Desistance Transitions and the Impact of Probation

Sam King

• Publisher: Taylor & Francis
• Year: 2013
• Print ISBN: 9780415642286
• eBook ISBN: 9781136170904
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Sciences sociales
• Subtopic: Criminologie

Moving away from criminal behaviour can be fraught with difficulties. Often it can involve leaving behind old habits, customs, and even friends, while at the same time adopting a new way of life. How do individuals go about making a decision to give up crime? How do they plan to sustain this decision? And in what ways does probation help? This book explores these questions.

Based on in-depth interviews with a group of men under probation supervision, Sam King investigates the factors associated with making a decision to desist from crime. The book examines strategies for desistance, and explores the factors that individuals consider when they are thinking about how they will desist. In doing so, the book sheds new light on existing understandings of desistance from crime and helps to develop our understandings of the role that individuals play in constructing their own desistance journeys. This book also highlights the role of probation in this process, offering a timely and critical review of the nature of probation under the New Labour government in the UK between 1997-2010.

The findings indicate that we should allow Probation Officers greater autonomy and discretion within their roles, and that we should free them from the bureaucracy of risk assessment and targets. Moreover, the book warns against the potential fragmentation of community supervision. As such, the book will be of interest to criminology students, researchers, academics, policymakers and practitioners, particularly those who work with ex-offenders in the community.

1   Introduction

Introducing desistance transitions

Desistance from crime emerged as an area of interest following the somewhat unexpected findings from a number of longitudinal studies in the UK and North America which began in the late-1950s. Prominent studies included the Philadelphia Birth Cohort Study in the USA (Kempf, 1990; Wolfgang et al., 1987), and the Cambridge Study in Delinquent Development in the UK (Farrington, 1989, 1995; Farrington et al., 2006a, 2006b). The researchers undertaking these projects had expected to study crime over the life-course but found that by the 1970s many within the cohorts that they were observing ceased their involvement in crime as they began to enter early adulthood. Thus, the pattern that was observed followed the now well-established ‘age-crime curve’, and researchers were left to explain how and why so many members of the cohorts had ceased offending at this time in their lives, and why a smaller group of persistent offenders remained after the majority of offenders had desisted (Farrall and Calverley, 2006: 3). In other words, the pattern of offending identified at the macro level by the age-crime curve concealed disparities in patterns of offending at the micro level between individual offenders. The task for researchers would be to explore how individual offenders were able to desist from crime at different stages of the life-course (Farrall and Calverley, 2006: 3–4).

Different views of desistance

Indeed, following these findings, desistance became a field of research in its own right, and a number of authors began to publish their findings on how offenders ceased their involvement in crime (for example: Burnett, 1992; Cusson and Pinsonneault, 1986; Shover, 1983). This has led to the identification of a number of factors associated with successful desistance, including: marriage/family formation (Osgood and Lee, 1993; Shover, 1983); employment (Fletcher, 2001; Uggen, 1999); detachment from delinquent peer groups (Maruna and Roy, 2007; Osborn, 1980); the impact of criminal justice interventions (Burnett, 1992; Hughes, 1998; Rex, 1999); motivation and confidence in the ability to desist (Burnett, 1992; Farrall, 2002); the development of a pro-social sense of morality (Weaver, 2009: 18); and the adoption of an alternative, non-criminal identity (Giordano et al., 2002).

Drawing upon the empirical observations outlined above in relation to the factors that support desistance, a number of theoretical explanations have been proposed to explain how and why individuals move away from offending and offending-related behaviours. Generally, there are three broad theoretical categories: structural (which relate to the social context within which desistance takes place), agency (which relate to the individual’s attitudes, values and other personal characteristics), and integrated (which seek to combine structure and agency elements) (Barry, 2010a). ‘Structural theories’ are those which explain desistance as resulting from particular life-course events, which usually accompany processes of ageing and maturation. These may prompt desistance, for example through experiencing some form of ‘external shock’, such as sustaining injury whilst committing a crime (Cusson and Pinsonneault, 1986). However, structural theories most often explain desistance in relation to particular life-course transitions which alter the socio-structural context of an individual’s life, such as employment, marriage, or detachment from delinquent peer groups (Laub and Sampson, 2003). ‘Agency theories’ generally explain desistance in relation to some conception of free will or rational choice (Clarke and Cornish, 1985; Cornish and Clarke, 1986). Often these theories explain that would-be desisters have some form of plan or vision for an alternative future that does not involve offending (Maruna, 2001), and some perception of past behaviour as being morally wrong and incongruent with their future vision (Weaver, 2009: 18). Generally, therefore, agency theories explain desistance as resulting from enhanced decision-making skills in relation to the risks and rewards associated with crime.

