As People Stop Offending They Become Citizens Becoming More Engaged in Community Matters - Essay Example

?Life after Punishment: Evaluate the evidence that as people stop offending they also become ‘citizens’ becoming more engaged in political and community matters. Introduction Criminal offending is one of the most persistent barriers towards citizenship and socialization. For most criminals and former convicts, finding their place in normal society has been considered a difficult process because of personal and societal issues. Opinions differ in relation to the issue of effective re-socialization among former convicts with various criminologists arguing that it is possible for former convicts to become normal citizens and participants in political and community matters (Laub and Sampson, 2001). The public including government officials is, however, wary of this claim and points out that former convicts may continue to pose a threat to the rest of society and that it is not possible for them to reach the point where they can safely participate in normal citizen activities without posing a threat to the safety of society (Sherman, 1993). This paper will now evaluate the evidence that as people stop offending, they also become citizens, becoming more engaged in political and community matters. It will first present a discussion of the theories involving criminal recidivism and desistance, including re-socialization. A more critical analysis of these concepts will follow, including a specific assessment of the details involving re-socialization and its impact on former and released criminals. Body Desistance is a difficult phenomenon to evaluate because it refers to the non-existence of events or of criminal offending; such non-existence of criminal activity cannot easily and objectively be measured (Maruna, 2001). Desistance basically means stopping, in this case, stopping from committing crimes (Maruna, 2001). Some criminologists argue that this concept of desistance is supported by the fact that even the most hardened criminal cannot persistently commit crimes and that there is a termination point for most crimes and criminals (Shover and Thompson, 1992). Offenders do not consistently offend either and individuals may go weeks or even years without committing any more crimes. Still, evaluating this phenomenon with its associated certainties can be a difficult process to undertake (Shover and Thompson, 1992). Moreover, theories can be used in order to understand desistance in criminal offending. Maturation is one of the theories which help establish an understanding of desistance, with age and criminal offending being associated with each other. In the maturation theory of S. Glueck and E. Glueck (1940), the theorists discuss that for as long as there are no neurological or biological issues, individuals develop well mentally and physically; moreover, they eventually break from offending. In effect, those who persist in their offenses in their older years may not have reached maturity as yet (S. Glueck and E. Glueck, 1940). S. Glueck and E. Glueck (1940) also discounted external transformation; however, they did not indicate a specific chronological age in human development. Such point was later emphasized by McCulloch and McNeill (2008) on their observation about chronological age not having meaning on its own. In effect, without any specific age, it would be difficult to indicate the point of maturation and then to assess developments within a specific chronological understanding (McCullogh and McNeill, 2008). Other theorists developed a different understanding of crime and desistance, with crimes being defined as short term events which presuppose a specific set of necessary elements or conditions and criminality being founded on stable differences which affect the possibility of offending (Messner et al., 1989). Gottfredson and Hirschi (1990) also discuss self-control as an element of offending with low self-control indicating a tendency to offend. They further elaborate that those with low self-control are more likely to participate in impulsive risk taking in order to secure immediate gratification (Gottfredson and Hirschi, 1990). These qualities are associated with poor socialization skills as well as poor parenting, with parents failing to manage and control children’s self-control. Children learning self-control at an early age would more likely find it easier to control their impulses and proclivities during their older years (Gottfredson and Hirschi, 1990). Such theory further claims that one’s environment and upbringing can have a significant impact on desistance and re-socialization of criminal offenders (Gottfredson and Hirschi, 1990). Critical Analysis The theories above present various explanations and links between re-socialization and desistance in criminal offending. On the one hand, there is evidence which would suggest that when people stop offending, they also become citizens who can engage in political and community matters (Sobell, Toneatto and Leo, 1993). In assessing such statement, it is important to recognize that re-socialization cannot exist alongside delinquent behaviour. And where people participate in delinquent activities, their