Criminal Justice and Behavior

For more than two decades, the diagnostic and cultural insights of psychological jurisprudence (PJ) have informed social theory, clinical practice, and public policy. As a form of heterodox criticism, PJ probes the relationship between human agency and social structure, and it examines how both are informed by and co-produce extant reality. This article explores the utility of PJ—especially as a basis to reconfigure the problem of crime, to redefine institutional responses to it, and to reconceive the process of desistance. To accomplish this objective, the article addresses two issues. First, it explains how the diagnostic and cultural footing of PJ functions as philosophical critique concerning the subject of crime. Second, it demonstrates how this critique represents the grounding of an ethic with considerable relevance for developing a normative theory of trans-desistance. The article concludes by suggesting how the normative dimensions of trans-desistance portend dynamic change for future criminal justice practice and mental health treatment.

The law can be a systemically induced decision point for offenders and can act to help or hinder desistance. Desistance can be described as a change process that may be initiated by decisive momentum, supported by intervention, and maintained through re-entry, culminating in a citizen with full rights and responsibilities. Desistance within courts, corrections, and beyond is maximized by applying the law in a therapeutic manner. In common, desistance, therapeutic jurisprudence, and human rights support offender autonomy and well-being. The intersections between the three models have been explored to propose a normative framework that provides principles and offers strategies to address therapeutic legal rules, legal procedures, and the role of psycholegal actors and offenders in initiating, supporting, and maintaining desistance.

The science examining institutional and community-based responses to sexual offending has been well documented. The responses to this form of criminal behavior include penal incarceration followed by civil commitment, community notification, and sex offender registration. To date, evidence-based findings report that these correctives and/or curatives yield limited effectiveness sufficient to justify their continued maintenance as statewide or even national criminal justice and mental health policy prescription. One official systems-level way that policy receives legitimacy is through the Courts. Interestingly, the precedent-setting sex offender case law indicates that current policy prescriptions are constitutionally permissible and therefore justifiable as regulatory practices, notwithstanding the empirical evidence that challenges their soundness. This article summarizes the science regarding sex offender policy from the point of imprisonment to reentry, recounts the relevant case law that judicially sanctions such institutional and community practices, and explains how the driver for sex offender law and policy is legal moralism grounded in and advanced by utilitarian reasoning and duty-based logic. This article concludes by suggesting how judicial reliance on legal moralism could further the interests of public safety and civil liberties if insights from virtue jurisprudence informed the analysis.

The issue of dual roles within forensic and correctional fields has typically been conceptualized as dissonance—experienced by practitioners—when attempting to adhere to the conflicting ethical requirements associated with client well-being and community protection. In this article, we argue that the dual role problem should be conceptualized more broadly to incorporate the relationship between the offender and their victim. We also propose that restorative justice (RJ) is able to provide a preliminary ethical framework to deal with this common ethical oversight. Furthermore, we unite the RJ framework with that of Ward’s moral acquaintance model to provide a more powerful approach (RJ-informed moral acquaintance) aimed at addressing the ethical challenges faced by practitioners within forensic and correctional roles.

Four well-known delinquency intervention and prevention programs remain both publicly and politically popular regardless of a large body of evidence-based research revealing their ineffectiveness in promoting a lasting desistance from youth violence and crime. Scared straight programs, Drug Abuse Resistance Education (D.A.R.E.), youth boot camps, and secure large-scale, custodial juvenile correctional facilities overemphasize offender “risk management and maintenance” as opposed to individual, group-based, and/or collective well-being. This article will identify the values that these current and dominant community-centered youth justice initiatives reflect, and it will explain how these values further (or forestall) offender desistance. Viable, evidence-based alternatives consistent with the value orientation of therapeutic and restorative programming will also be evaluated. The article concludes by examining the efficacy of this alternative normative agenda to foster successful desistance from juvenile delinquency and crime.

A key theme in mental health is the principle of recovery. However, it is not clear how this might apply to forensic mental health services, which offer mental health care to men and women who have offended when mentally unwell. In this article, we explore how discussion of the index offense fits into recovery paradigms and how reflection on offender identity relates to recovery. Using clinical material from therapy groups for homicide perpetrators, we discuss how narratives of agency and responsibility change (or not) in therapy, and how narrative shifts link with the concept of “recovery” in mental health.

Recent criminological studies have focused on what promotes desistance from crime, ranging from internal promoters (such as narrative identity shift) to external promoters (such as employment and marriage). An understudied promoter is the role of ordinary community members in integrating released offenders into community life. This article draws on qualitative data collected from a Circles of Support and Accountability (CoSA) program in Vermont, which uses community volunteers to create a circle around selected medium-to-high risk offenders (often sex offenders) who present a risk for reoffense due to their isolation. The nature of the forged relationships is examined, and the article asserts that desistance can be achieved through the actions of community members who communicate a sense of shared moral space, and a genuine sense of belonging. By actively integrating offenders into community life, CoSA model normative lives, create normative and ordinary relationships of mutual obligation and respect, and aid in the de-labeling process by focusing on the other attributes of offenders beyond their criminality. This article concludes by theorizing the role of community integration as an antecedent to desistance, rather than an outcome. In so doing, our knowledge of offender reintegration and desistance processes can be more fully understood.

This article draws on the life stories of a friendship group of men in their 40s who offended together in their youth and early adulthood. By exploring these interrelated narratives, we reveal individual, relational, and structural contributions to the desistance process, drawing on Donati’s relational sociology. In examining these men’s social relations, this article demonstrates the central role of friendship groups, intimate relationships, families of formation, employment, and religious communities in change over the life course. It shows how, for different individuals, these relations triggered reflexive evaluation of their priorities, behaviors, and lifestyles, but with differing results. However, despite these differences, the common theme of these distinct stories is that desistance from crime was a means of realizing and maintaining the men’s individual and relational concerns, with which continued offending became (sometimes incrementally) incompatible. In the concluding discussion, we explore some of the ethical implications of these findings, suggesting that work to support desistance should extend far beyond the typically individualized concerns of correctional practice and into a deeper and inescapably moral engagement with the reconnection of the individual to social networks that are restorative and allow people to fulfill the reciprocal obligations on which networks and communities depend.

Anecdotal evidence suggests that many of the staff members working for prisoner reentry programs are formerly incarcerated persons. Moreover, criminologists have written that the strengths-based role of the “wounded healer” or “professional ex-” is exemplified by released prisoners who desist from a deviant career by replacing it with an occupation as a paraprofessional, lay therapist, or counselor. Despite these observations, there is a paucity of research about formerly incarcerated persons employed by agencies that provide reentry-related programming. This study begins to fill this gap by examining whether, how, and why the staff members of prisoner reentry programs differ from the clients. Characteristics of formerly incarcerated persons thought to be related to desistance and reconciling a criminal past such as overcoming stigma, prosocial attitudes and beliefs, active coping strategies, psychological well-being, and satisfaction with life are examined. Findings support the notion that the wounded healer or professional ex- role is related to desistance and can potentially transform formerly incarcerated persons from being part of “the problem” into part of “the solution” to reduce crime and recidivism.