ORCID Profile
0000-0002-0848-9467
Does something not look right? The information on this page has been harvested from data sources that may not be up to date. We continue to work with information providers to improve coverage and quality. To report an issue, use the Feedback Form.
In Research Link Australia (RLA), "Research Topics" refer to ANZSRC FOR and SEO codes. These topics are either sourced from ANZSRC FOR and SEO codes listed in researchers' related grants or generated by a large language model (LLM) based on their publications.
Social Policy | Policy and Administration
Ability and Disability | Structure, Delivery and Financing of Community Services |
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 02-01-2020
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 10-02-2017
Publisher: SAGE Publications
Date: 07-06-2022
DOI: 10.1177/26326663221103434
Abstract: On 9 August 2019, a workshop convened at the University of Melbourne, Australia, brought together academics, practitioners and advocates to explore patterns of violence and neglect within and across a range of confined settings: youth and adult prisons, immigration detention, aged and disability care and residential ‘child protection’. Some of the participants in that workshop reflect here in eight pieces of writing that comprise this Special Themed Collection on ‘Confinement: The spaces and practice of care and control’. The contributions are anchored and connected by the parallels in how violence manifests within and across these erse sites of confinement – corporeally and subtly, in idually and collectively. Yet as we reflect, separately and together, the differentiation and demarcation of these sites and systems of confinement serves to maintain their material and symbolic separation, and to conceal their connecting threads and commonalities. In our Editorial Introduction, we draw out themes running through the contributions to illustrate how they connect and collide, and how they illuminate intersections, differences and (sometimes unexpected) resonances between spaces, practices, settings and experiences of confinement. We identify three themes running through the seven other pieces that comprise this collection: erasure, identity and voice. Against the backdrop of the global pandemic and its implications for how we think about and experience freedom, autonomy, isolation and connection, we consider these themes: how violence is hidden from view and erased from public and political memory how identities are shaped and swallowed by institutional practices and patterns of dehumanisation, coercion and control and how the voices of those with lived experience of confinement – both as ‘keepers’ and the confined – help deepen our understanding of the threads that connect and comprise the carceral webs in which we are all entangled.
Publisher: SAGE Publications
Date: 18-09-2019
Abstract: When issues emerge in women’s imprisonment, criminology often responds with narratives of ‘difference’. In this article we respond to the call of Barbara Hudson, and generate a ‘criminology of ersity’ instead. We present the case of Vietnamese women in Victoria, Australia, whose incarceration is increasing at an alarming rate. According to government discourse, this increase occurs because Vietnamese women in Victoria have a distinct ‘problem gambling’ pathway to crime that is supported by Vietnamese lending arrangements. Seeking to disaggregate and denature this essentialist and reductionist narrative, we draw on the accounts of specialist Vietnamese community workers to explore the various meanings and significance of gambling in the lives of Vietnamese women in Victoria. We further engage with the work of Paul Gilroy on diasporic identities and Ghassan Hage on vacillations to illustrate what is gained by recognizing the overlaps, parallels and points of ergence that form within and between ‘different’ groups.
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 03-07-2014
Publisher: Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Date: 12-2011
Abstract: There is concern among socio-legal scholars about the relationship that has formed between scholarly research and public policy. Pat Carlen contends that in the case of criminology, this relationship sees scholars increasingly struggle to maintain their critical capacity. The problem, according to Carlen, is that scholars trying to increase research output through partnership with policy makers often find this partnership hinges on an agreement that any research produced will conform to the parameters of the policy makers' needs. Furthermore, when scholars do not seek partnership with policy makers, they may face political hurdles in gaining access to institutional data. Scholars may be required to demonstrate the direct policy relevance of their research before policy makers will consider the type and extent of access granted. These kinds of barriers to data access have the potential to adversely impact the critical merit of socio-legal scholarship. This paper employs my own research as a case study to explore some of the foundations for socio-legal scholars' concerns about the appearance and impact of barriers to institutional data. My research aimed to explore how correctional agencies approach the offender rehabilitation principle of responsivity in relation to Indigenous offenders. Contemporary correctional literature states that to be responsive, correctional agencies must identify variances among offenders that may affect the delivery and reception of programs. Significantly, however, it is unclear what, if anything, correctional agencies should do to accommodate variances once identified. Accordingly, I sought access to correctional agencies to interview staff working in the areas of Indigenous offender rehabilitation policy and service who could elaborate on their agencies' approach to Indigenous offender responsivity. Agencies in four jurisdictions were approached. In seeking access to this institutional data, I encountered two main barriers that impacted the scope and direction of the project in unexpected ways.