bond with society is broken (Sobell et al., 1993). For individuals who value their attachment to society, they also wish to preserve such an attachment and would be less likely to violate social norms or to break or endanger such attachment. The attachment can relate to one’s attachment or link to family, to one’s friends, religion, or any other elements which might be broken if there is a deviation from the normal (Sobell et al., 1993). Where individuals have a weak attachment to society, they would not be concerned much about the societal norms and would persist in offending their family, friends, and general society (Sommers, Baskin and Fagan, 1994). Persistent Criminal Offenders For individuals who have invested a significant amount of time and energy in an institution, most of them would not want to risk losing their place within the institution by displaying negative behaviour; on the other hand, individuals who have invested less in the institution would not care either way about maintaining their place in society (Bachman and Schutt, 2003). Under these conditions, it is possible to observe criminal offenders introduced in an institution to which they do not have any attachment, to be continually involved in negative and criminal behaviour (Bachman and Schutt, 2003). Since they do not feel like they have a place which they need to protect in the institution, these individuals would likely be recidivists (Barry, 2000). These recidivists would not be able to function well in society because instead of carrying out normal citizen functions including voting, community participation, or carrying out civic duties, they would see opportunities to carry out delinquent activities. Involvement in activities refers to interactions as well as investments in society. In effect, where individuals are involved in school, in the workplace, or in any other socialization activities within their communities, they would likely be too busy to be involved in deviant activities (Hirschi, 2004). For former convicts being reintroduced into society, their re-socialization is likely based on the extent of their involvement in society as well as the level of their investment in the social activities in their community (Hirschi, 2004). Being invested in the education, the work environment, as well as the socialization activities of the community would likely indicate a successful re-socialization for the former convict (Hirschi, 2004). Under these conditions, it is possible to argue that where people stop offending, they can become more engaged in political and community matters. It is also possible to expect that where former convicts share the beliefs of their community, they can establish a strong bond with their community (Cavadino and Dignan, 2001). Values bind individuals with each other and where the social bonds are established based on meritocracy, former convicts would likely understand that they need to work hard in order to be rewarded and in order to earn their pay (Hearn, 2010). These convicts would also understand that where they work hard in school, they would also gain new opportunities for their future. For convicts who do not believe that they can access the legitimate opportunities, they would not likely commit or support these beliefs (Hearn, 2010). The argument that it is possible to expect normal citizenry from former convicts has a significant merit, especially when the delinquent patterns of behaviour for adolescents and young adults are evaluated (Dean, Bracken and Morissette, 2007). Where maturation sets in for most individuals, they would also likely discard deviant behaviour. For older adults who find themselves in more mature conditions, including a more mature emotional as well as mental mindset, they would likely crave normal citizen behaviour in their work and social commitments (Dean et al., 2007). Although it can be difficult for these individuals to gain favourable work situations considering their criminal past, their maturity levels would create better emotional conditions where they can handle challenges better (Dean et al., 2007). Finding the stability from where they can build their lives involves the relinquishment of juvenile delinquent behaviour, or accepting the more resolute thought processes of a mature individual (Delvin and Turney, 1999). The expectations for former convicts being re-socialized into society are, therefore, very much reasonable because from a developmental and life-course viewpoint, people can and do change (Delvin and Turney, 1999). Aside from the maturation element of development and personal growth, Sampson and Laub (2001) point out that maturation also necessarily includes the process of gaining more responsibility within the community and society. Gaining more responsibility can involve family formulation as well as employment (Sampson and Laub, 2001). These activities are bonds which are referred to as social capital (Hughes, 1998). In a study by Hughes (1998), she covered males in various American cities where she was able to establish that these subjects were eventually able to leave their criminal lifestyles. Hughes (1998) also recognized that for individuals who consider pathways which lead away from crime, or