Structural and agency theories have been criticised for reducing the role of the desister to either that of a ‘super-dupe’, whose actions are wholly constrained and determined by structural factors, or that of a ‘super-agent’, who is entirely free to take whatever course of action they desire (Farrall and Bowling, 1999). ‘Integrated theories’ aim to overcome these shortcomings, not only by combining structure and agency dimensions in their explanations but, moreover, by exploring their interaction (Bottoms et al., 2004; Byrne and Trew, 2007). Generally, these theories explain that desistance occurs when changes to an individual’s attitudes, values and decision-making lead to the individual seeking to alter their socio-structural context by searching for, or engineering, particular pro-social life-course transitions. Once these transitions take place, new behaviours are learned and new pro-social roles become cemented (Barry, 2010a).

Although researchers have studied desistance more extensively in recent years, more research is still required on how desistance is perceived and experienced prospectively from the perspective of the individual offender. The rationale for this is that an understanding of this nature will offer a greater insight into understanding ‘how’ and ‘why’ successful desistance occurs for some but not for others (Maruna, 2000: 12). An integrated theory, of the type discussed above, is clearly relevant to this endeavour, as it allows for an incorporation of structural factors in relation to particular obstacles or life-course turning points in the individual’s social context, and agency factors in respect of the individual’s attitudes, values and decision-making that influence behavioural intentions. However, despite the growing body of research that employs an integrated theory, structure-agency interaction remains a relatively under-explored aspect of desistance research. In particular, theoretical and conceptual accounts of agency remain vague, and there is a dearth of research which explores notions of ‘active agency’ in desistance, which, it is argued, refers to the notion that individuals may be able to engineer their own desistance pathways, although not necessarily under conditions of their own choosing (Bottoms et al., 2004; Vaughan, 2007). Indeed, there is considerable research which has paid little attention to the role of agency in the desistance process (for example: Gottfredson and Hirschi, 1990; Laub et al., 1998; Sampson and Laub, 1993), and where the concept has been applied it has generally been considered from a rational choice perspective (for example: Paternoster, 1989; Piliavin et al., 1986; Uggen and Shelton, 1998).

Exploring prospective strategies for sustaining desistance may reveal a great deal about the desistance process, not least because existing evidence suggests that successful desisters tend to have a plan that they adhere to (Maruna, 2001). It is likely that one aspect of such a plan will entail overcoming certain obstacles. Previous research has identified a number of obstacles that offenders are likely to face as they attempt to move away from crime, in relation to employment, alcohol, drugs and so forth (National Audit Office, 2002; SEU, 2002), and it has been shown that individuals are more likely to desist if they are able to successfully overcome such obstacles (Farrall, 2002). An examination of the individual’s prospective viewpoint can offer a greater insight into the types of obstacles offenders face when attempting to desist, and how these obstacles are perceived by the individual. Further, such an approach is likely to reveal how such perceptions inform intended action (Forste et al., 2010: 2), and how this influences actual behaviour, as behavioural intention is central to actual behaviour (Ajzen, 1991).

The probation context

The development of the desistance literature has broadly coincided with the resurgent interest in exploring ‘What Works’ in community interventions in the UK (for example: Burnett and Roberts, 2004; Mair, 2004; McGuire, 1995; Newman and Nutley, 2003). This, in turn, led to the New Labour government establishing ‘reducing reoffending’ as an explicit aim of criminal justice policy (Halliday, 2001; Carter, 2003; Home Office, 2004a). A rising prison population and public anxieties about the extent of reoffending – particularly among those under probation supervision – are contemporary concerns in the UK (Leapman, 2006; Doyle, 2008; Ford, 2009), so it is pertinent to explore the topic of desistance in relation to probation interventions at this time. It is also worthwhile reflecting on the impact of New Labour’s policies in relation to probation and desistance from crime given the changes which are being proposed, if not already administered, within probation under the current Coalition government (see for example: Ledger, 2010; Neilson, 2010; Warburton, 2010; Burke, 2011; Hough, 2011; Ryan, 2011; Fox and Albertson, 2012; Teague, 2012). Numerous changes took place within probation, and within criminal justice policy more generally, under the New Labour government – not the least the introduction of the National Probation Service (NPS), the Carter Review of correctional services and the subsequent development of the National Offender Management Service (NOMS), the enhancement of National Standards, the creation of the Ministry of Justice and the passing of the Offender Management Bill.

