One of the primary purposes served by the field of criminology is to examine the nature of crime and criminals. Among the various issues that criminology addresses is the crime cycle. This cycle begins when one introduced to crime. The individual’s criminal activity gradually escalates as they begin to engage in graver and more violent criminal acts (Paternoster & Bushway, 2009). There are many who stay on the path of crime. There are others who decide to abandon criminal behavior. The latter group has fascinated criminologists for ages. Criminologists have sought to understand the factors that compel individuals to shun crime. Do these individuals have a change of heart? Does the fear of legal action or even death force them to abandon crime? These are just some of the questions that must be answered to gain insights into the reasons why individuals desist from crime. This paper seeks to add to the existing discussion on the forces responsible for desistance. In this paper, a critical examination of several factors that push individuals to desist from criminal behavior is offered.
Desistance definition
Before exploring the factors responsible for desistance, it is important to begin by defining this term. Desistance can be regarded as the decisions made by individuals involved in crime to resist the pressure and allure of crime (Paternoster & Bushway, 2012). Thanks to desistance, individuals are able to obey the law and completely turn their back on crime. As noted above, the factors that cause individuals to desist from criminal behavior has been the subject of fascination by criminologists for years. They have committed incredible effort to providing insights into these factors. In the discussion that follows, three key forces that are behind criminal desistance are explored in detail.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Identity change
In an article that they collaborate on, Paternoster and Bushway identify identity change as among the factors that convince individuals to abandon crime. They argue that individuals undergo changes in their internal-self and these changes cause them to desist from crime Paternoster & Bushway, 2012). They state further that ‘feared self’ play an important role in encouraging individuals to abandon crime. To make the point that they attempt to make clearer, an example of a criminal can be considered. This criminal has only engaged in petty crimes that have not resulted in significant harm. After deep reflection, the criminal realizes that he is becoming someone that scares them. He notes that he is slowly moving towards graver crimes where he will be forced to cause pain. This realization scares this criminal into abandoning crime altogether. Paternoster and Bushway add that desistance results from changes in self-perception and how one sees the world Paternoster & Bushway, 2012). As an individual who has been involved in crime begins to see himself in new light, they come to new realizations that compel them to abandon crime.
Paternoster worked with Bushway to author a different piece in which they explore criminal desistance. In this piece, they echo the insights that are shared in the article mentioned above that they also collaborated on. Paternoster and Bushway cite previous studies which suggest that individuals who desist from crime are driven by the desire to become better men (Paternoster & Bushway, 2009). These individuals desire to develop more positive relationships with their spouses. They understand that they can only do this when they abandon crime. While the desire to please the spouse is the direct and primary force behind the criminal desistance in the case of these individuals, it can be argued that these men undergo a transformation of their inner-self. This indicates that a change of heart and identity is a key driver of criminal desistance. The desire to please one’s spouse was also investigated by Ronald Simons and Ashley Barr who set out to determine if this desire had any impacts on desistance. While they found no relationship, they observed that those who had desisted enjoyed healthier and happier relationships with their partners (Simons & Barr, 2012).
It is important to mention the role that religion plays in the transformation of criminals. The criminal desistance is not the result of empty reflections. It is common for criminals to receive insight from some higher power who calls them to abandon crime. The higher power allows the individual to realize the error in their ways and to reform. Richard Stansfield and his team examined the impacts that religion has on crime desistance. They observed that religion and spiritual faith provide offenders with the beliefs that they use to abandon criminal activity (Stansfield, 2016). Additionally, religious communities provide offenders with the support that they need to keep from re-offending. It is quite clear that religion helps individuals to come to terms with the fact that crime is unacceptable and destructive.
That identity change plays an important role in criminal desistance is confirmed by Ronet Bachman in an article that he authored with his colleagues. In the article, they present a study in which they examined the behavior of a group of adult offenders (Bachman et al., 2015). They observed that an encouraging number of the offenders had abandoned crime. They proceeded to examine the factors that had caused this. They realized that the criminal desistance had been caused by a change in identity (Bachman et al., 2015). While still criminals, the offenders had an ‘offender identity’. They assumed a ‘non-offender’ identity upon desisting from crime. This study adds to the mountain of evidence that suggests that an identity change is needed for criminal desistance to occur.
Dissatisfaction with crime
Paternoster and Bushway argue that criminals become increasingly dissatisfied with the criminal lifestyle Paternoster & Bushway, 2012). This pushes them to abandon this life and to become law-abiding members of their community. Crime presents a number of perks that keep criminals shackled to criminal behavior. These perks include the goods that they steal. While these perks offer some satisfaction, the satisfaction is rather fleeting. Added to the fact that the conscience of criminals pricks them, the temporary satisfaction derived from crime make criminal behavior unsustainable and damaging in the long run. This is the realization that criminals who have abandoned crime come to.
