Assisted Desistance in Formal Settings: A Scoping Review

Abstract

Current research often relies on measures of recidivism to evaluate the effectiveness of formal criminal justice system interventions. Such studies, however, do not provide information on desistance from crime, that is, on how such interventions can help maintaining abstinence from offending and assist desisters in their efforts to change. This scoping review argues that formal agents (such as probation officers) can play a part in supporting desistance by providing practical help and resources based on desisters’ needs, and can assist in changes in self‐identity through sustained positive feedback and encouragement. We propose a model of assisted desistance to conceptualise the effects of formal agents on desistance processes. The mandatory context of interventions, the fragile balance between legalistic and therapeutic roles, as well as the processes of desistance outside of the criminal justice system are considered. Implications for future research, policy, and practice are discussed.

Spotlighting the probation meeting – Lived experiences of desistance-supporting interaction following imprisonment

“…What he perceived as her feeling that he had become a responsible, desisting person made him feel the same way about himself. Similar strong incentives to change were found in positive interactions with probation staff in a scoping review by Villeneuve et al (2021). In some cases, these sustainable relationships extended beyond the formal duty of the staff.…”

“…Feelings of normality allowed for experiences of change in self-narratives (Blagden et al, 2016;Kruse, 2020;O'Sullivan et al, 2020). In a similar vein, Villeneuve et al (2021) show how sentenced persons tend to be 'between two selves', where they do not yet feel like citizens nor offenders, and how seeing the good in people over time is required for changes to take place.…”

‘Thank you for having me’: The experiences and meanings of release from prison in Norway and England & Wales

“…These, however, were always informal and dependent on individuals and circumstances, rather than formal markers of a transition from offender back into citizen (Maruna, 2011). While there were occasional instances of meaningful final interactions with staff which perhaps operated as some form of 'transformation ceremony' (Braithwaite and Mugford, 1994) that could celebrate the progress made and signal the change in status taking place (Villeneuve et al, 2021), these were contingent on particular staff members rather than operating as a formal state ritual. Being welcomed back into outside society was likewise dependent on existing community ties, and rarely reflected any official reception or status change.…”

“…It might be that having a more individualised approach would involve having personal officers more involved in the process. Indeed, if we were to reimagine the system more extensively, having someone with a parallel role to a judge at the beginning of a sentence to acknowledge the end of incarceration and formally recognise any achievements made in prison would fulfil several of Maruna's suggestions, would provide the bookend that some people seek, and would 'reinforce' desistance processes that might prove to be fruitful in the longer term (Villeneuve et al, 2021). Doing so in a way that engages with communities, and where necessary utilises 'artificial groupings of volunteers' (Maruna, 2011: 18) to welcome those without existing community ties, might go some way to aiding reintegration and community membership for all those leaving prison, including those currently more isolated at exit.…”

“…Nevertheless, for decades scholars have suggested that more should be done to mark the exit from prison, and indeed the end of punishment (Braithwaite and Mugford, 1994;Maruna, 2011;Travis, 2000). An increasing body of literature shows that desistance from crime is a social-relational process as well as an individual one and can be assisted by state actors (such as probation officers) and individual community members (McNeill, 2006;Villeneuve et al, 2021). Reintegrative rituals could contribute to desistance by commending rehabilitative efforts made by the individual whilst incarcerated, 'reinforcing desistance efforts by pointing these out to the desister and others' (Villeneuve et al, 2021: 96), and giving prison leavers much-needed 'opportunities to show to themselves and others that they really have changed' (Ugelvik, 2021: 11).…”