Zoekresultaat: 6 artikelen

x
De zoekresultaten worden gefilterd op:
Tijdschrift PROCES x Jaar 2017 x
Artikel

Veilige resocialisatie van zedendaders met inzet van vrijwilligers

Tijdschrift PROCES, Aflevering 6 2017
Trefwoorden COSA, Zedendelinquenten, Resocialisatie, Vrijwilligers
Auteurs Dr. Mechtild Höing en Audrey Alards
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Circles of Support and Accountability (COSA) is a method in which volunteers support and monitor a convicted sex offender during his or her re-entry into society in order to prevent new sex offences. COSA was developed in Canada in 1994 as a grass roots approach to an acute crisis in a small town near Toronto, and since then has spread throughout Canada. In 2002, the COSA model was introduced and further developed in England, and from there the approach found its way to the Netherlands, where circle projects are provided by the Dutch Probation Organization since 2010. Until now, more than one hundred sex offenders (‘core members’ in a circle) have participated in a circle in the Netherlands. Although the COSA model predates the Good Lives Model, it’s basic principles align very well to the Good Lives Model. In COSA, a group of three to five volunteers form a surrogate social network, that offers social inclusion, practical and moral support in all kinds of daily challenges the core member faces, and that monitors risk and risk behavior. The volunteers are supervised by a professional circle-coordinator and supported by professionals who are involved in the core members’ after care arrangements. The COSA intervention model describes a number of conditions and strategies that support its effectiveness. Canadian, American and English case-control studies into the effectiveness of COSA shows a substantial reduction of offending behavior in core members compared to controls. Since the international proliferation of the COSA model is ever increasing, protecting the program integrity is a growing concern, and stresses the need for international cooperation between COSA providers.


Dr. Mechtild Höing
Dr. Mechtild Höing is socioloog aan het Expertisecentrum Veiligheid van de Avans Hogeschool en projectleider en lid van de kenniskring lectoraat Veiligheid in afhankelijkheidsrelaties.

Audrey Alards
Audrey Alards is werkzaam bij Reclassering Nederland; als cirkelcoördinator is zij sinds 2009 werkzaam voor COSA.
Artikel

Hoe werkt vroegsignalering door lokale jongerenwerkers in de strijd tegen terrorisme?

Tijdschrift PROCES, Aflevering 4 2017
Trefwoorden Radicalisering, Gewelddadig extremisme, Jongerenwerker, Subjectieve oordeelsvorming
Auteurs Annemarie van de Weert MSc en Mr. dr. Quirine Eijkman
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article analyses whether the local youth worker can operate on the intersection of social welfare and signalling of extremism. Although it is a rare phenomenon, there is a clear message from the government to watch out for the first signs of deviant behavior and unacceptable behavior. However, shouldn’t we ask ourselves whether youth workers are adequately equipped at local level to signal threat? The qualitative results show that in daily practice there is a lack of clear standards which make terminology for social professionals not easily distinguished. In addition their opinion depends largely on their own intuition regarding the issues. This can create side effects which form a risk that the local terrorism policy does not have the intended effect.


Annemarie van de Weert MSc
Annemarie van de Weert MSc is onderzoeker Toegang tot het recht aan het Kenniscentrum Sociale Innovatie (KSI), Hogeschool Utrecht.

Mr. dr. Quirine Eijkman
Mr. dr. Quirine Eijkman is lector Toegang tot het recht aan het Kenniscentrum Sociale Innovatie (KSI), Hogeschool Utrecht.
Artikel

Nog niet effectief genoeg: het huisverbod in perspectief

Tijdschrift PROCES, Aflevering 3 2017
Trefwoorden huisverbod, huiselijk geweld, effectiviteit, integrale aanpak
Auteurs Drs. Katrien de Vaan
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In 2009 the Dutch temporary restraining order Act came into being. The order is a much used instrument in the fight against domestic violence. However, it’s effectivity has yet to be proven beyond doubt. There are signs the order can be effective, but it is unknown what influences this effect: which choices in its implementation, which characteristics of violence and those involved, which characteristics of the care that is provided.
    This article claims that the temporary restraining order can be more effective if we collect more data on what it is that makes it effective, and use this data to mirror the order against other instruments that are available in the fight against domestic violence. In that way, we can choose the instrument that best suits the situation, instead of picking the temporary restraining order simply because it is most readily available. This means the following is necessary: 1) more knowledge about the types of situations in which the order can be most effective; 2) more knowledge about the effects of choices that are being made in the implementation of the instrument; 3) an overview of all available instruments for intervening in situations of serious and immediate threat of domestic violence and the effects that can be reached with those instruments; and 4) a better use of available knowledge about the effects of care and assistance to victims and perpetrators of domestic violence to improve the trajectories that accompany temporary restraining orders. This will enable a more balanced choice between these orders and other interventions and will improve the effects of the orders and the care and assistance that accompanies them.


