Total Pageviews

Thursday, 2 March 2017

How many times have IPP prisoners or life-sentenced prisoners heard the justification for parole refusal; ‘We have seen no progress demonstrating a significant improvement in behaviour’? So, if you behave throughout your sentence, complete all recommended OBPs, you still face parole refusal because the psychologist departments have no benchmarks

Many psychologists (and those that wish to minimise their own culpability) have a tendency to link adult behaviours to those experienced as a child. They use the reasoning that learned behaviour, or transference, impacts the development of emotional reasoning and cognitive decision-making as an adult; if the child is exposed to poor or socially unaccepted parenting.

You can’t blame the psychologists or psychiatrists though! They are taught archaic theories and perspectives from practitioners of a different (outlived) era. For any argument to be fully and widely accepted, there must be contra-data to compare and contrast proposed theories. However, there have been very few studies examining an opposing theory that may state that parenting or childhood experiences have little or no impact on cognitive reasoning as an adult.

” We are in a spiral of depravity caused by a change of accepted behaviours of our time; in comparison to those exhibited 30 years ago “

Has growing up with Punch & Judy shows, in which Mr Punch is often depicted as a violent wife-beating angry man, created a generation of chauvinistic domestic abusers? Has growing up with Grand Theft Auto created a generation of gun-toting, prostitute-murdering people? The answer to the above is a resounding NO.

Psychologists would agree that behaviours of today have evolved (or maybe devolved) into a more degenerative social status, or that we are in a spiral of depravity caused by a change of accepted behaviours of our time; in comparison to those exhibited 30 years ago. Whilst this might be true of some aspects of socially unacceptable behaviour; for the majority, this is a heavily diluted claim.

In the last 30 years, life in general has evolved. The way in which we communicate with each other, the way in which we share information, the way in which family, marriage or religion is viewed or practised has changed radically. The cultural diversity experienced in every country has changed, as has the role of the sexes. This multitude of influences has completely altered the social acceptance of today; it has radically changed the education system and the criminal justice system. It continually impacts on governmental policy-making and media focus. So why hasn’t it impacted on the psychological perspectives of those charged with this area of expertise?

Advice commonly given to those serving IPP or life sentence prisoners is that for the first couple of years, create problems and get in trouble, why? This seems counter-productive, does it not? Well, this is so the psychology department can justify their existence.

How many times have IPP prisoners or life-sentenced prisoners heard the justification for parole refusal; ‘We have seen no progress demonstrating a significant improvement in behaviour’? So, if you behave throughout your sentence, complete all recommended OBPs, you still face parole refusal because the psychologist departments have no benchmarks.
More than £1m has been paid out in compensation in the last five years after a backlog of parole hearings meant they were kept in prison for too long. A report published today reveals a growing number of outstanding parole hearings waiting to be heard nationwide, as a result of a 2013 Supreme Court ruling.It means the amount paid out to prisoners kept in jail longer than necessary has risen sharply, with last year’s total of £554,000 bringing the figure for compensation to £1.1m since 2011-12. More than 450 compensation claims were made in 2015/16, with inmates able to claim as much as £650 for every extra month spent in prison. window.
 According to the National Audit Office, half of the inmates left waiting for hearings for more than 90 days  whome were given an  (IPP) sentences or other .IPPs were created by the Criminal Justice Act 2003 and used from April 2005.
The offender serves a set number of years in prison followed by an indefinite period where they can only be released if the parole board no longer considers them a risk. But over six months last year, nearly 400 such cases were delayed by more than a year before a parole hearing was completed. Though IPP sentences were scrapped in 2012, as of last year around 4,000 IPP prisoners were still in the system, with around three-quarters having already served their minimum term.
It was claimed last year that convicts serving IPP sentences are turning to self-harm as they see no end to their detention.
 And in 2014, it was suggested that the high proportion of IPP inmates at HMP Hatfield in South Yorkshire was contributing to a spate of escape bids by inmates.
The National Audit Office said in its report: “Since 2011-12, the Board has paid out £1.1 million in compensation as a result of delays in hearings.“In 2015-16, prisoners were paid £554,000 in compensation for delayed hearings. This had increased from £87,000 in 2012-13.“As the board attempts to reduce the backlog of outstanding cases, it will crystallise its liability for an increased number of potential compensation claims, and compensation costs may increase.”The backlog developed because of a court case known as the ‘Osborn ruling’ in 2013, which increased the likelihood of longer and more expensive oral, rather than paper, hearings being held for prisoners.
This meant that the number of oral hearings carried out by the Parole Board increased from 4,628 in 2012-13 to 6,872 in 2014-15. At its peak in January 2015, there were more than 3,000 outstanding cases. The Parole Board, which is responsible for assessing the risk inmates pose to the community, wants to cut the number of serving IPP prisoners to 1,500 by 2020 and the overall number of outstanding cases to 1,200 by the end of this year.It launched a strategy to tackle the backlog last year and has developed a new system which has allowed it to process an average of 170 more cases each month.

