Desistance

Beth Weaver

Interest in the subject of desistance from crime emerged in the 1970s and 1980s. Since then, research has moved beyond seeking descriptive explanations towards revealing how and why people give up crime.

There are inherent difficulties in judging when someone has desisted. Most criminologistsassociate desistance with both ceasing and refraining from offending. This is because desistance, like any other behavioural change, is not an abrupt event but a process characterised by lapse and relapse. Some scholars have identified distinguishable phases in this process, but perhaps the most widely recognised is Maruna and Farrall’s (2004) differentiation between primary and secondary desistance:

  • primary desistance refers to any lull or crime-free gap in the course of a criminal career;
  • secondary desistance is defined as the movement from non-offending to the assumption of a role or identity as a non-offender or “changed person”.

Theoretical explanations for desistance cohere around maturational reform, social bonds and narratives theories (Maruna 2001).

Maturational reform

Maturational reform theories suggest that people naturally 'grow out of crime' as they mature (Rutherford 1992). The oft-cited aggregate age-crime curve suggests that offending peaks in early adulthood and then drops off gradually before people reach 30 or 40 years of age (Piquero et al 2001). It is argued that physical, mental and developmental changes within the person explain this phenomenon. Critics of these theories converge in concluding that age indexes a range of different variables, including biological and physiological changes, but also reflecting changes in social contexts, in attitudes, beliefs and values, in life experiences and in the impact of social and institutional processes (Bushway et al 2001). Advancing age is not, on its own, an explanation.

Social bonds

Other theories focus on the role of social bonds in triggering change. They suggest, for example, that gaining employment or acquiring significant relationships can support change by creating a stake in conformity and rendering offending incompatible with the change in lifestyle, associations and roles that these bring. However, gaining employment or a significant relationship does not itself produce desistance; what is important is:

  • what these ties mean to an individual;
  • the perceived strength, quality and interdependence of the ties;
  • their impact in buttressing informal social controls, improving self control, and reducing opportunities and motivations to offend.

Narrative theories

Narrative theories of desistance combine individual, relational and structural factors in their explanations of the desistance process. They emphasise the role of subjective changes in the offender and in their sense of self or identity. They are reflected in greater concern for others, in changing motivations, values and attitudes, and shifting relationships within their social frameworks.

Messages for practice

While research has revealed the diversity of pathways to desistance, some specific messages have emerged.

Motivation and hope are critical in the early stages of change. Hope can give people asense of confidence that they can exercise choice and exert influence and control over their lives, and that they can overcome the challenges they face in trying to give up crime (Farrall and Calverley 2006; Lloyd and Serin 2011). With hope, a person may be more inclined to take advantage of positive social opportunities and feel more resilient when they encounter setbacks – though it is important that the problems they encounter are not perceived to be overwhelming (LeBel et al 2008).

Positive factors that help to bring about change include:

  • someone believing in the individual;
  • increased distance from the label of ‘offender’
  • identification with and internalization of a more constructive, non-stigmatised identity or role, be that as an ex-offender, parent, or by virtue of their occupation.

In this vein, involvement in ‘generative activities’ (contributing to the well-being of others), such as mentoring, peer support and volunteering, can support the development of an alternativeidentity (see Maruna and LeBel 2009; Weaver 2012).

However, desistance is not just about the acquisition of a sense of agency or hope; nor is it only about the experienceof shifts in one's personal and social identity. Desistance requires social capital - which is essentially the network of social or relational connections that exist between people, based on norms of reciprocity and mutual helping, through which we achieve participation in society (Fukuyama 2001).

Dynamics in the process of desistance resonate with concepts of resilience with young people (Robertson et al., 2006), recovery from addiction (Best et al., 2010) and processes of recovery in mental health (Brown and Kandikirira 2007; NSW CAG 2009).

Desistance research provides a wealth of knowledge for practice, but it does not provide a manual or method that can be universally applied. It does, however, indicate general principles that have relevance to social work fields beyond criminal justice.