Drs. Katrien de Vaan
Drs. K.B.M. de Vaan werkt als expert sociaal domein bij Regioplan. Zij is sinds de testfase van het huisverbod met onderzoek en advies betrokken bij de ontwikkeling daarvan, en schreef onder andere een handreiking voor de uitvoering en een advies over doorontwikkeling van het instrument.
Artikel

De reclassering en de lokale samenwerking

Tijdschrift PROCES, Aflevering 2 2017
Trefwoorden Reclassering, sociaal domein,, samenwerken in het sociaal domein, frontlinie werker
Auteurs Drs. Lous Krechtig en Drs. Mirjam Wildeboer
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Recently the Dutch probation is faced with changes in the local situation: new forms of cooperation and networks have emerged, due to the transformation of the social domain. The probation officers participate on different levels in these networks. They can no longer simply deliver their ‘products’, but have to ‘do what is necessary. A lot of decisions have to be made on the operational level.
    Examples of the changes are given. Recent research on cooperation in the social domain show that ‘cooperation’ is easier sad then done. These changes ask for a new set of competences.


Drs. Lous Krechtig
Drs. Lous Krechtig is senior ontwikkelaar en onderzoeker bij het lectoraat Werken in Justitieel Kader bij het Kenniscentrum Sociale Innovatie van de Hogeschool Utrecht.

Drs. Mirjam Wildeboer
Mirjam Wildeboer is kwaliteitsfunctionaris voor de regio zuid-west van Reclassering Nederland en neemt deel aan de Master Forensisch Sociale Professional.
Redactioneel

Reclassering: professionalisering en samenwerking

Tijdschrift PROCES, Aflevering 2 2017
Auteurs Drs. Jacqueline Bosker en Dr. Jaap A. van Vliet
Auteursinformatie

Drs. Jacqueline Bosker
Dr. Jacqueline Bosker is hogeschoolhoofddocent bij het Instituut voor Recht en onderzoeker bij het lectoraat Werken in Justitieel Kader van Hogeschool Utrecht. Tevens is zij redacteur van PROCES.

Dr. Jaap A. van Vliet
Dr. Jaap A. van Vliet is zelfstandig gevestigd adviseur en onderzoeker. Hij is tevens redacteur van PROCES.
Artikel

‘Buurt Bestuurt Niet’

Empirisch onderzoek naar burgerparticipatie in een Rotterdamse achterstandswijk

Tijdschrift PROCES, Aflevering 1 2017
Trefwoorden CLEAR-Model, security and safety management, CAPS, Rotterdam
Auteurs Marc Schuilenburg
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In this article, I report on an ethnographic research project conducted in 2013-2015 in Rotterdam’s neighbourhood Hillesluis on ‘Community Governs’, a community-based program which goal is to solve neighbourhood crime and disorder problems. By making use of the CLEAR model, the article focuses on three factors of effective participation of citizens: ‘Enabled to’, ‘Asked to’, and ‘Responded to’. The results indicate that making residents of a deprived neighbourhood responsible for the governing of safety and security issues is extremely difficult. It also becomes clear that the participants don’t believe that their involvement is making a difference in the neighbourhood. An importantly explanation for this is that the participants are not provided enough information to make the right decisions about which safety problems need to be tackled.


Marc Schuilenburg
Marc Schuilenburg is universitair docent Strafrecht en Criminologie aan de Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
Interface Showing Amount
U kunt door de volledige tekst zoeken naar alle artikelen door uw zoekterm in het zoekveld in te vullen. Als u op de knop 'Zoek' heeft geklikt komt u op de zoekresultatenpagina met filters, die u helpen om snel bij het door u gezochte artikel te komen. Er zijn op dit moment twee filters: rubriek en jaar.