Law and Politics in the Reign of Charles I: The Case of John Prigeon

The case of John Prigeon (1634) was an important precedent in the development of administrative law, and the control of local agencies by the central courts. This article shows that its apparent simplicity is misleading. The case was relevant to a major conflict between two powerful personalities, Archbishop Laud and Bishop Williams, over the religious policies of the Caroline regime, and over patronage in the church and the royal court. It also raises issues of the independence of the judiciary in Charles I's reign and the common law judges' understanding of their role both in their own courts and in Star Chamber. This latter is the particular focus of this article.     

‘Coping with the job’: prison staff responding to self-harm in three English female prisons: a qualitative study

This study considers how those who work in prisons are affected by and respond to repetitive self-harm of imprisoned women in English prisons. This paper considers the perspectives of custodial staff working in this area on a day-to-day basis. Semi-structured face-to-face interviews were conducted with 14 prison staff and explored using techniques of thematic analysis. The interviews examined: the emotional impact of working with and witnessing self-harm incidents, coping strategies used, training and the support available to prison staff. Findings indicate the strategies used by staff to cope emotionally with such incidents and these include presenting a ‘façade of coping’, rejecting support and becoming desensitised. It is concluded that staff felt they must portray themselves as coping well with self-harm in prison even when they were troubled and emotionally affected by it. However, some did describe accepting help when outside of the prison and this has implications for how support can be offered in the future. It is recommended that more should be done to support and train staff in this area.     

Differentiating patterns of substance misuse by subtypes of antisocial traits in male offenders

Among criminal offenders, two subtypes of antisocial traits, psychopathy and externalizing-only, are associated with an especially elevated risk for substance use disorders (SUDs). The present study examined the associations of these traits with patterns of substance misuse. In a sample of 1410 male offenders, we used diagnoses for alcohol, cannabis, opioids, and stimulants to examine the association between antisocial traits and SUD severity, as well as, age at substance use initiation. Results indicated that externalizing-only, but not psychopathic, traits predicted greater severity of SUDs (i.e. increased likelihood of dependence) across all substances. By contrast, psychopathic, but not externalizing-only, traits predicted earlier initiation of use across all substances. These differential patterns of substance misuse may be a reflection of distinct psychobiological processes. Ultimately, parsing the patterns of substance use across a continuum of clinically heterogeneous samples, rather than within circumscribed diagnostic categories, might help to refine the phenotype and improve the prediction of substance-related problems.     

Work-Family Balance and Job Satisfaction: The Impact of Family-Friendly Policies on Attitudes of Federal Government Employees

We use the 1991 Survey of Federal Government Employees to test a theoretical framework regarding the relationships between work and family demands, family-friendly policies, satisfaction with work-family balance, and job satisfaction for diverse groups of employees with different personal and family needs. We find that a variety of policies widely presumed to be "family friendly" were used to varying degrees by disparate groups of federal employees. The use of such policies had very diverse effects on both employee satisfaction with work-family balance and job satisfaction, within and across various groups of similarly situated employees. The assumptions underlying the provision of family-friendly policies and implications for the organization are examined.     

The Intensification and Bifurcation of Surveillance in British Criminal Justice Policy

This paper explores the relevance and applicability of recent theoretical developments in surveillance studies in the context of contemporary British criminal justice policy. It will be argued that surveillance now occupies a privileged position in official policy. In a raft of new policy initiatives undertaken either as part the general project to modernise the criminal justice system or in response to particular crises, the surveillant solution occupies the central stage. Thus, whether it be in response to anxieties over sex offenders, failures of social services in protecting children at risk, or the management of the prison population, for example, the policy response has been to increase the surveillance capacity of the state. In particular, in line with the new penology thesis we are witnessing an expansion of the generalised surveillance capacity, in relation to all citizens, which may be characterised as passive and reactive. Simultaneously, vestiges of the old criminology remain as an officially designated ‘hard core’ of persistent or problematic offenders subject to the full panoply of surveillance techniques, which are proactive, extensive and intrusive. Thus, we are witnessing both an intensification and a bifurcation of surveillance practice. This paper was prepared for the European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research special edition on Fear vs. Freedom post 9/11-The European Perspective.     

Who needs fact when you’ve got narrative? The case of P,C&S vs United Kingdom

Legal arguments and judgements ostensibly rely for their credibility and persuasiveness on the presentation of factual claims and determination of facts through due process. While it should follow that proceedings that are undermined by disregard for facticity and due process should not appear credible or persuasive, in practice this is not always the case. In cases where narratives are not firmly underpinned by factuality and due process a series of narrative techniques and processes can be brought into play to enhance the persuasiveness and credibility of those narratives. These processes include the reliance on a narrative trajectory, the presentation of consensus, drawing on supportive discourses, the privileging of certain narrators and the smoothing over of contradictory evidence. This paper examines these processes in the case of P,C&S vs United Kingdom in which in the absence of fact and due process a local authority and the domestic courts in the UK constructed and confirmed a narrative of a dangerous mother.