It has to be noted that the dissatisfaction with the criminal life is not voluntarily experienced by all criminals. There are some criminals who are pushed by certain circumstances to recognize that crime does not offer lasting satisfaction. Motherhood is among these circumstances. Derek Kreager partnered with other scholars to examine the impacts of motherhood on crime desistance. In their article, they argue that motherhood forces criminals to abandon crime (Kreager, Matsueda & Erosheva, 2010). The impacts of motherhood are stronger in poor neighborhoods. The mothers in these neighborhoods realize that their children will look to them for guidance. They also understand that crime is not the path that they wish their children will take. This forces them to abandon crime and focus all their efforts and energy on their children.
The threat of legal action and the promise of freedom
Successive governments in the United States have adopted tough stances on the question of crime. The criminal justice system responds to criminal behavior by meting out punishment on those found to have offended. The legal action taken against offenders appears to be effective in discouraging criminal behavior. Usually, when tougher penalties are imposed on offenders, there is usually a decline in the crime rate. This indicates that those who choose to desist from crime are driven by the fear of legal action. The impact of the threat of punishment on crime rates is the subject of a study that Siddhartha Bandyopadhyay. She details the results of the study in an article in which she confirms that tougher penalties do indeed reduce crime (Bandyopadhyay, 2012). She particularly argues that longer prison terms serve to discourage individuals from engaging in criminal activity. While the legal system largely has the effect of discouraging criminal activity, it has been shown that it also offers certain promises that encourage individuals to become law-abiding. Ericka Adams and her colleagues carried out a study in which they explored the effects of programs established to clear the records of offenders. They observed that the reoffending rates for those whose records were cleared were lower (Adams, Chen & Chapman, 2016). These offenders simply did not want their names to return to the crime records. Their desire to keep their records clean offers them incentive to desist from criminal behavior. The findings that Adams and Chen obtained from their study are clear indication that the promises that the legal system offers to offenders encourage them to abandon crime.
In conclusion, most communities desire to create safe environments. This desire is usually made difficult to achieve by criminals who cause harm and pain. It is encouraging that there are many criminals who truly desire to work with communities in creating safer neighborhoods. These criminals choose to abandon crime. Their decision is driven by a number of forces. These include the transformation of their identities. These individuals also become dissatisfied with crime and choose to embrace a new lifestyle characterized by obedience and respect for the law. The justice system also plays an important role in promoting desistance. Through the threat of penalties, it scares criminals into changing their ways. The fact that criminal desistance is possible should serve as a call to criminals to abandon crime. There is no excuse for criminal behavior and there are many gains that desistance presents.
References
Adams, E. B., Chen, E, Y., & Chapman, E. (2016). Erasing the Mark of the Past: Ex-offenders’
Expectations and Experiences with Record Clearance. Punishment & Society . DOI:
10.1177/1462474516645688
Bandyopadhyay, B. (2012). Acquisitive Crime: Imprisonment, Detection and Social Factors.
CIVITAS. Retrieved 3 rd December 2016 from http://www.civitas.org.uk/content/files/crimeanalysis2012.pdf
Bachman, R., Kerrison, E., Paternoster, R., O’Connell, D., & Smith, L. (2015). Desistance for
A Long-Term Drug-Involved Sample of Adult Offenders. Criminal Justice & Behavior
DOI: 10.1177/0093854815604012
Kreager, D. A., Matsueda, R. L., & Erosheva, E. A. (2010). Motherhood and Criminal
Desistance in Disadvantaged Neighborhoods. Criminology, 48 (1), 221-258.
Paternoster, R., & Bushway, S. (2009). Distance and the Feared Self: Toward an Identity Theory
Of Criminal Desistance. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 99 (4), 1103-1156.
Paternoster, R., & Bushway, S. (2012). Studying Desistance from Crime: Where Quantitative
Meets Qualitative Methods. In Bosworth, M., & Hoyle, C. (Eds.). What is
Criminology? Oxford: Oxford UP.
Simons, R. L. & Barr, A. B. (2012). Shifting Perspectives: Cognitive Changes Mediate the Impact of Romantic Relationships on Desistance from Crime. Justice Quarterly, 31 (5),
793-821.
Stansfield, R., Mowen, T. J., O’Connor, T., & Boman, J. H. (2016). The Role of Religious
Support in Reentry. Evidence from the SCOVI Data. Journal of Research in Crime
And Delinquency. DOI: 10.1177/0022427816657578