for those who recognize the turning points in their lives, it is possible for them to deviate from a life of crime. Moreover, respect and concern for their children, as well as fear of harm and jail time were considered turning points for most of the respondents (Hearn, 2010). In ‘The RHP Companion to Youth Justice’ edited by Bateman and Pitts (2005), it posits that women leaving their homes, forming significant relationships or having a child were considered turning points which were able to stop their offending and criminal activities. As compared to young men, however, the above points – relationships and family – sometimes created the opposite effect (Bateman and Pitts, 2005). For some men, staying at home is a curtailment of their freedom and a reduction of their access to drugs and alcohol (Bateman and Pitts, 2005). These differences can be associated with the different socialization process for females and males within families. Informal social control and male roles are seen beyond the home life. Males are often encouraged to be more aggressive and females are seen more as nurturers (Bateman and Pitts, 2005). Under these considerations, the same expected patterns for desistance may not always be expected. Societal changes, however, have introduced more modern and adjusted conditions, with single parent families working better for families with fathers incarcerated (Cavadino and Dignan, 2001). The risk of losing one’s family due to offending is not anymore as high for women within the criminal justice system. Mothers who are also criminal offenders are usually single parents with the primary responsibility for their children (Cavadino and Dignan, 2001). If they were to be incarcerated, these children are often brought to child care, even where their fathers are around (Cavadino and Dignan, 2001). Under these conditions, the theory of social bonds is somewhat outdated and no longer relevant. The modern family is established to function well with lone parents and with high divorce rates (Farrall and Calverley, 2006). The notion of family may not form a sufficient motivation for former convicts to not persist in a life of crime. It is, however, unavoidable to note that individuals gaining maturity and responsibility in relation to work or family can provide a sufficient influence or impact on recidivists, allowing them to veer away from a life of crime (Farrall and Calverley, 2006). Moffitt (1993) discusses the concept of dual taxonomy of offending where he describes two types of offenders: the life course persisters and the adolescent limiteds. These two groups have unique motives for their offending. Life course persisters usually have neurological issues or cognitive and learning issues which can cause problems in their socialization and relationships (Moffitt, 1993). Poor parental bonds can form for these life course persisters and can cause antisocial behaviour as well as poor self-control to manifest (Gottfredson and Hirschi, 1990). These persisters usually manifest antisocial behaviour at an early age, and this may include underage drinking and premarital sex (Moffitt, 1993). These persisters are often excluded from society because of their behaviour and they are also eventually rejected by their friends and teachers due to their poor social skills and development (Kazemian, 2007). Their antisocial behaviour can also lead them to a life of chronic offending, which often escalates in seriousness. These individuals are unable to establish alternative cerebral solutions to their issues; as a result, they often repeat the same mistakes in different aspects of their life – relationships, marriage, education as well as work (Laub and Sampson, 2001). Adolescent limited offenders do not have the neurological defects which life course persisters suffer from (Moffitt, 1993). Instead, they are actually able to establish relationships and bonds in their school and in their communities. Their antisocial behaviour is associated with gaps between their social maturity and their age (Laub and Sampson, 2001). Their age does not allow them to participate in adult activities which they want to experience, including drinking and sex (Laub and Sampson, 2001). Eventually, their paths are crossed with the life course persisters. As a result, their negative behaviour becomes amplified. For the limiteds, however, they are more likely to be able to change their behaviour and break away from the criminal activities which the persisters are participating in (Laub and Sampson, 2001). For these individuals, they can be re-socialized into society and can engage in the normal activities of citizens. Maruna (1997) discusses that establishing persistent criminality is often based on methodology where dispositional traits are highlighted. Still, it is possible for people to change even if their personalities do not significantly change with time (Maruna, 1997). A more significant assessment, however, needs to be undertaken in order to understand patterns of behaviour. Laub and Sampson (2001) discuss the life course perspective where they explain desistance and persistence. There are various concepts which refer to the developmental and life course perspective. These concepts include