The author begins with a reckoning: judgement is not a technical function, it is a civic act. It requires presence, reflection and answerability. In automated systems, judgement is often displaced; reduced to scoring, routing or compliance, but the field of judgement cannot be automated; It must be held.
This chapter explores how judgement is structured, how it is delegated and how it might be reclaimed. One proposes that judgement is relational, it occurs between people, not within systems. It requires discretion, testimony and time and It cannot be reduced to throughput.
In many UK institutions, judgement has been proceduralised, staff are trained to relay decisions, not to make them. Citizens are processed through forms, not met in dialogue. Overrides are discouraged. and Reflection is rare. The author names this as judgement displacement. A civic condition where no one answers and no one is allowed to.
To restore the field of judgement, institutions must redesign roles, records and relationships. This means creating space for discretion, documenting reflection and supporting ethical presence. It means recognising that judgement is not an error; it is expertise.
One will examine examples of judgement reclaimed: a teacher who refuses to relay algorithmic grades, a housing officer who annotates a case with lived context, a clinician who pauses to reflect before triage. These are not deviations, they are civic acts.
