Harris,
D. A., Pedneault, A., and Willis, G. (2017) The Pursuit of Primary Human Goods
in Men Desisting From Sexual Offending. Sexual
Abuse. iFirst.
The good lives model proposes
at least 10 primary human goods that are thought to be common to all
individuals which, when secured, contribute to enhanced well-being and life
satisfaction. Prosocial attainment of primary human goods is thought to promote
desistance from crime. However, individuals convicted of sexual offenses face
significant obstacles upon their reentry into the community that likely
undermine their ability to obtain such goods. The current study explored the
pursuit and attainment of primary human goods in a U.S. sample of men convicted
of sexual offenses. We interviewed 42 men released into the community to
examine the extent to which they desired and pursued primary human goods.
Results highlighted that participants valued many of the human goods outlined
in the good lives model, but their means to achieve them were restricted
considerably by their correctional status. “Interpersonal relationships” and
“life/survival” emerged most frequently during the interviews and were
identified as the two most important goods. We discuss the negative impact of
recent policies on participants’ ability to pursue and attain human goods as
well as the value of attending regular treatment in obtaining the goods of
“knowledge” and “community.” Implications for policy and directions for future
research are provided.
Could you talk us through where the
idea for the research came from?
The idea for this article came from a
series of conversations that I (DH) had with colleagues at a time when I was
trying to make sense of the themes that had emerged from my desistance
interviews. I was familiar with the main tenets of the Good Lives Model (GLM),
and I observed a natural congruence between the optimism of that approach and
what I had seen in the emerging literature on desistance from crime.
We (DH & AP) used the Life
History Interview Protocol to interview men who had been convicted of sexual
crimes, served time in custody, and then been released into the community. The
interview questions included specific items about some of the PHGs (such as
pursuit of mastery, spirituality, and relationships) but we noted during our
analysis that many men also spoke of the severe limitations and challenges that
they experienced in pursuing and achieving other PHGs. We decided to revisit
the transcripts and look for mentions of the PHGs that emerged spontaneously to
explore the extent to which the men wanted to pursue, had tried to attain, had
successfully achieved, or had been restricted from pursuing them. The guiding
hypothesis was that the pursuit and successful attainment of PHGs would
facilitate what criminologists call “desistance from crime.”
What kinds of challenges did you face
throughout the process?
One of the biggest hurdles was the
need to legitimize qualitative methodologies in an area where quantitative
approaches are far more typical. There are many reasons why desistance research
lends itself to qualitative research and in-depth interviewing, but there is a
clear bias against those findings (and approaches) by a field that has largely
been built upon the meta-analyses of much larger samples. Desistance is best
defined as a process, and is therefore not well understood using
cross-sectional data or quantitative approaches at discrete points in time
(e.g., risk assessment scores). Understanding desistance means understanding
one’s life story; the details and nuances of which cannot be dichotomized
without losing data quality. Exploring a life story means asking in-depth
questions that sometimes yield meandering answers. It means asking for
clarification on temporal variables, ensuring you’ve got the story straight,
and honouring the longitudinal nature of how someone’s story has unfolded and
continues to unfold. We felt the richness of those stories could only be
authentically represented through qualitative methods. Above all else, the fact
that we know so little about the life histories, offending trajectories, and
transitions of these men (on an individual level) necessitates that we use a
qualitative approach. For us, this early work on understanding the important
phenomenon of desistance must occur within the “context of discovery.”
“Relationship status” is a good
example of a variable that is better captured by a long quotation than by a
spreadsheet. Marriage is usually a dichotomous variable - a simple yes/no. It
might be operationalized as “legally married at the time of the index offense,”
or “ever lived with a lover for two years.” But these simplistic distinctions
offered only inadequate ways of describing our sample: Roy was married for 23
years but admits to cheating on his wife (and fathering children with other
women) repeatedly; Jacob has had a few long-term, committed relationships with
men, Rodney was married four times: twice happily, and twice dysfunctionally;
Clay was married for a long time but frequently abused his wife. Quite frankly,
after the interviews, there was too much detail to put in a table!
What do you believe to be the
main things that you have learnt about desistance?
One of the most compelling findings
to come from desistance research so far, is that for many or most of the
samples we work with, desistance from sexual crime is as natural and widespread
as it is from nonsexual crime. Most people who have engaged in these acts come
to no longer do so. Understanding how and why that transition occurs (with,
without, or in spite of the various interventions that we prescribe and
enforce) is a research question that deserves more attention. Thinking about
the positive elements of a person’s life, seeing them as more than the worst
thing they have ever done (or more accurately—been caught for) is also an important
lesson from this work. The realization that someone can do bad things and not
be a bad person forever, or can do bad things and then not do them anymore
challenges a lot of approaches (and assumptions) that are well-entrenched in
this space. Finally, as we continue to examine the extent to which our
participants are “successful” upon release, it is increasingly necessary and
meaningful to look beyond “recidivism” and “risk factors” as the only variables
of interest.
Now that you’ve published the
article, what are some implications for practitioners?
Although the men in our study experienced profound
difficulties in pursuing and attaining PHGs, a key finding that emerged was
that attending a treatment program provided a source of several PHGs, including
a sense of belonging (“community”) and knowledge. In the context of increasingly restrictive
policies and legislation it is easy to focus on challenges that our clients
face and lose hope that they will ever live a better life. But if we lose hope,
so will our clients. It is important that we frame treatment as an activity
designed to assist clients to find meaning and purpose in their lives, rather
than something they must do. By creating safe and supportive treatment
environments where PHGs can be realised, practitioners can help facilitate and
support the natural desistance process.
No comments:
Post a Comment