Restorative justice: the relevance of desistance and psychology

Abstract

Purpose – The purpose of this position paper is to assess the contribution of restorative justice to the desistance paradigm with a particular focus upon the psychology of these approaches. Design/methodology/approach – Risk, need and responsivity approaches to offender intervention are discussed and compared with the desistance paradigm. An integrative approach of the two methods is proposed and the value of desistance approaches is highlighted in understanding processes of change and how restorative justice approaches can best contribute. Findings – Discussion of desistance theory and the consideration of primary, secondary and tertiary desistance stages leads to the exploration of interplays in social and the human capital and the contribution of restorative justice to the desistance process. A desistance process that belongs to the desister is proposed to be supported by restorative justice processes. Practical implications – Conceptualising the interplay of human and social capital within primary, secondary and tertiary desistance is suggested improve the responsivity of restorative processes, promote desistance, reduce recidivism and better support children’s rights. It provides justification to extend restorative approaches to 18-24-year-old young adults and to different settings. Restorative justice evaluation should consider the process of restorative justice and its outcome measurement could better consider desistance stages. Originality/value – The position paper outlines the unique contribution that restorative justice approaches can make in supporting desistance. It outlines a relevant conceptualisation of desistance to advance knowledge through an improved understanding of process to improve responsivity of restorative approaches and of evaluation practice.

Enabling change: An assessment tool for adult offenders that operationalises risk needs responsivity and desistance principles

“…Despite their apparent differences, RNR and desistance research strive toward the same goal – to assist individuals to cease offending behaviour (Serin and Lloyd, 2017). Therefore, the integration of strengths-based approaches with empirically evidenced RNR principles has a theoretical base and offers a way of achieving better rehabilitative outcomes for people with convictions (Horan, 2015; Serin and Lloyd, 2017). It follows, therefore, that the design of tools that assess the needs and risks of people with convictions (built on RNR empirical evidence) could also accommodate new directions in offender rehabilitation and assessment practice based on desistance-led approaches.…”

“…However, the RNR corrections approach, although well evidenced, is not without limitations (Polaschek, 2012; Public Safety Canada, 2011). Integrating RNR with asset-based desistance approaches is an important and welcome innovation (Horan, 2015; Serin and Lloyd, 2017). This is the approach that is embodied in the Enablers of Change (EOC) assessment and sentence planning tool.…”

“…Debate abounds regarding RNR and desistance approaches, which are often pitted against each other (Horan, 2015). Drawing on an explicitly evidence-focused framework from its inception (Cullen et al, 2009), RNR principles have guided the assessment of offender risk and needs for over 30 years (in Canada, England and Wales and other jurisdictions in Europe).…”

“…Some commentators suggest that strengths-based approaches are in opposition with ‘RNR and ‘what works’ research (Looman and Abracen, 2013), whilst others see strengths-based approaches as already presaged in much of the ‘what works’ literature (Andrews et al, 2011). However, research does suggest that the outcomes of criminal justice case management could be enhanced by the integration of strengths-based approaches with the more empirically evidenced RNR principles (Horan, 2015; Serin and Lloyd, 2017). Although it should be acknowledged that their inappropriate integration could increase risks through the dilution of evidence-based risk management practice (Serin and Lloyd, 2017; Wong and Horan, 2019).…”

“…Integrating RNR with asset based desistance approaches is an important and welcome innovation (Horan 2015;Serin and Lloyd, 2017). This is the approach which is embodied in the Enablers of Change (EOC) assessment and sentence planning tool.…”