Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

The Norwegian Correctional Service ascribes to both a humane and rehabilitative approach to incarceration which includes the use of dynamic security practices, emphasizing relationship-building and communication between officers and incarcerated individuals. In addition, officers are expected to actively participate in the rehabilitative process. Despite Norway’s low rates of prison-based violence, there remain questions about officers’ ability to implement dynamic security and contribute to therapeutic goals. The current study explores perspectives about dynamic security and officer relationships using a questionnaire (n = 81) and semi-structured interview (n = 47) data from individuals incarcerated at Halden Prison in Norway. Findings indicate that officers have generally attained authoritative legitimacy through dynamic security, but their participation in the rehabilitative process is met with resistance stemming from prison culture expectations of officers’ role in enacting State punishment. Results from this study provide meaningful insights into the role of dynamic security implementation and the contributions of correctional officers to the rehabilitative process.

Keywords

corrections rehabilitation correctional officers qualitative analysis prisoners prison

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Abdel-Salam

Sunde

H. M.

(2018). Enhancing the role of correctional officers in American prisons: Lessons learned from Norway. Federal Sentencing Reporter, 31(1), 67–74. https://doi.org/10.1525/fsr.2018.31.1.67

Ahalt

Haney

Ekhaugen

Williams

(2020). Role of a US-Norway exchange in placing health and well-being at the center of US prison reform. American Journal of Public Health, 110(S1), S27–S29. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2019.305444

Ahalt

Peters

C. S.

Steward

Williams . (2019). Transforming prison culture to improve correctional staff wellness and outcomes for adults in custody “the Oregon way”: A partnership between the Oregon department of corrections and the University of California’s correctional culture change program. Advancing Corrections Journal, 8, 130–142.

Appelbaum

K. L.

Hickey

J. M.

Packer

(2001). The role of correctional officers in multidisciplinary mental health care in prisons. Psychiatric Services, 52(10), 1343–1347. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ps.52.10.1343

Beijersbergen

K. A.

Dirkzwager

A. J.

Molleman

van der Laan

P. H.

Nieuwbeerta

(2015). Procedural justice in prison: The importance of staff characteristics. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 59(4), 337–358. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X13512767

Berg

B. L.

Hune

(2007). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences (6th ed.). Pearson.

Blagden

Winder

Hames

(2016). “They treat us like human beings”—Experiencing a therapeutic sex offenders’ prison: Impact on prisoners and staff and implications for treatment. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 60(4), 371–396. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X145532

Brooks

(2006). Security is the number one job in corrections: How well trained is your staff? Corrections Today, 68(6), 18–19.

Butler

Drake

D. H.

(2007). Reconsidering respect: Its role in her majesty’s prison service. The Howard Journal of Criminal Justice, 46(2), 115–127. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2311.2007.00460.x

10.

Camp

S. D.

Daggett

D. M.

(2016). Correctional and treatment staff attitudes toward reentry: Nature of the differences and why we care. Criminal Justice Review, 41(4), 393–408. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734016816665155

11.

Charmaz

(2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. SAGE.

12.

Correctional Service Canada. (2016). Classification of institutions. http://www.csc-scc.gc.ca/lois-et-reglements/706-cd-eng.shtml

13.

Council of Europe. (2006). European prison rules. Council of Europe Publishing.

14.

Crewe

(2011a). Depth, weight, tightness: Revisiting the pains of imprisonment. Punishment & Society, 13(5), 509–529. https://doi.org/10.1177/1462474511422172

15.

Crewe

(2011b). Soft power in prison: Implications for staff–prisoner relationships, liberty and legitimacy. European Journal of Criminology, 8(6), 455–468. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477370811413805

16.

Crewe

Liebling

(2015). Staff culture, authority, and prison violence. Prison Service Journal, 221, 9–14.

17.

Douglas

Caulfield

(2014). Relinquishing control? An exploration of staff working in a therapeutic community prison. Prison Service Journal, 213, 24–30.

18.

Dvoskin

J. A.

Spiers

E. M.

(2004). On the role of correctional officers in prison mental health. Psychiatric Quarterly, 75(1), 41–59. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:PSAQ.0000007560.09475.a0

19.

Ecole Nationale D’Administration Pénitentiaire. (2018). Dynamic security. https://www.epta.info/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/brochure_dynamic-security-2018-1.pdf

20.

Fereday

Muir-Cochrane

(2008). Demonstrating rigor using thematic analysis: A hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 5(1), 80–92. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690600500107

21.

Glaser

B. G.

Strauss

A. L.

(2009). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Transaction Publishers.

22.

Hacin

Meško

(2018). Prisoners’ perception of legitimacy of the prison staff: A qualitative study in Slovene prisons. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 62(13), 4332–4350. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X18758896

23.

Hean

Willumsen

Ødegård

(2017). Collaborative practices between correctional and mental health services in Norway: Expanding the roles and responsibility competence domain. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 31(1), 18–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/13561820.2016.1233392

24.

