Positive Criminology

Natti Ronel, Dana Segev, Natti Ronel, Dana Segev

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2015
• eBook ISBN: 9781317750826
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Social Sciences
• Subtopic: Criminology
• Index: Social Sciences

How can we best help offenders desist from crime, as well as help victims heal? This book engages with this question by offering its readers a comprehensive review of positive criminology in theory, research and practice. Positive criminology is a concept – a perspective – that places emphasis on forces of integration and social inclusion that are experienced positively by target individual and groups, and may contribute to a reduction in negative emotions, desistance from crime and overcoming the traumatic experience of victimization. In essence, positive criminology holds a more holistic view, which acknowledges that thriving and disengagement from distress, addiction, mental illness, crime, deviance or victimization might be fostered more effectively by enhancing positive emotions and experiences, rather than focusing on reducing negative attributes.

Each chapter in this book is written by key scholars in the related fields of criminology, victimology and addiction and, thus, assembles varied and extensive approaches to rehabilitation and treatment. These approaches share in common a positive criminology view, thereby enriching our understanding of the concept and other strength-based approaches to dealing with offenders and victims.

This edited book elaborates on positive criminology core ideas and assumptions; discusses related theories and innovations; and presents various benefits that this perspective can promote in the field of rehabilitation. For this reason, this book will be essential reading for those engaged in the study of criminology, criminal justice and victimology and may also assist scholars and professionals to help offenders desist from crime and improve victims' well-being.

Part I Positive criminology in theory and practice

1 Introduction ‘The good' can overcome ‘the bad’

Natti Ronel and Dana Segev

DOI: 10.4324/9781315796536-1

Time and again, in different locations and within a variety of cultural contexts, we rediscover the power of words, ideas, images or perspectives over human transformation. The content of our minds is considered to have an ability to create the reality we live in. In religious contexts, it was practiced by different spiritual schools, such as the exercises of St. Ignatius of Loyola (1951), or Tibetan Tantric Buddhism (Lama Yeshe, 2001) and others as well. In the early years of the twentieth century, Emile Coué developed this idea as a method for suggestion and autosuggestion, to construct a school of healing for various ailments. The Thomas theorem ¹ continues the same line while stating that our definitions and belief create the reality we live in. This idea grew over the previous century to influence a diversity of approaches in different disciplines. But what about criminology?

Crime is a phenomenon society has long struggled with. Crime is considered by most individuals and societies as a negative occurrence of harm, injustice and suffering. Certainly it is. But what about the reality we create with our reaction to crime? Desperately, we resist and respond to crime with endless means, attempting to minimize the harm it causes. These means include segregating offenders for a long duration, while granting parole only to those who demonstrate good behavior and low risk of recidivism (Petersilia, 2003), or minimizing risk for potential victims and high risk places (see for example, Clarke, 2003; Felson, 2003). We turn to risk detection and management as a leading tool to direct our actions. We also use supervision and rehabilitative programs as a way to reintegrate offenders, change their ways and/or limit their reach (O’Hear, 2011; Weaver, 2009).

Throughout this time, much emphasis has been placed on negative life events and circumstances considered as causes of crime, negative consequences of imprisonment, negative consequences for victims and negative attributes that place offenders as high risk (Ronel & Elisha, 2011; Ward & Maruna, 2007; Ward & Stewart, 2010). But when we approach the negative as real and only, it likely becomes the only and very reality we live in! Positive criminology suggests to counter, or balance, this overemphasis with ‘the negative’ – ‘the bad’ – by bringing into focus positive perspective, experiences, images, ideas and concepts. Positive criminology suggests a transformation of thinking about and responding to crime from that of negativity (as common understanding of the negative) to positivity – from avoiding, illuminating or reducing the bad, to enabling, promoting and increasing the good. Positive criminology follows the principle that we must be the change we want to create (Braswell, Fuller, & Lozoff, 2001) hence the support of transformation of behaviors from negatively to positively considered ones, deserves corresponding positively considered means. These ‘positive makings’ encompass a wide variety of theories and practices, such as ‘sociology of acceptance’ as introduced by Bogdan and Taylor (1987), which expose individuals who offended to altruism and a sense of social and personal unification. Also, for example, processes of restorative justice that expose offenders and victims to a constructive and positive experience and that foster a sense of social inclusion and taking of responsibility, thereby reflecting positive mechanisms suggested by positive criminology (Gray, 2005; Hayes & Daly, 2003; Ronel & Segev, 2013).