However, much of the policy-focus on reducing reoffending under New Labour had been concerned with young offenders (Soothill et al., 2003: 408), to the neglect of the needs of adult offenders (Soothill et al., 2009: 84). Further, contemporary probation can be characterised in terms of its focus upon the management of offenders, targets and objectives, reflecting the rise and significance of risk within the criminal justice system (Denney, 2005; Hope and Sparks, 2000; Kemshall, 2003; O’Malley, 1998; Stenson and Sullivan, 2001). Thus, throughout the New Labour administration, despite many changes within probation, the predominant theme was public protection through the surveillance and management of offenders. The effect of this has been a shift towards an ethos of ‘responsibilisation’ and ‘individualism’, whereby the individual offender is held accountable for reducing their own risk of reoffending. In other words, recent changes within the Probation Service mean that the important relationship between officer and offender has been altered to the extent that individuals attempting to desist are likely to receive less help from their supervising officers. The significant changes that probation has undergone in recent years reinforce the importance of a desistance-focused research agenda, as it has become more uncertain how probation can support individuals in their efforts to move away from crime. This, combined with the arguments presented earlier in this chapter in relation to the lack of focus on ‘active agency’ within desistance research, supports the justification for further research in this area. If probation interventions assume that individuals are capable of exercising agency in order to reduce reoffending, then research needs to explore the nature of this agency and how individuals exercise it within the context of the probation interventions to which they are subjected.

This book is based upon a study of the impact of probation interventions on the construction of individuals’ prospective strategies for desistance. A total of 20 men and their supervising officers were interviewed in-depth in order to gain an understanding of: the processes which led towards a decision to attempt to desist; the intended strategies that individuals would employ in order to try to sustain desistance; the expected or anticipated obstacles that individuals believed they would encounter; and how they intended to overcome these. The aim of this study was to contribute to the existing knowledge of desistance by exploring the early transitional stage of desistance through an examination of a sample of men’s narratives about the prospect of attempting desistance. It was also intended that the study would contribute to existing knowledge about ‘assisted desistance’ (see for example: Rex, 1999; Farrall, 2002; Farrall and Calverley, 2006; King, 2013a). That is, the role of probation interventions in facilitating the transition towards desistance. This book aims to shed new light on these two factors relating to the wider process of desistance, but it also aims to offer something by way of an appraisal of the New Labour approach to probation and the implications that this may have for understanding desistance. At the time of writing, it is approaching three years since the formation of the Coalition government in May 2010. There has been much speculation and conjecture during that time about changes to the way that probation works with individuals, and about the future of the Probation Service more generally (see for example: Ledger, 2010; Burke, 2011; Hough, 2011; Dominey, 2012; Maguire, 2012). Therefore, it is timely to reflect on what could be learned about probation and desistance from the New Labour approach.

Overview of the book

Chapter 1 begins by providing an overview of the socio-political context within which the study took place. The nature and extent of persistent reoffending is outlined, before discussing the response from the Probation Service. This chapter provides an account of some of the key changes to probation implemented under New Labour. It is commonly accepted that criminal justice in general, and probation more specifically, experienced significant change during the period 1997–2010, and much of this change was part of the modernisation of public services (Whitehead, 2010). Chapter 1 outlines how these changes altered the nature of probation interventions, and the impact upon the relationship between the Probation Officer and the Probationer, which has been highlighted in the existing literature as a central aspect of assisted desistance.