  1. The change process depends on more than the interventions of formal support systems; individuals and informal networks have particular contributions to make. Practice should focus on maintaining, protecting and developing the ties that matter to the individual. It should aim to enhance their capacities to sustain positive roles and relationships. It should support them in the process of building networks and contexts in which shifts in identities can be embedded and through which they can make useful contributions to families, groups or communities.
  1. There is an emphasis across change-focused literatures on the centrality of narrative reframing work to support identity transformations. Stress is laid on the importance of strengths-based approaches in the development of people’s personal, psychological and social resources and capacities.
  1. Developing motivation, hope and agency are key tasks for practitioners (McNeill et al 2012). Participatory and empowering approaches to practice might be one means of realizing this (Weaver 2011; Weaver and Lightowler 2012). Indeed,across the recovery and desistance literatures, placing people, not programmes, at the centre of change management processes is seen to be of crucial significance in people’s accounts of how change has been achieved. The individual’s active role and ownership of the change process must be fully respected.

For further reading

Farrall, S and Calverley, A (2006) Understanding Desistance From Crime: Theoretical Directions in Resettlement and Rehabilitation McGraw-Hill Education, Oxford University Press: Crime and Justice Series.

McNeill, F., and Weaver, B., (2010) Changing Lives? Desistance Research and Offender Management. Scottish Centre for Crime and Justice Research Report No. 3/2010 available online at:

Maruna, S (2001) Making Good: How Ex-Convicts Reform and Rebuild their Lives American Psychological Association Books, Washington DC.

References:

Best, D., Rome, A, Hanning, K., White, W., Gossop, M., Taylor, A. and Perkins, A. (2010) Research for recovery: A review of the Drugs Evidence Base. Crime and Justice Research Findings no.23. Edinbrugh: Scottish Government. Available at:

Brown, W and Kandirikirira, N (2007) ‘The Possibility of Wellness’, Mental Health

Today, 7(7): 23-26.

Bushway, S D, Piquero, A.R, Broidy, L.M, Cauffman, E and Mazerolle, P. (2001) An empirical framework for studying desistance as a process. Criminology 39:491–515.

Farrall S and Calverley A (2006) Understanding Desistance From Crime: Theoretical Directions in Resettlement and Rehabilitation McGraw-Hill Education, Oxford University Press: Crime and Justice Series.

Fukuyama, F (2001) Social capital, civil society and development. Third World Quarterly, 22, 1: 7-20

LeBel T.P, Burnett R, Maruna S and Bushway S (2008) The ‘Chicken and Egg’ of Social Factors in Desistance from Crime. European Journal of Criminology 5 (2): 131-159

Lloyd, C.D and Serin, R.C (2011): Agency and outcome expectancies for crime desistance: measuring offenders' personal beliefs about change, Psychology, Crime & Law, DOI:10.1080/1068316X.2010.511221

McNeill, F., Farrall, S., Lightowler, C., and Maruna, S. (2012) How and Why People Stop Offending: Discovering Desistance published online at:

Maruna S (2001) Making Good: How Ex-Convicts Reform and Rebuild their Lives American Psychological Association Books, Washington DC.

Maruna S and Farrall S (2004) ‘Desistance from Crime: A Theoretical Reformulation’ Kolner Zeitschrift fur Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, 43.

Maruna S., and LeBel, T.P (2009) Strengths-based approaches to reentry: Extra mileage toward reintegration and destigmatization. Japanese Journal of Sociological Criminology 34, 58-80

NSW Consumer Advisory Group – Mental Health Inc (2009) Literature Review on Recovery available online at:

Piquero, A R, Blumstein, A., Brame, R., Haapanen, R., Mulvey, E.V and Nagin D.S (2001) Assessing the impact of exposure time and incapacitation on longitudinal trajectories of criminal offending. Journal of Adolescent Research 16:54–74.

Robertson L, Campbell A., Hill, M and McNeill, F. (2006) Promoting Desistance and Resilience in Young People Who Offend.Scottish Journal of Criminal Justice Studies Vol 12, pp. 56-73

Rutherford A (1992) Growing Out of Crime: The New Era Winchester: Waterside Press.

Weaver, B. (2011) Co-Producing Community Justice: the transformative potential of personalisation for penal sanctions. British Journal of Social Work, 41(6): 1038-1057.N

Weaver, B. (2012) The Relational Context of Desistance: Some Implications and Opportunities for Social Policy. Social Policy and Administration.46 (4)al

Weaver, B and Lightowler, C (2012) Shaping the Criminal Justice System: The Role of Those Supported by Criminal Justice Services. published online at