Publisher: Routledge
Date: 02-08-2022
Publisher: Routledge
Date: 02-08-2022
Publisher: Routledge
Date: 02-08-2022
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 29-06-2023
DOI: 10.1111/JPPI.12461
Abstract: People with disability continue to face barriers to substantive and meaningful inclusion in accommodation and community settings. The aim of this systematic review was to examine the characteristics of the literature on ‘inclusion’, ‘integration’, ‘exclusion’, and ‘segregation’ for people with disability in accommodation and community settings. This literature is important because it provides the evidence base that informs policy and practice. We identified 457 articles that primarily related to the experiences of people with intellectual disability and psycho‐social disability. We found: (1) the volume of publications relating to the ‘inclusion’, ‘integration’, ‘exclusion’ and ‘segregation’ of people with disability in accommodation and community living settings has increased each year since 2006 (2) high‐income western countries were overrepresented in research outputs (3) most research has been undertaken in the health sciences (4) only 30% of literature directly engaged with people with disability (5) less than 50% of the publications we reviewed (223 out of 457 manuscripts) identified inclusion, integration, exclusion and segregation as their primary focus (6) ‘inclusion’, ‘integration’, ‘exclusion’ and ‘segregation’ were predominantly used in the context of specific populations—psycho‐social disability and intellectual disability (7) there is great variation in the attention paid to the experiences of different communities of people with disability and (8) the notable absence of current scholarly literature on the experiences and outcomes of people with disability living at home with parents and/or siblings. Each of these findings have important implications for the research agenda, policy, and practice.
Publisher: Routledge
Date: 02-08-2022
Publisher: Routledge
Date: 02-08-2022
Publisher: SAGE Publications
Date: 12-06-2017
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 02-01-2018
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 14-09-2023
Publisher: SAGE Publications
Date: 10-06-2022
DOI: 10.1177/09646639211022795
Abstract: Disabled people are subject to disability laws – such as guardianship, mental health and mental capacity legislation – which only apply to them, and which enable legal violence on the basis of disability (‘disability-specific lawful violence’). While public health laws during the COVID-19 pandemic enabled coercive interventions in the general population, disabled people have additionally been subject to the continued, and at times intensified, operation of disability laws and their lawful violence. In this article we engage with scholarship on law, temporality and disability to explore the lification of disability-specific lawful violence during the pandemic. We show how this lification has been made possible through the folding of longstanding assumptions about disabled people – as at risk of police contact as vulnerable, unhealthy and contaminating – into the immediate crisis of the pandemic ignoring structural drivers of oppression, and responsibilising disabled people for their circumstances and the violence they experience.
Publisher: SAGE Publications
Date: 10-04-2017
Abstract: This article seeks to enhance criminology’s understanding of the disability group home as a targeted site for confining and regulating disabled bodies. In particular, it seeks to extend criminology’s burgeoning understanding of the archipelago of confinement and control, and build upon others’ observations that within this archipelago, the penal has become mobile through site, and the carceral mobile through (disabled) body. The article shows how group homes serve a dual purpose and are marked by an uneven, bifurcated practice. For the vast majority of residents, group homes share little in common with other sites of confinement, but for a select few they can become multilayered sites of confinement and control, containing people first through the site of the group home itself, and then through the site of the person’s disabled body (with all that the designation of disability permits under law). Data supporting the analysis are drawn from the Australian state of Victoria and includes both government documents, as well as transcripts from interviews with 12 stakeholders who provide services and support to people with disability residing within group homes.
Publisher: Routledge
Date: 02-08-2022
Publisher: SAGE Publications
Date: 12-2014
Abstract: In the last decade, criminology has begun to raise concerns about people with disabilities’ problematic relationship with criminal justice systems. Yet we have ignored their problematic relationship with civil justice systems a relationship which has seen people with disabilities subject to a range of punitive civil controls in the wake of their deinstitutionalisation. This article draws attention to one such punitive civil control, the Supervised Treatment Order regime in the Australian state of Victoria. Drawing on Foucault and his interlocutors’ work on ‘governmentality’, and engaging with Cohen’s concept of ‘magical legalisms’, the article reveals how this civil regime has become an effective mechanism for governing the lives of sex offenders with disabilities post their release from criminal justice systems. The article illuminates how this unusual function of the regime has not only been obscured from criminology’s view through claims of legislative intent, but further reconstituted as protective of people with disabilities’ human rights. The article concludes by discussing the implications of criminology’s absence from engaging with such punitive civil orders for people with disabilities and the wider penal field.
Start Date: 09-2022
End Date: 09-2025
Amount: $466,852.00
Funder: Australian Research Council
View Funded Activity