Thus, rather than focusing on negative causes, consequences and risks, positive criminology suggests placing emphasis on integrating and unifying forces that enhance ‘the good’ and thereby foster desistance and well-being for offenders and healing for victims. A similar attitude can be found in the increasing rise of strength-based theories and innovations, which claim, for example, that more needs to be done than reducing associated stigma and offenders’ sense of skepticism regarding the future (LeBel, Burnett, Maruna, & Bushway, 2008). We also need to help them develop self-efficacy and hope for future prospects, in order to help them desist from crime (LeBel et al., 2008). Also, for example, the Good Life Model, developed by Tony Ward, advocates for developing individuals’ strength, by helping offenders develop a way of life that aligns with their values and set goals that are individually meaningful to the offender (see for example, Ward & Stewart, 2010; Ward, Mann, & Gannon, 2007). In short, there is a growing recognition that managing risk and reducing negative characteristics is not sufficient to help offenders. They require something more. Being exposed to positive experiences, which will foster constructive changes, can help reintegrate offenders and victims and fill the void that emerges when we try so hard to reduce the negative. Surely, such an integration, when installed successfully, might contribute to individuals and groups that are involved and to society by large.

Accordingly, positive criminology introduces a paradigm that attempts to look at criminological theories, responses to crime and interventions for offenders and victims from a different point of view; a point of view that, arguably, has not been given sufficient attention in criminological discourse. Comparably to positive psychology, research and theory in positive criminology focuses on positive emotions, experiences and mechanisms that increase individuals’ well-being and reduce their negative emotions, behaviors and attitudes (see, for example, Duckworth, Steen, & Seligman, 2005; Gredecki & Turner, 2009; Ronel & Segev, 2013; Wylie & Griffin, 2012). Furthermore, these experiences, at their core, aim to be socially inclusive, as well as integrating for the individual at three levels: social/interpersonal, intrapersonal and spiritual. In doing so, these experiences counter a sense of separation an individual undergoes when they are either a victim of crime or commit a crime. In this manner, positive criminology is also a proponent of encouraging society to establish integrative attitudes and approaches to promote offenders’ social integration. The current response of the criminal justice system can further induce an experience of social exclusion and this is why there is great importance in placing emphasis on positive experiences and providing individuals with a sense of social and spiritual unification. Related to the assertions and attitude of positive psychology, positive criminology holds that positive experiences are not secondary to negative ones and that developing these can result in alleviating emotional difficulties and impact their root cause (Akhtar & Boniwell, 2010; Duckworth et al., 2005).

As noted earlier, there are existing innovations and theories that reflect its core ideas and practice (Elisha, Idisis, & Ronel, 2013). More examples include: peacemaking criminology and its teachings (e.g., Braswell et al., 2001; Pepinsky & Quinney, 1991), the study of factors of resilience and protection that deals with the development of internal positive mechanisms, which can help individuals recover from trauma and cope with distress and risk (Agaibi & Wilson, 2005; Antonovsky, 1979; Kobasa, 1982); exposure to goodness and altruism by way of, for example, volunteers (Ronel, 2006), which can encourage the processes of rehabilitation and within individual changes; also, therapeutic jurisprudence reflects positive criminology themes by exposing offenders to a constructive and just court process, as well as enhancing the courts’ ability to promote therapeutic consequences.

However, although some of the approaches and theories mentioned here (such as restorative justice and resilience and protection factors) already exist and have demonstrated their value, they are not recognized as reflecting positive criminology (Ronel & Elisha, 2011). By acknowledging that some existing theories and innovations reflect its philosophy and by recognizing that these theories and approaches aim to promote positive experiences and outcomes, we can, arguably, better communicate our efforts to promote desistance for offenders and well-being for victims. The concept of positive criminology, reach and potential, has yet to be fully explored within current criminological theory and research. For this reason, we took on the project of publishing this book, which aims to explore the reach of positive criminology and positive victimology. It is the first book of positive approach to criminology that attempts to bring together a diversity of approaches within criminology that shares a common perspective – the positive one. It is our hope that this collection of chapters will deepen our understanding of how positive criminology and victimology can contribute to our attempt to respond to crime, and its victims, by way of being vigorous and constructive. It is also our hope that this book will be followed by further research, theories and practices that will stem from the positive perspective and will enhance it to become a growing discipline within criminology.

This book is divided into three sections: (i) positive criminology in theory and practice, which looks at both the criminal justice system and individuals within it; (ii) positive criminology and addiction treatment, which responds to the strong link between positive criminology and recovering from drug use; and (iii) positive victimology, which applies the core philosophy of positive criminology for victims.

In the first section, we start our book by taking a thorough and careful description of positive criminology. Accordingly, Natti Ronel, who originally developed the concept, discusses in his chapter ‘How can criminology (and victimology) become positive?’ the concept of positive criminology in detail and shares how his vast experience in criminological research and practice helped developed this notion. Furthermore, Natti explores the complexity of what we mean by positive, especially in relation to criminology, as well as describes the possible contribution of this concept.

