Feeling the difference:care ethics, emotional information & sentencing

real people

Dr Helen Brown Coverdale FHEA h.a.coverdale@lse.ac.uk @helencoverdale

UFP, Barcelona, 22nd May 2015

emotional information – the missing pieces

Plea in mitigation

Pre-sentence report

Chinese whispers – adding opportunity for misunderstanding

Interactional justice – Feeling heard & included as equal

Interactional justice – Feeling included as equal

‘You don’t think you’re important enough to speak to a Sheriff. Cos you open your mouth maybe in court and … they would just go ‘silence’ (McIvor 2009, p.41 quoted offenders response)

He’ll listen to your point of view and there’s not many Sheriffs that will. He looks through the addiction, I think, and sees the person who is there.’ (McIvor 2009, p.41 quoted offenders response)

‘what’s good about it is because I’m getting treated now like a human being and an equal.’ (McIvor 2009, p.43 quoted offenders response)

McIvor 2009 – Offenders’ responses

Mair & Millings 2011 – Offenders’ responses

At the mainstream court:‘I know [nothing] of what’s happening, sometimes I don’t even speak and like they’ve done it all and I’m on my way and still don’t know what’s happened’ (Mair & Millings 2011, p.78)

At the problem-solving court:‘They pay more attention and they seem interested in what you say, even the bizzies here treat you with respect’ (Mair & Millings 2011, p.77)

Integrity

Practice Values

Attitude

CARE

Visualising Care Ethics

Traditional decision-making

Relationships

Helen Brown Coverdale h.a.coverdale@lse.ac.uk 11th February 2012

Care Ethics

Care Ethics

Relationships

Housing?

Health?Employment?

skills?

Needs?

Care Ethics

Relationships

Interdependency

Care Ethics

Relationships

Interdependency

Care Ethics

Responsibility

Relationships

Interdependency

Care Ethics

Changes with time

Responsibility

Care Ethics

Core themes

•Rationality•Interdependency•Responsibilities•Situatedness

Practices

•Valuing emotional information•Listening•Iterative practice

Care Ethics: resonances

Therapeutic jurisprudence:Drug Courts

•Regular, responsive, supportive contact between sentencer and offender•Medical model paradigmatic of caring practice•Requires :

Desistance paradigm:

•Supportive practitioner-offender relationships require:

•Valuing emotional information•Listening•Iterative practice

Context: Emotional, Personal, Social Information

Risks:May give rise to:•Bias•Prejudice•Interpreting need as Risk•Coerced care in some case?

Context: Emotional, Personal, Social Information

Risks:May give rise to:•Bias•Prejudice•Interpreting need as Risk•Coerced care in some case?

Responses:•Care ethics reflexive and reflective review practices•Basic rights•Principle of protecting the vulnerable•Developments in therapeutic & problem-solving jurisprudence•More research needed