A qualitative enquiry into the experiences of Prison Offender Managers providing evidence at Parole Board directed oral hearings in a category C prison
Résumé fourni par la source
Aim: Professionals are often directed to attend formal hearings as a witness to provide evidence to a Parole Board. However, given the gravity of the hearing this may lead to adverse reactions on the part of the witness. Within a forensic setting, evidence is taken at an oral hearing. This is a decisive meeting where the test for release is considered for a serving prisoner. To date there has been very limited research published exploring how professional witnesses experience this aspect of their work. This research therefore aimed to capture the experiences of Prison Offender Managers (POMs) who have attended and provided evidence at oral hearings. Method: Semi-structured interviews were carried out with six POMs, and data was analysed using Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis. Results: Four themes were identified: ‘Forecasting the hearing’, ‘A combative experience’, ‘Coping’ and a ‘Return to normal state’. Implications: The findings have implications for training, reframing of their experiences, and individualised support for POMs who attend and give evidence at oral hearings. Limitations and future research: This research was conducted in a single site with POMs, as a result, additional research which extends on this sample may provide more insight into this area of forensic work.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- A qualitative enquiry into the experiences of Prison Offender Managers providing evidence at Parole Board directed oral hearings in a category C prison
- Date Crossref
- 07/08/2026
- Éditeur
- British Psychological Society
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude et ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.