%0 Journal Article
%T Post
%A Matthew Cracknell
%J Probation Journal
%@ 1741-3079
%D 2018
%R 10.1177/0264550518776779
%X Transforming Rehabilitation (TR) promised a ¡®revolution¡¯ in the way offenders are managed, providing a renewed focus on short sentence prisoners. The TR reforms extends mandatory post-release supervision and tailored through-the-gate resettlement provisions to a group that has predominantly faced a ¡®history of neglect¡¯ yet often present with the most acute needs within the criminal justice system. However, existing literature underlines that serving short sentences lacks ¡®utility¡¯ and can be counter-productive to facilitating effective rehabilitation. This article explores the purposes of providing post-release supervision for short sentences, firstly exploring a previous attempt to reform short sentences, the now defunct ¡®Custody Plus¡¯ within the 2003 Criminal Justice Act, and then the Offender Rehabilitation Act (ORA) 2014 within the TR reforms. This article contends that both post-release reforms have sought to re-affirm and re-legitimise prison as the dominant form of punishment in society ¨C or what Carlen refers to as ¡®carceral clawback¡¯. This article will also use Cohen¡¯s analysis on social control to establish that post-release supervision will serve to ¡®widen the net¡¯, extend the period of punishment and oversight and will only reinforce a form of enforced ¡®state-obligated rehabilitation¡¯ that will undermine efforts made to resettle short sentence prisoners
%K ¡®through the gate¡¯
%K net-widening
%K post-release supervision
%K privatisation
%K probation
%K rehabilitation
%U https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0264550518776779