peak of offending at late teens or from 15-19 years with onset at 8 to 14 years (Laub and Sampson, 2001). For early onset offenders, a long criminal career and numerous offending are expected. There may also be a continuity of antisocial and offending behaviour throughout a person’s childhood, adolescence and adult years (Laub and Sampson, 2001). Under these conditions, the process of re-socialization would be influenced by different elements which mostly include an individual’s environment and developmental life course (Maruna, Porter and Carvalho, 2004). Based on various qualitative studies, desistance is apparent due to subjective changes. The theory of primary and secondary deviance is associated with stress, including the loss of a loved one, boredom, and even the loss of a job (Hearn, 2010). On the other hand, secondary deviance is based on continued behaviour which gradually incorporates the negative behaviour into the person’s identity (McNeil, 2006). In order to ensure effective desistance, criminals must undergo primary and secondary processes including symbolic reorganization lodged within self-identity (Cohen and Vila, 1996). In other words, the initial instinct to be good is continued and is made part of their main identity. This would help support the notion that as good citizenry becomes a part of an individual’s identity, he would also become more engaged in political and community matters (Cohen and Vila, 1996). It is reasonable, therefore, to expect that among probationers, some offenders decide to go straight when they are released; however, for those who participate in any crime within two years after their release, they are more likely to persist in criminal activity (Hearn, 2010). Primary desistance occurs so often that it does not need to be evaluated any further (Maruna and Immarigeon, 2004). Instead, there is a need to highlight secondary desistance from crime where the roles in society are disturbed and there is a reorganization of new roles. Maruna (2001) also pointed out that effective desistance can be seen where individuals are persistent on their need to change. In Sampson and Laub’s (2003) studies considering 52 life stories about men, the authors were able to reveal that some of these individuals persisted in their offensive activities, whereas others were able to desist. For the men who desisted, most of them were able to gain time to think about their life and in the end, considered that it was better for them to go straight (Sampson and Laub, 2003). In Maruna’s (2001) study of persisters and desisters, similar criminal traits, backgrounds, and environments were evaluated. Maruna (2001) also noted that stories were unique to various individuals with the themes of condemnation and redemption being persistent elements affecting desistance and persistence. For persisters, the impact of condemnation is greater as they are often victims of environmental elements including their lack of access to education, their difficult family situations as well as other circumstances beyond their control (Maruna et al., 2004). These elements are considered career traps especially with the society presenting ideals which all people must seek to attain (Young, 1999). And still, some groups including former convicts are often excluded from the opportunity to secure favourable ideals due to the lack of legal opportunities (Young, 1999). Maruna (2001) also discusses that in encouraging offenders to participate in community activities including respite care, the repair of wheelchairs as well as participation in charity organizations, it is possible to negate the so-called bulimic society by securing long-term volunteerism. With participation in volunteer activities, there was a noted improvement in self-worth for offenders, including a better sense of purpose and accomplishment for offenders (Maruna et al., 2004). Other impositions such as community service and short-term imprisonment, even anger management programs, were not as effective in providing feelings of community engagement and re-socialization for offenders. Volunteerism seems to provide offenders with a more dignified outlook as helpers or help-givers, a role which is far removed from their being recipients of assistance (Maruna et al., 2004). Volunteer work also indicates to the community that the offender deserves to be supported and that he deserves investments in his re-socialization. At its very core, volunteerism helps reverse the bulimic value systems of society (Maruna, 2001). Based on the redemption concept, individuals find a greater sense of self-belief over their life (Maruna, 2001). As they discard their past criminal activities, they also credit their criminal past to circumstances beyond their control and then take responsibility for their lives (Hearn, 2010). Where these individuals view themselves more favourably, even when other people see them negatively, desisters are able to apply neutralization, more or less justifying their past and getting on with their current life (Hearn, 2010). Away from their old social activities and contacts, they are also able to take on different personalities and identities which are very much removed from their old identities. It may be reasonable to expect that criminal offenders can abandon their criminal offending lives if they are exposed to change agents (McCulloch and McNeill, 2008). Some desisters were able to work well with their probation officers, eventually serving as positive influence in their client’s lives. These probation officers were able to manifest support for these offenders, investing professionally in the betterment of their clients (McCulloch and McNeill, 2008). These officers were also likely to interpret issues in behaviour for these clients in a more positive light. The negative perspective which indicates that ‘nothing works’ supports a conclusion that offenders and non-offenders are very much different. Maruna (2001 cited in Hearn, 2010, p. 12) discusses that atavism ‘shows us the inefficiency of punishment for born criminals and why it is they inevitably have periodic lapses into crime’. Criminologists have long been sceptical of offenders going straight and becoming clean mostly because of the proven pattern of escalating criminality for offenders. However, Maruna (2001) also claims that there is much interest in false positives, including individuals who have been influenced by socio-economic and environmental elements. These individuals have been known to eventually make good with their lives. The end of criminal offending is based on various elements, and one of the most important elements includes employment. Employment is a significant factor influencing desistance (Farrall, 2003). Where former or current offenders are able to establish and secure work, good work habits, and eventually get promoted, there is also a commensurate growth in income which can prove favourable for the offender (Farrall, 2002). These conditions allow offenders to have better control over their lives and the direction of their lives. They can secure their finances, be less dependent on others and interact with other non-offenders (Farrall, 2002). In an assessment of parolees, individuals being released from prison had unrealistic visions in their entry into the workforce (Messner, Krohn and Liska, 1998). These unfavourable expectations were associated with their expected income as well the ease of securing steady and gainful employment. Most convicts are usually low skilled and are not sufficiently literate; in fact, half of those in the prison population are not even in the level one literacy, meaning they hardly cleared the expected literacy of an 11-year-old (Rhodes, 2008). These barriers to work were not helped either by the fact that laws protect the right of employers to gain data regarding criminal records of potential employees and for these employers to consider these records as reasons for not hiring applicants (Rhodes, 2008). In effect, the lack of skills, the poor educational background, and the presence of criminal records for offenders are considered significant barriers to the gainful employment of these offenders (Rhodes, 2008). Where they are able to gain favourable employment, they are also unable to desist from participating in committing criminal acts. Although most offenders imprisoned are often repeat criminal offenders, there are various developments in the life of offenders which can unfold and which can eventually help these individuals stop offending (Piquero, Farrington and Blumstein, 2007). Age and maturity were already mentioned as an element which can impact desistance. The history of the individual offender also factors in the future activities of individual offenders (Piquero et al., 2007). The incidence of offending may not necessarily stop as a person ages and in some cases, offending may even actually increase (Blumstein et al., 1986). Nevertheless, for some individuals, gaining maturity and responsibility can reduce the tendency towards offending (Blumstein et al., 1986). A study of other patterns of behaviour involving recidivism and desistance also unveiled the impact of marriage on social stability (Gibbens, 1984). Some experts (Knight, Osborn, and West, 1977) were able to establish that marriage did not necessarily impact or eliminate criminality; however, it reduced antisocial tendencies including alcoholism and drug use/abuse. Moreover, for offenders who moved away from their original residence where they were known to be criminals, they were less likely to reoffend (Osborn, 1980). Leaving the place where they have been branded as criminals, often feared, and often expected to act like criminals offers a favourable opportunity for criminal offenders, especially those wanting to go straight and be re-socialized into society (Osborn, 1980). For offenders who are able to move to an area where their past is unknown and where they can live and participate in social and political activities without experiencing any social stigma, there is a better chance for them to be re-socialized into the community (Osborn, 1980). In a study by Trasler (1979), the concept of spontaneous desistance comes from the impact of changes and reinforcement on offenders. Situational changes have been known to create desistance. Reinforcers often included work, sufficient income, family, and friends (Trasler, 1979). In order to evaluate the impact of various transitional life incidents on desistance, various offenders have often been assessed. Rand (1987) discussed that life events such as marriage, high school completion, vocational education, and training in the military were favourable elements which reduced criminal recidivism. However, these elements were also impacted by other situational elements. Other studies indicated that there did not seem to be any relationship between early delinquent behaviour and early onset of crime (Rand, 1987). However, the study by Farrington and Hawkins (1991) did indicate that early manifestation of delinquent behaviour was considered a possible early predictor of offending. Other elements, however, have caused a significant impact on criminal offending. Paternal participation in leisure activities, for example, has been associated with late onset of offending and desistance from crime (Farrington and Hawkins, 1991). In relation to parental involvement, commitment to school activities has also been associated with desistance from crime. Elements such as low social withdrawal and decreased tendency to disrupt were associated with early desistance (Loeber et al., 1991). Where individuals were less likely to be socially withdrawn, they were also more likely to desist immediately from criminal offending. For these early desisters, they are patently aware that a life of crime is not in their nature or is not a favourable action to take in their lives (Loeber et al., 1991). Nevertheless, these patterns of desistance are not always consistent. Crime type actually factors in the rate of desistance. The age by which the offending is terminated is also associated with the age by which the offending is first initiated (Loeber et al., 1991). In most cases, serious offenses are often stopped at an older age and the less serious crimes are often desisted at earlier ages. The study by Sampson and Laub (1993) also argues that important life events and social links in adulthood can impact the direction which is set during the childhood years. Social bonds in adulthood, including an individual’s bond with the labour force and one’s marriage, indicated how criminal behaviour is not founded on previous differences in one’s propensity for crime (Sampson and Laub, 1993). In effect, possible criminal behaviour or compliance was affected by main institutions of social control during the shift to adulthood. The favourable social bonds can explain the desistance during adulthood even where a history of delinquent behaviour is present (Wolfgang, 1981). Job stability and marriage are very much related to the re-socialization process. Where an offender is able to secure strong ties to their family and work, they are less likely to be involved in persistent criminal offenses. Desistance is also possible and made even more effective where quality marriage bonds are created, especially bonds which are gradual and cumulative (Stattin and Magnusson, 1991). In order to gain the maximum impact of marriage as a factor in criminal desistance, the timing for marriage has to be right. Early marriages associated with social cohesiveness have been known to cause favourable desistance (Laub and Sampson, 2001). Moreover, individual qualities and family upbringing have also been considered elements in predicting delinquency as well as criminality. Conclusion Based on the above discussion, there is a strong support for the premise which implies that where people stop offending, they can also become citizens and become engaged in political and community matters. In other words, it is possible to re-socialize criminal offenders into normal society and normally functioning citizens. The trend in criminal behaviour implies that recidivism is an accepted trend; however, where the conditions are favourable, it is possible for former convicts to stop offending and participate in political and civic activities. Where these offenders become more invested in society, they also learn to value their place and role in society. As a result, they are less likely to reoffend. This re-socialization is, however, impacted by different elements including situational factors such as age, maturity, marriage, gainful employment, sufficient income as well as education. Where the situations and conditions align, re-socialization and normal citizenry can eventually be secured for these former convicts. References Bachman, R. and Schutt, R., 2003. The practice research in criminology and criminal justice. London: Sage Publications. Barry, M., 2000. The mentor/monitor debate in criminal justice: ‘what works’ for offenders. British Journal of Social Work, 30, pp. 575–595. Bateman, T. and Pitts, J., 2005. The RHP companion to youth justice. Dorset, UK: Russell House Publishing Ltd. Blumstein, A., Cohen, J., Roth, J. and Visher, C., 1986. Criminal careers and career criminals. