{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.016129032258064516, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.478260869565218, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
More Harm than Good? The Language of Public Protection

Issues of risk and public protection are currently a critical, and politically sensitive, area of practice for probation and youth justice services in England and Wales. The language of public protection shapes practice in significant ways, yet this use of terminology is an issue which has received relatively little attention. This article examines the current debate between policy makers and independent inspectors concerning the use of the terms ‘harm’ and ‘serious harm’ to illustrate how linguistic confusion can hinder practice. The article concludes with suggestions for an alternative vocabulary that could bring greater clarity to risk assessment and risk management processes.