Hepburn

J. R.

Albonetti

(1980). Role conflict in correctional institutions: An empirical examination of the treatment-custody dilemma among correctional staff. Criminology, 17(4), 445–460. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.1980.tb01308.x

25.

Hulley

Liebling

Crewe

(2012). Respect in prisons: Prisoners’ experiences of respect in public and private sector prisons. Criminology & Criminal Justice, 12(1), 3–23. https://doi.org/10.1177/1748895811423088

26.

Josi

D. A.

Sechrest

D. K.

(1996). Treatment versus security: Adversarial relationship between treatment facilitators and correctional officers. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 23(1–2), 167–184. https://doi.org/10.1300/J076v23n01_15

27.

Kikas

Koopmansch

J. P.

Linderborg

Stageberg

(2021a). Best practices in dynamic security training. European Penitentiaries Training Academy. https://www.epta.info/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/EPTA_05_SIG2-Dynamic-Security_EN_def.pdf

28.

Kikas

Koopmansch

J. P.

Linderborg

Stageberg

(2021b). Minimum standards for dynamic security training. European Penitentiaries Training Academy. https://digiriiul.sisekaitse.ee/bitstream/handle/123456789/2819/Minimum%20Standards%20for%20dynamic%20Security%20Training.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

29.

Kirby

E. J.

(2019, July 7). How Norway turns criminals into good neighbors. BBC News. https://www.bbc.com/news/stories-48885846

30.

Klocke

(2021). Evaluating the success of Oregon’s Norwegian-inspired prison reform [Honors Thesis, University of Oregon]. University of Oregon Scholars’ Bank. https://scholarsbank.uoregon.edu/xmlui/handle/1794/26536

31.

Kolind

Frank

V. A.

Lindberg

Tourunen

(2015). Officers and drug counsellors: New occupational identities in Nordic prisons. British Journal of Criminology, 55(2), 303–320. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azu088

32.

Kriminalomsorgens høgskole og utdanningssenter. (n.d.). Studies at KRUS. https://www.krus.no/studies.511950.no.html

33.

Leggett

Hirons

(2007). Security and dynamic security in a therapeutic community prison. In Parker

(ed.), Dynamic security: The democratic therapeutic community in prison (pp. 232–241). Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

34.

Liebling

(2011). Distinctions and distinctiveness in the work of prison officers: Legitimacy and authority revisited. European Journal of Criminology, 8(6), 484–499. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477370811413807

35.

Logan

M. W.

Jonson

C. L.

Johnson

Cullen

F. T.

(2022). Agents of change or control? Correlates of positive and negative staff-inmate relationships among a sample of formerly incarcerated inmates. Corrections, 7(3), 175–195. https://doi.org/10.1080/23774657.2020.1749181

36.

North Dakota Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. (2020). ND DOCR report card July 2020. https://www.docr.nd.gov/reports-and-statistics

37.

Norwegian Correctional Service. (n.d.). 2020 annual report. https://www.kriminalomsorgen.no

38.

Ricciardelli

Perry

(2016). Responsivity in practice: Prison officer to prisoner communication in Canadian provincial prisons. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 32(4), 401–425. https://doi.org/10.1177/1043986216660004

39.

Rubin

H. J.

Rubin

I. S.

(1995). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data. SAGE.

40.

Santorso

(2021). Rehabilitation and dynamic security in the Italian prison: Challenges in transforming prison officers’ roles. The British Journal of Criminology, 61(6), 1557–1574. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azab015

41.

Smith

P. S.

Ugelvik

(2017). Introduction: Punishment, welfare and prison history in Scandinavia. In Smith

P. S.

Ugelvik

(Eds.), Scandinavian penal history, culture and prison practice (pp. 3–31). Palgrave Macmillan.

42.

Steiner

Wooldredge

(2018). Prison officer legitimacy, their exercise of power, and inmate rule breaking. Criminology, 56(4), 750–779. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9125.12191

43.

Sykes

G. M.

(1958). The society of captives: A study of a maximum security prison. Princeton University Press.

44.

Ugelvik

(2022). The transformative power of trust: Exploring tertiary desistance in reinventive prisons. The British Journal of Criminology, 62(3), 623–638. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azab076

45.

United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime. (2015). Handbook on dynamic security and prison intelligence. https://www.unodc.org/documents/justice-and-prison-reform/UNODC_Handbook_on_Dynamic_Security_and_Prison_Intelligence.pdf

46.

Young

J. L.

Antonio

M. E.

Wingeard

L. M

. (2009). How staff attitude and support for inmate treatment and rehabilitation differs by job category: An evaluation of findings from Pennsylvania’s Department of Corrections’ employee training curriculum “Reinforcing Positive Behavior.” Journal of Criminal Justice, 37(5), 435–441. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2009.07.003

“The Uniform’s in the Way”: Navigating the Tension Between Security and Therapeutic Roles in a Rehabilitation-Focused Prison in Norway

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References