Use this URL to cite or link to this record in EThOS: http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.407177
Title: Punishment, treatment or management? : policy and strategy towards prisoners with mental health problems in England and Wales between 1987 and 1996
Author: Seddon, Toby Robert.
Awarding Body: Goldsmiths College (University of London)
Current Institution: Goldsmiths College (University of London)
Date of Award: 2004
Availability of Full Text:
Full text unavailable from EThOS. Restricted access. Please contact the current institution's library directly if you wish to view the thesis.
Abstract:
In Britain, the last three decades of the twentieth century have seen a series of profound social, economic, cultural and penal transformations which have been described by some as indicative of a shift from modernity to late modernity. The principal and overarching research question for this thesis is whether these transformations have also led to a reconfiguring of the ways in which the 'mad' and the 'bad' are defined, categorised and divided. Focusing on the 1980s and 1990s, the research looks specifically at the government of those 'mentally disordered offenders' who are deemed more 'bad' than 'mad', more suitable for punishment than treatment and more appropriately sent to prison rather than hospital. The 'problem' for investigation is how this group of prisoners, who had since the 1930s been seen as potentially suitable for treatment or therapeutic responses, came to be viewed increasingly as sources of 'risk' requiring 'management', containment or control. The findings from this research show that the 1980s and 1990s did indeed see a reconfiguring of 'dividing practices' aimed at 'mentally disordered prisoners'. Some novel governmental rationalities and technologies were inserted in to strategies. However, there was not a wholesale paradigm shift, with a new strategy succeeding and replacing the preceding penal-welfare strategy. Rather, this period saw a complex and rapidly-changing multifaceted strategic 'mix' of a range of elements, including, managerial ism, humanitarianism and 'penal populism'. An increasing focus on risk management was particularly evident. It is argued that, at the start of the twenty-first century, a new 'kaleidoscopic' penality has emerged in which apparently new strategic patterns are endlessly created through the rotation and re-orientation of the same constituent parts (punitive, neo-liberal and humanitarian rationalities). The thesis has also developed a theoretical and methodological approach which significantly advances methods in socio-historical research.
Supervisor: Not available Sponsor: Not available
Qualification Name: Thesis (Ph.D.) Qualification Level: Doctoral
EThOS ID: uk.bl.ethos.407177  DOI: Not available
Share: