What is Desistance and How Can it Be Explained - Coursework Example

Desistance Desistance Introduction Generally, desistance refers to the act of avoiding or shunning away from crime and other offensive or antisocial activities. In the end, the term desistance has not received a comprehensive elaboration. It is a common term in the field of criminology. The definition is not precise because it is almost impossible to determine the exact time or moment when an individual desists from committing an offence. Therefore, desistance remains studied as a process of human development in the social context. The process involves a series of actions that result into an individual abandoning offensive ways and improving their level of compliance with federal laws and other social norms. Desistance can be classified as being either primary or secondary. Primary desistance refers to behavioural changes while secondary relates to changes in identity. Secondary desistance works best for people with a protracted history of heinous crimes because a change in identity would be more effective compared to a mere behavioural alteration. In as much as desistance is based on a personal opinion, the social setup also has influences. People would be compelled to desist from or prolong criminal acts by the manner in which society views them and how the individual sees his or her place in society. If the society is positive about former criminals, the probability of the individuals desisting from crime is higher (Weaver, 2012, p. 351). The aspect of intervention in the desistance process works towards initiating hope and motivates the offenders that are ready for the cessation of crime. Interventions can be done by professionals at a personal level or through social networking that is able to reach many individuals at the same time. Therefore, interventions inculcate and develop individual self-determination and individual strengths. In addition, the state policy on criminal matters adversely affects desistance. For instance, in a situation where the policies seem to be hard on criminals, desistance is frustrated because such individuals are not motivated to turn away from offences. To understand the explanation of desistance, it is imperative to comprehend three factors. Firstly, the correlation between age and committing offences, secondly, the reason behind the commencement of the desistance process and lastly, the motives that cause people to desist from crime. Age is a vital factor as far as desistance matters are in question. For instance, crime or offences reduce with age. An individual is less likely to commit crimes during his or her elderly years as compared to the youthful years (Melde & Esbensen, 2013, p. 150). On the other hand, the reason for desisting from offences is also integral in this case. If an individual turns away from crime for a genuine or credible reason, the desistance is likely to be effective. Lastly, diverse motives drive different people to desist from offences. For example, a societal setting that is positive about offenders and believes that they can change would encourage desistance from crime. Principles of Supporting Desistance to Ensure Criminal Justice For detailed understanding of desistance, it is necessary to identify and be familiar with the values that enhance desistance. Certain principles guide and support desistance. They ensure that appropriate guidelines are in place to make desistance possible and to provide an enabling environment for offenders. Such principles include: The process of implementing criminal justice should be realistic in terms of the approaches that are related to criminal activities and their cessation. Therefore, in the process of initiating desistance, should take the fact that lapses and relapses might occur into account. It is not guaranteed that desistance would take place instantly. Criminals that may have vowed to avoid criminal activities may find themselves repeating the same mistakes. As a result, the interventions that are supposed to initiate desistance should continue even after the relapses because the flaws of criminals are only but logical (Weaver & McNeill, 2015, p. 1). Corrective facilities, prisons and other criminal detention centres should be used sparingly. Jailing offenders frustrates desistance. Once an individual is put in prison, he is separated from the normal society and forced to live with other offenders. Such a person would associate himself with crime because he lives among criminals. Imprisonment curtails the development of positive social ties between an offender and the society. If offenders were to avoid contact with other criminals and interact with ethical members of society, they would be able to learn how to live on a positive dimension by desisting from crime. The process of building positive relationships is imperative in the initiation of desistance. A notable fact in this case is that, offenders are influenced by to change by people that are closest to them. Those close to offenders are in a position to offer relevant advice that would result to desistance (Zdun & Scholl, 2013, p. 341). For this reason, positive relationships are vital in the process of influencing the behaviour of offenders. Therefore, interventions that do not recognise the significance of positive relationships are unlikely to succeed. Despite the fact that desistance may be based on a single person, during support or intervention, considerations should be made beyond the individual status. The point here is that, changes are necessary not just within the offender but also in the social context. Offenders need to re-integrate into society after their desistance. Therefore, it is up to the people within the society to adjust their attitudes to accommodate the reformed individuals. Having changed, the former offenders need a society that recognises and appreciates the value of their desistance. Acceptance and appreciation of reformed offenders within social settings ensures that their desistance lasts longer or becomes permanent (Weaver & McNeill, 2015, p. 1). For desistance to be possible, the promotion of the redemption of former offenders is imperative. The normal criminal justice system seems to be condemning offenders. However, an effective approach that would inculcate desistance is to avoid the condemnation of criminals and try to recognise their efforts towards changing and desistance. Condemning offenders and ex-offenders would only result to their alienation from moral deeds and they would end up committing more crimes (McNeill, 2012, p. 22). Lastly, equality is another principle for supporting desistance. If ex-offenders are treated equally with other members of the society they may desist from crime as opposed to a situation whereby they are subjected to various inequalities. Racial discrimination is a form of inequality that could frustrate desistance. If a particular race feel sidelined, it would rise against other races that seem to be receiving favour. Therefore, equal treatment of all people, whether offenders or not, encourages desistance (Patton, 2012, p. 191). Theories of Desistance The theories of desistance are divided into three. Narrative theories focus on the imperativeness of a subjective change in identity. Social-based theories focus on the vitality of social relationships and ties. Lastly, onto-genic theories emphasise the importance of maturity and the age factor. However, desistance is a complex process and the difficulties have to be addressed for the positive results to be achievable in the case of persistent or chronic offender. The desistance process is unique in different situations. Therefore, interventions meant to initiate desistance need to be tailored and made suitable for specific individuals by considering their nature and the extent of their offences. The first concept or theoretical view of desistance is maturation. Older people are considered mature compared to young individuals. Therefore, this concept insinuates that as an individual matures, he tends to deviate from criminal activities. The belief that females tend to mature faster than females brings in the notion that they are more likely to desist from crime (Hearn, 2010, p. 6). As a result, gender complements the age factor as far as desistance is concerned. Maturation is both mental and physical and it elicits desistance. Therefore, in accordance with this concept, people who make no efforts to desist from committing offences are not mature yet. However, this concept has a weakness because it is difficult to determine the chronological age at which an individual is considered mature. Therefore, the process of developing a chronological framework for both maturation and desistance is complex (Barry, 2010, p. 129). Self-control is also a concept used to describe desistance. Based on this theory, the probability of a person with low self-control committing a crime is higher. Individuals with low self-control are impulsive and go for immediate gratification especially when offended. Therefore, such people react aggressively to angering situations and end up committing crimes. A child’s upbringing plays a major role in nurturing the individual’s self-control. As a result, low self-control is a hindrance to desistance. However, individuals who can effectively control their emotions have a higher probability of desisting from offensive acts. The theory of narrative identity is based on primary and secondary deviance. Primary deviance results from stressful factors for example unemployment while secondary deviance is the protraction of the resulting offensive behaviour. Consequently, such behaviour becomes fully attributable to the individual involved and defines his identity. Desistance is easier at the primary stage because the persistence of the behaviour is not high. However, when offensive behaviour is sustained, desisting from crime becomes difficult. Therefore, identity and behaviour are integral determinants of desistance (Paternoster & Bushway, 2009, p. 1104). Another concept in the study of desistance is the social control theory. The theory is based on the bonds that people have with society. People tend to engage in criminal activities when their relationships and bonds with others in society is weakened or compromised. An individual with a positive relationship with people in the society may prefer not to engage in offensive activities to preserve the bond. Therefore, such individuals desist from crime (Hearn, 2010, p. 6). Similarly, individuals that have extensive commitments to the society for example through commercial investments are less likely to compromise their important positions by taking part in delinquent activities or behaviour. Subsequently, having a positive relationship with members of the society enhances desistance. However, individuals with no social bonds within the society may not practice desistance because most of them may feel like aliens amongst their own people. Conclusion Desistance is not just an act but also a process. It does not solely involve offenders but the society and law enforcement agencies may also intervene. Various principles support desistance for example being realistic during the implementation of criminal laws, using jail facilities sparingly, building positive relationships and promoting redemption. Desistance is a complex criminological concept that has diverse explanations and approaches, but it is basically the act of cessation of a certain course of action, in this case a crime. Because of the different approaches and views, various theories have been put forward in an attempt to comprehensively explain and understand desistance. Examples of the theories include the narrative, social control and maturation theories. The theories relate desistance with age and the society and provide explanations in different contexts (Haigh, 2009, p. 315). Bibliography Barry, M., 2010, Youth transitions: from offending to desistance, Journal Of Youth Studies, 13, 1, pp. 121-136, Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost, viewed 3 July 2015. Haigh, Y., 2009, Desistance from crime: reflections on the transitional experiences of young people with a history of offending, Journal Of Youth Studies, 12, 3, pp. 307-322, Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost, viewed 3 July 2015. Hearn, N., 2010. Theory of desistance. Internet Journal of Criminology, 1-48. McNeill, F., 2012, Four forms of offender rehabilitation: Towards an interdisciplinary perspective, Legal & Criminological Psychology, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 18-36. Available from: 10.1111/j.2044-8333.2011.02039.x. [3 July 2015]. Melde, C, & Esbensen, F., 2013, Gangs and Violence: Disentangling the Impact of Gang Membership on the Level and Nature of Offending, Journal Of Quantitative Criminology, 29, 2, pp. 143-166, Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost, viewed 3 July 2015. Paternoster, R, & Bushway, S., 2009, Desistance And The "Feared Self": Toward An Identity Theory Of Criminal Desistance, Journal Of Criminal Law & Criminology, 99, 4, pp. 1103-1156, Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost, viewed 3 July 2015. Patton, J., 2012, The Moderating Effects of Risk, Protection and Desistance on Violence in Female Adolescents, Child & Adolescent Social Work Journal, 29, 3, pp. 185-202, Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost, viewed 3 July 2015. Weaver, B., 2012, The Relational Context of Desistance: Some Implications and Opportunities for Social Policy, Social Policy & Administration, 46, 4, pp. 395-412, Business Source Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 3 July 2015. Weaver, Beth & McNeill, Fergus., 2015. Giving Up Crime. Scottish Centre for Crime and Justice Research. Web. June 1, 2015. Accessed from http://www.sccjr.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/Giving_Up_Crime_tcm8-2569.pdf Zdun, S, & Scholl, J., 2013, The Impact of Girlfriends on Desistance Processes among Socially Deprived Young Adults, European Journal Of Crime, Criminal Law & Criminal Justice, 21, 3/4, pp. 339-358, Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost, viewed 3 July 2015. Read More