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. Cavadino, M. and Dignan, J., 2001. Bias in the criminal justice system. Criminology: A Reader. Eds: Jewkes, Y. & Letherby, G. London: Sage. Cohen, L. and Vila, B., 1996. Self-control and social control: an exposition of the Gottfredson-Hirschi/Sampson-Laub Debate. Studies on Crime and Crime Prevention, 5, pp. 125–50. Dean, L., Bracken, D. and Morrissette, D., 2007. Desistance within an urban aboriginal gang. Probation Journal, 54, p. 125. Delvin, A. and Turney, B., 1999. Going straight: after crime and punishment. UK: Waterside Press. Farrall, S., 2003. J'accuse: probation evaluation-research epistemologies. Criminal Justice, 3(3), pp. 249–268. Farrall, S. and Calverley, A., 2006. Understanding desistance from crime: theoretical directions in resettlement and rehabilitation. In: M. Maguire, ed. Criminal Justice Series. UK: Open University Press. Farrington, D. and Hawkins, D., 1991. Predicting participation, early onset, and later persistence in officially recorded offending. Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health, 1, pp. 1–33. Gibbens, T., 1984. Borstal Boys after 25 years. British Journal of Criminology, 24, pp. 49–62. Glueck, S. and Glueck, E., 1940. Juvenile delinquents grown up. New York: Commonwealth Fund. Gottfredson, M. and Hirschi, T., 1990. A general theory of crime. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Hearn, N., 2010. Theory of desistance. Internet Journal of Criminology [online]. Available at: http://www.internetjournalofcriminology.com/Hearn_Theory_of_Desistance_IJC_Nov_2010.pdf [Accessed 24 December 2012]. Hirschi, T., 2004. Causes of delinquency. New Jersey: Transaction Publishers. Hughes, M., 1998. Turning points in the lives of young inner-city men forgoing destructive criminal behaviors: a qualitative study. Social Work Research, 22, pp. 143–151. Kazemian, L., 2007. Desistance from crime: theoretical, empirical, methodological, and policy considerations. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 23, p. 5. Knight, B., Osborn, G., West. D., 1977. Early marriage and criminal tendency in males. British Journal of Criminology, 17, pp. 348–60. Laub, J. and Sampson, R., 2001. Understanding desistance from crime. The University of Chicago [online]. Available at: http://troublesofyouth.pbworks.com/f/laub%20and%20sampson%20-%20understanding%20desistance.pdf [Accessed 24 December 2012]. Loeber, R., Stouthamer-Loeber, M., Van Kammen, L., and Farrington, D., 1991. Initiation, escalation, and desistance in juvenile offending and their correlates. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 82, pp. 36–82. Maruna, S., 2001. Making good: how ex-convicts reform and rebuild their lives. Washington DC: American Psychological Society. Maruna, S., 1997. Desistance and development? The psychological process of ‘Going Straight’. In: M. Brogden, ed. 1999. The British Criminology Conferences: Selected Papers, 2. British Society of Criminology. Maruna, S. and Immarigeon, R., 2004. After crime and punishment: pathways to offender reintegration. UK: Willan Publishing. Maruna, S. Porter, L. and Carvalho, I., 2004. The Liverpool desistance study and probation practice: opening the dialogue. The Journal of Community and Criminal Justice, 51(3), pp. 221–232. McNeil, F., 2006. A desistance paradigm for offender management. Criminology and Criminal Justice, 6, pp. 39-62 McCulloch, T. and McNeill, F., 2008. Desistance-focused approaches. In: S. Green, E. Lancaster and S. Feasy, eds. 2008. Addressing offending behaviour: context, practice and values. UK: Willan Publishing. Messner, S. F., Krohn, M. D. and Liska, A., 1989. Theoretical integration in the study deviance and crime: problems and prospect. New York: New York Press. Moffitt, T., 1993. ‘Life-course-persistent’ and ‘Adolescent limited’ antisocial behaviour: a developmental taxonomy. Psychological Review, 100, pp. 674–701. Osborn, S., 1980. Moving home, leaving London, and delinquent trends. British Journal of Criminology, 20, pp. 54–61. Piquero, A., Farrington, D. and Blumstein, A., 2007. Key issues in criminal career research. New analyses of the Cambridge study in delinquent development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Rand, A., 1987. Transitional life events and desistance from delinquency and crime. In: M. E. Wolfgang, T. P. Thornberry and R. M. Figlio, eds. From boy to man, from delinquency to crime. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Rhodes, J., 2008. Ex-offenders, social ties and the routes into employment. Internet Journal of Criminology. Sherman, L., 1993. Defiance, deterrence, and irrelevance: a theory of the criminal sanction. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 30, pp. 445–473. Shover, N. and Thompson, C., 1992. Age, differential expectations, and crime desistance. Criminology, 30, pp. 89–104. Sobell, L., Sobell, M., Toneatto, T. and Leo, G., 1993. What triggers the resolution of alcohol problems without treatment? Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 17, pp. 217–24. Sommers, I., Baskin, D. and Fagan, J., 1994. Getting out of the life: crime desistance by female street offenders. Deviant Behavior, 15, pp. 125–49. Stattin, H. and Magnusson, D., 1991. Stability and change in criminal behavior up to age 30. British Journal of Criminology, 31, pp. 327–46. Trasler, G., 1979. Delinquency, recidivism, and desistance. British Journal of Criminology, 19, pp. 314–22. Wolfgang, M., 1981. Confidentiality in criminological research and other ethical issues. Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 72(1), pp. 345–361. Read More