Mentee and mentor perceptions of a mentoring court for high-risk probationers

Abstract

As part of an evaluation of the only known mentoring problem-solving court for adult moderate- and high-risk probationers in the United States, the current study investigated mentors and mentees’ perceptions of the programme. Data sources included surveys of and focus groups with mentees as well as online monthly reports from mentors. Qualitative analysis revealed that both mentors and mentees reported positive mentoring relationships, while mentees were concerned about issues of relatability and enabling. Mentees also perceived the programme to be a sanctuary from their chaotic everyday lives and a very new experience within the justice system.

Keywords

mentoring problem-solving court probation credible messengers procedural justice

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Austria

Peterson

(2017) Credible messenger mentoring for justice-involved youth. The Pinkerton Papers. Available at: http://www.thepinkertonfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Pinkerton-Papers-credible-messenger-monitoring.pdf (accessed 25 June 2020).

Barnes

Hyatt

(2012) Classifying adult probationers by forecasting future offending. Available at: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/238082.pdf (accessed 25 June 2020).

Bottoms

Tankebee

(2012) Beyond procedural justice: a dialogic approach to legitimacy in criminal justice. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 102(1): 119–170.

Brown

Ross

(2010) Mentoring, social capital and desistance: a study of women released from prison. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology 43(1): 31–50.

Buck

(2018) The core conditions of peer mentoring. Criminology and Criminal Justice 18(10): 190–206.

Garcia

(2016) The importance of the mentor–mentee relationship in women’s desistance from destructive behaviors. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology 60(7): 808–827.

Gross

(2010) The effects of net-widening on minority and indigent drug offenders: a critique of drug courts. University of Maryland Law Journal of Race, Religion, Gender and Class 10: 161–178.

Hucklesby

Wincup

(2014) Assistance, support and monitoring? The paradoxes of mentoring adults in the criminal justice system. Journal of Social Policy 43(02): 373–390.

Kavanagh

Borril

(2013) Exploring the experiences of ex-offender mentors. Probation Journal 60(4): 400–414.

10.

Koschmann

Peterson

(2013) Rethinking recidivism. Journal of Applied Social Science 7(2): 188–207.

11.

Lynch

Astone

Collazos

, et al. (2018) Arches Transformative Mentoring Program: An Implementation and Impact Evaluation in New York City. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.

12.

Porter

Rempel

Mansky

(2010) What Makes a Court Problem Solving? Universal Performance Indicators for Problem-Solving Justice. New York: Center for Court Innovation.

13.

Spinak

(2010) A conversation about problem-solving courts: take 2. University of Maryland Law Journal of Race, Religion, Gender and Class 10: 113–136.

14.

Taylor

(2019) MENTOR Program Evaluation Report. Available at: https://digitalcommons.lasalle.edu/soc_crj_faculty/10 (accessed 25 June 2020).

15.

Tyler

(1990) Why People Obey the Law. New Haven: Yale University Press.

16.

Tyler

Huo

(2002) Trust in the Law: Encouraging Public Cooperation with the Police and Courts. New York: Russell-Sage Foundation.

17.

Walker

Bowen

(2015) Mentoring serial and high-risk perpetrators of intimate partner violence in the community: engagement and initiating change. Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health 25(4): 299–313.