The Chair of the Parole Board, Professor Nick Hardwick, said: “I am pleased the NAO has recognised the huge challenges the Parole Board faced as it dealt with more cases and more oral hearings with fewer Parole Board members. “As a result, the backlog of outstanding cases grew, with unacceptable delays for victims and prisoners. Given the scale of the challenge it has taken time to put things right.“I am pleased the NAO recognises the progress we have made. We have a new strategy, have recruited over a 100 new members and our backlogs are down by over a third.“There is more to do and the NAO report helpfully highlights a number of areas for us to focus on. I am confident we will continue to make progress whilst making sure that in each of the approximately 7,000 cases .

Prison creates an abnormal environment; continued frustration, repressed violence, peaks and troughs of depression and acceptance, exposure to addictions and differing criminality. This environment is unique to prison and yet psychologists determine and measure criminogenic factors of an individual whilst they are enveloped in this pseudo-environment. The behaviours, communications, attitudes and emotions of an individual are all influenced by environment and yet prison psychologists base their measurements and prognosis’ on what they see in front of them. They themselves do not live in this environment and are not exposed to the variance in behavioural attrition and can therefore, never fully appreciate the exposure of the melting pot of behaviours rife within prison.

I can explain the function and performance of the internal combustion engine, but having never seen one, I could never hope to fix one. Psychologists are exactly the same. You can read a hundred books and still never be able to understand what it is like to be a serving prisoner. Using that analogy, what qualifies psychologists within the prison system to determine whether a prisoner is fit for release/recategorisation?

In any commercial environment, a manager of people MUST have experienced the role of the people they expect to manage. Qualifications mean very little when compared to actual experience and success. So, why then do prison psychologists feel they shouldn’t have to conform to this internationally recognised blueprint.

Inside times
About the Author


About a month back the  Sun Newspaper wrote an article on IPP prisoners the article lacked fairness, balance, facts and natural justice.

Once more the sun News paper are up to there old tricks. They had to find a story to sell papers and doing what they do best  Scare monger as if the government don't know what they are doing.Is it not enough that we had 16 young IPP prisoners   deaths because they got trapped in a system  no fault of there own, they have gone through enough but they want more blood.
In response  I feel there objective is to attempt to undo what the government are achieving alongside Lis Truss. My personal may be responsible for the article.
The sun have been accused of lying going on hunts and  tapping phones being a snap shot  They also where the  instigator that HIPED THIS SENTACED  through which not originally intended for  minor offences  .The Sun  hunt like the  clu clux clan hunting there  pray  like dogs after rabbits. scandalising tearing down foundations and lives  regardless if they have all the facts .Tarring all Those sentenced to an  IPP like the same brush which is incorrect .There has been enough deaths without the Sun drawing more blood. 

IPP  prisoners  have spent some 5- 10 years more in prison at no fault of there own though  they have finished there sentence they are no longer called criminal as they have served. if the sun got there facts correct    Numbers of ipps were given the sentence for not what is was orginaly attended for such as burglary, ABH  Arson …
For those the  IPP  sentence was originally  intended for is  what the parole board will have to deal with. It is very dangerous ground to call people up for the same when this is not the case in resulting in there hunt . I will never by the paper again, they don't seemed to of learned there lesson.

Read more at:



No comments:

Post a Comment


Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.