ABSTRACT
The political forces of the late 19th century which shaped the early structure of probation were motivated by concerns about moral degeneracy and dangerousness but also faith in the efficacy of officers; whereas those of the late 20th century were motivated by similar concerns expressed in terms of risk and public protection but scepticism about that efficacy. That scepticism was the fuel of a process of centralization enacted alongside age old, familiar conflicts such as the psychology of the individual versus the environment, help versus control, and treatment versus practical help. That process took place within a harsher political climate, and as this chapter shows involved mixed fortunes for advocates of officer autonomy, anti-discriminatory practice, the addressing of socio-economic problems and evidence-based programmes. During the final phase of autonomy, the end of which began with the Statement of National Objectives and Priorities (SNOP), an eclectic range of practices flourished.
