essentiels des interventions brèves efficaces vous sont présentés. Nous expliquons ensuite en quoi l’EM offre un regard nouveau sur les personnes demandant une aide thérapeutique. Une nouvelle définition de la motivation vous est offerte en plus des concepts théoriques à la base de l’EM (les modèles théoriques à la source de cette approche, son esprit et ses principes). Nous étudions ensuite en quoi l’EM se distingue de l’approche cognitivo-comportementale, de l’approche rogérienne et du modèle dit « traditionnel » d’intervention en toxicomanie . Enfin, nous survolons les stratégies fréquemment utilisées dans le cadre de l’EM ainsi que les diverses phases d’intervention.
Probation staff do valuable and diverse work, making sure that some of the most dangerous offenders released back into the community are properly monitored and reintegrated into society.
SSPT was chosen to pilot a project which allows probation officers to exercise more professional judgement when managing cases.
The pilot was such a success that the new working model will be rolled out across England and Wales. Revised Probation National Standards have been published on the Ministry of Justice website and will be implemented over the next year. Previously probation officers had instructions on exactly how frequently they should meet with and assess offenders. The new National Standards allow frontline probation staff to manage their work with offenders as the risks of each case demands, using their knowledge and drawing on their professional training and experience
SSPT chief executive Sonia Crozier said: « The pilot showed that staff had more purposeful and better focussed contact with offenders when they were allowed to exercise their professional judgement in deciding how to work with each individual. « We were delighted to be chosen by the Ministry of Justice to pilot this important initiative. It shows that we are recognised as a trust which can deliver results which improve the probation service for offenders and the public alike. »
A Ministry of Justice spokesman said: « We are committed to allowing frontline staff to better use their judgement and professional skills to cut reoffending and protect the public. « Offender managers must be able to focus their work on the most serious offenders, they should not be spending their time on tick-box exercises. « The new standards will remove the unnecessary proscription and red tape that restricts frontline decision making. »
SSPT has made a video with staff explaining just how the Professional Judgement Project has made a difference, which you can watch below.
Surrey & Sussex Probation Trust (SSPT) was chosen to pilot a new way of working for the probation service in place of the old National Standards, which dictated minimum requirements for offender contact and risk assessments. The new method provided offender managers with more freedom to exercise their professional judgement in managing offenders. After the successful pilot the new way of working has been extended nationally. In this video SSPT staff explain how the new freedoms have enabled them to better engage with offenders and cut out red tape.
Présentation en Français du syndicat de la fonction publique anglaise UNISON
UNISON opposes government plans that could see the Probation Service lose its interventions functions and become a small ‘specialist organisation’ managing only high risk offenders. In a speech delivered on 20 November 2012, Chris Grayling had the following to say about the future of the Probation Service:
- The ‘rehabilitation revolution’ will be driven mainly via payment by results (PBR) schemes, where providers of rehabilitation services will only be paid if they are successful in reducing offending. Chris Grayling indicated that he was minded to use a binary measure for assessing whether providers have succeeded in reducing offending, i.e. simply has the offender re-offended or not? If this is the measure that is brought in, it will prevent small and medium size enterprises bidding for this work as they will not have the financial resources available to take the risk on bidding for work. Large multi-national outsourcing companies will on the other hand be able to take the financial risks on board. The Justice Secretary did not indicate any particular role for the Probation Service in delivering payment by results. The Ministry of Justice will publish a paper shortly setting out its plans for PBR.
- The Probation Service will continue to have a role to play in the future, but most likely supervising only high risk offenders and managing risk in the public interest. Services to courts, where there are serious issues to be considered, will also continue to be provided by the Probation Service. Chris Grayling said that the Probation Service would become a specialist organisation, retaining a supervisory role for high risk offenders, presenting with a high risk of harm. The Justice Secretary’s idea seems to suggest that the Probation Service might shrink to become a much smaller organisation, delivering services only in relation to high risk cases, with the majority of interventions work and low-risk work being put out to competition to the private sector. UNISON is totally opposed to this reductionist vision of the Probation Service which will simply not be viable if it loses its vital interventions arms. We will campaign against this outcome.
- Commissioning of probation services will be carried out by NOMS/MoJ nationally, with no role for Probation Trusts to take on this work. This is really bad news. It means that Ministers have turned their back on any role for Probation Trusts in commissioning probation services at a local level, or other local agencies, like local government, having any role to play in delivering rehabilitation services. This is an inherently undemocratic model and one which will deny any sort of local accountability for probation services. As we know, NOMS/MoJ has a poor track record in letting contracts (the FM contract being the worst example of this) and so the Justice Secretary’s announcement does not bode well. UNISON will continue to oppose this top-down commissioning model and continue to make the case for local commissioning and a democratic base for the work that Probation delivers. Privatisation has not delivered for communities and cannot deliver in the future. UNISON will continue to campaign against the privatisation of probation services.
- The Ministry of Justice will provide a response to the Probation Review Consultation results in the new year now.Given the Justice Secretary’s announcements yesterday, it is not surprising that the MoJ will now delay its response to the Probation Review. The views of Chris Grayling on the Probation Service are so different from his predecessor that all the previous thinking on the future of the probation service has gone out of the window.
It is unfortunate that we will have to wait a few more months before we get a definitive view from Government on its exact plans for the Probation Service, but the announcements yesterday do not bode well. UNISON will now be concentrating our resources on making the case for a Probation Service which is:
- Local
- Accountable
- Delivering the whole range of probation services including interventions
- Working with local communities
- Publically run and managed and not handed over to the private sector
A transcript of Chris Grayling’s speech can be found at: justice.gov.uk
Le texte intégral de l’intervention en pdf: rehabilitation revolution