Chapter 2 then turns attention to the topic of desistance. The concepts of persistence and desistance are explored in order to provide an understanding of how and why these phenomena may occur, and to account for the processes by which formerly persistent offenders may come to cease offending. Clearly most people will not abruptly stop offending, particularly if they have been involved in persistent offending over a period of time, so Chapter 2 introduces the concept of the transitional phase of desistance, in order to account for the dynamics of moving from criminality to conformity. Various life-course factors are examined which have been shown to facilitate desistance, and the role that the individual can play in their own desistance journey is explored. Chapter 2 also provides an overview of assisted desistance in order to develop a greater understanding of the ways in which criminal justice interventions can facilitate the process.

As a key aim of this book is to provide a greater understanding of the role of human agency in the desistance process, Chapter 3 provides a detailed account of the key aspects of agency found in the desistance literature to date. This chapter provides an understanding of the role of agency in desistance, and a particular focus is given to the impact of agency on the early transitions towards desistance. In this chapter it is argued that particular configurations of agency are more likely to lead to the transformations necessary to sustain desistance over a longer period of time, and that these configurations of agency may be present during the early transitional stages. Chapter 4 provides an overview of the methods employed to explore and understand desistance transitions.

Chapter 5 examines the men’s accounts of the first tentative steps towards desistance. The role of agency is examined in relation to the process of making a decision to desist. In this chapter particular attention is paid to the way in which the men reflected on their past in order to consider alternatives for the future. Chapter 6 builds upon this by examining in greater detail the specific strategies that the men constructed in order to help them to achieve the goals that they had set for the future. Again, particular attention is given to the role of agency in this process. Most of the men highlighted employment as a crucial factor in their strategies, so this is explored in some detail, and the barriers to fulfilling the strategies are also identified. Chapter 7 examines the role, or the perceived role, of probation in enabling or constraining the transition towards desistance. Particular aspects of probation interventions are identified as enhancing individual agency, such that desistance becomes more feasible, while other dimensions of probation are identified as constraining the transition towards desistance.

Chapter 8 analyses the accounts of desistance transitions explored in the previous three chapters through the lens of Emirbayer and Mische’s (1998) conceptualisation of the chordal triad of agency. Their work provides a framework within which an understanding is developed of how agency can either reproduce or transform social contexts and individuals’ trajectories. This approach is relevant to research which examines the nature of agency in the desistance process as it can enable a greater understanding of how individuals approach the process of attempting to initiate change in their lives. The final chapter offers some concluding thoughts on the nature of agency in the desistance process, and the impact of probation under New Labour.

This book seeks to develop knowledge of desistance by specifically focusing on the initial transition towards desistance. The aim is to gain a greater understanding of individuals’ attitudes and experiences in the immediate aftermath of making a decision to desist, and how these relate to their prospective strategies for sustaining desistance. More specifically, it aims to explore the social context of individuals in the early stages of desistance, particularly in relation to those structural factors which have been shown to be associated with desistance, and how individuals mediate these in relation to their future strategies. Finally, it also seeks to develop understandings of the probation interventions that these individuals are subjected to, how these influence individuals’ personal and social contexts, and whether individuals perceive these to enable or constrain their attempts to desist.

2 Reoffending and the response from probation

The concern with reoffending

Criminal justice policy over the past three decades has emerged as a central theme in political rhetoric and governance in England and Wales, and within this two elements have constituted the dominant concerns surrounding crime: public protection and reoffending. The concern with public protection has, in part at least, been the result of the rise of the ‘risk society’ and the hegemonic discourse of risk within debates about crime and punishment (see for example: Hudson, 2003; Kemshall, 2003; Kemshall and Maguire, 2001). Risk in criminal justice has been most pervasive in the increased use of risk assessment tools and risk management strategies in policing and penal practice (O’Malley, 1998; Kemshall and Maguire, 2001). Risk in relation to crime more generally can, perhaps, be most readily characterised in terms of ...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Table of Contents
• List of illustrations
• Preface
• General editor’s introduction
• 1 Introduction
• 2 Reoffending and the response from probation
• 3 Persistence, desistance and the transitional phase
• 4 Agency, narratives and social context
• 5 Obtaining accounts of probation
• 6 First steps – the transition to desistance
• 7 Strategies for desistance
• 8 Probation – enabling or constraining desistance?
• 9 Active agents and social contexts
• 10 Concluding thoughts
• Notes
• References
• Index