Report comment

I do often wonder whether those who contribute these comments are lawyers at all, so little of the lawyerly qualities of judgment, objectivity and respect for the evidence do they display. This one is a corker, worthy of the legendary Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells. What is it that is "so blindingly obvious"? That contact with families shouldn't be fostered at all in case a family turns out to be criminal? That contact with families should be fostered even though a family might turn out to be criminal (in which case why bring up this possibility at all?). Or that the authorities should weed out any criminal families and prevent contact with them but allow it for all the others (and how would that work, and would it really increase the prisoner's chances of rehabilitation?)

Has anonymous of Tunbridge Wells had a look at the report that he or she condemns? I guess not: why trouble yourself with the facts when you can just give vent to your prejudices? Contact with families has been shown to foster rehabilitation and the report examines this and makes a number of careful recommendations designed to establish and further this contact. Might it not be quite a good idea, anonymous of Tunbridge Wells, to implements these recommendations, despite the probably quite low cost of producing them? Or does the reduction of crime not commend itself?