Next, Tahel Ben Zvi and Ronit Haimoff-Ayali augment on positive criminology theory by focusing on a specific aspect, namely exploring the effect of a positive mechanism – generosity – on self-centeredness. Tahel and Ronit find that exposure to generosity by youth offenders has encouraged a positive alternative of behavior for these youths and helped them find a more authentic way of life. The authors also pay attention to barriers that may limit the positive impact of generosity. The authors conclude that, although self-centeredness may limit youth offenders’ ability to see and engage with anything outside their own world (thereby limiting the ability to gain from their exposure to generosity), under certain conditions, though, the good has the power to reduce self-centeredness and thus bring the youngsters towards love and compassion; strengthening their positive behavior and change.

The next chapter, by Fergus McNeill, moves the reader away from a discussion on the individual and explores how the notion of positive criminology can fit within the criminal justice system. Could we have a positive criminal justice system? In his chapter: ‘Positive criminology, positive criminal justice?,’ Fergus examines the extent to which it is possible to re-frame our criminal justice approaches in line with the perspective of positive criminology (and its ‘older sister’ positive psychology). With particular focus on debates about the rehabilitation of ‘offenders’ as a key purpose of criminal sanctions, he delivers a novel claim, urging us to think like architects of justice. Namely, that we should judge criminal sanctions not so much by the evils (or harms) they reduce as by the goods they promote.

Shadd Maruna and Thomas P. LeBel’s chapter continues a macro discussion while also recognizing its impact on the individual. Shadd and Tom offer strengths-based (or ‘restorative’) philosophy as to assist in the reintegration of prisoners back into society. Their chapter explores the theory behind strengths-based innovations for offenders’ reentry and offers an important conclusion which encourages us, in their words, to go a ‘third mile’ to assist individuals’ desistance. This notion involves more direct efforts to reduce stigma through activism on ex-prisoner issues on a political level.

The next two chapters look at a possible relationship between positive criminology and the court system, mainly by synergizing the concept with therapeutic jurisprudence. First, Tali Gal and David B. Wexler, in their chapter: ‘Synergizing therapeutic jurisprudence and positive criminology’ reflect on therapeutic jurisprudence’s concerns – how does the criminal process affect the psychological well-being of defendants – and its aim to enhance therapeutic outcomes for defendants. Tali and David further claim that positive criminology poses similar questions, concerns and aims as therapeutic jurisprudence and, thus, describe their interconnections and what each notion could learn, give to and take from the other.

Dana Segev continues the exploration into the relationship of the two theories by focusing on lawyers’ practice with youth defendants and possible therapeutic outcomes. In her chapter: ‘Positive criminology and therapeutic jurisprudence: relevant techniques for defense lawyers,’ Dana merges the two theories and their proposed practices and explores the role of defense lawyers. Namely, the chapter discusses the manner in which defense lawyers can reflect positive criminology themes, therapeutic techniques and foster therapeutic consequences that can assist youth offenders in refraining from crime. She outlines the lessons to be learned from this merge, t...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Frontmatter
• Halftitle Page
• Series Page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Dedication Page
• Contents
• List of illustrations
• Notes on contributors
• Foreword
• Acknowledgments
• List of abbreviations
• PART I Positive criminology in theory and practice
• 1 Introduction: ‘the good’ can overcome ‘the bad’
• 2 How can criminology (and victimology) become positive?
• 3 The effect of ‘the good’ and the self-centeredness barrier – positive criminology in the lived reality of youth at risk
• 4 Positive criminology, positive criminal justice?
• 5 Strengths-based restorative approaches to reentry: the evolution of creative restitution, reintegration and destigmitization
• 6 Synergizing therapeutic jurisprudence and positive criminology
• 7 Positive criminology and therapeutic jurisprudence: relevant techniques for defense lawyers
• 8 Peacemaking
• 9 Israel’s Juvenile Probation Service from the perspective of positive criminology: a critical review
• 10 Applied positive criminology: restorative reentry and transition planning circles for incarcerated people and their loved ones
• 11 The Good Lives Model of offender rehabilitation: working positively with sexual offenders
• 12 Hotel prison check-out – hotel pardon check-in
• PART II Positive criminology and addiction treatment
• 13 Long-term recovery from addiction: criminal justice involvement and positive criminology?
• 14 Recovery as a social phenomenon: what is the role of the community in supporting and enabling recovery?
• 15 Application of positive criminology in the 12-Step program
• 16 ‘Pulling myself up by the bootstraps’: self-change of addictive behaviors from the perspective of positive criminology
• PART III Positive victimology
• 17 Theoretical and practical aspects of positive victimology
• 18 Posttraumatic growth and positive victimology: the case of ultra-Orthodox Jewish women who resided in a shelter
• 19 Restorative justice and domestic violence: a view from a positive victimological perspective
• 20 Irrational coping theory and positive criminology: a framework to protect victims of cyber crime
• 21 Between secondary victimization and positive victimology: the case of crime victims’ right of privacy
• 22 Challenges of post-conflict reintegration of former girl soldiers
• 23 Programs for female prisoners and positive criminology and victimology: the case of Serbia
• Epilogue: present to future: a positive direction for criminology?
• Index