ABSTRACT

Existing theories of desistance can be loosely divided into two perspectives: socio-situational theories identify how life-course events and the social environment facilitate desistance, while subjective theories focus on individual differences in achieving desistance. Although both groups of theories receive empirical support, socio-situational frameworks are criticised for neglecting the processes which underpin them, while subjective explanations are criticised for overlooking the influence of opportunity structures in restricting offender agency. The current study aims to bridge this theoretical gap by inserting an action element of desistance. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 53 probationers and parolees, asking them about their experiences with supervision and their efforts to comply with their order and desist from crime. A thematic analysis of the data uncovered four purposive actions that the participants use to avoid reoffending: (1) isolation, (2) knifing off antisocial peers, (3) prosocial activities and associations, and (4) getting clean. Our participants cited parenting and conventional goals as their main motivating factors, while the barriers to their desistance strategies included labelling, order conditions, and unemployment. Based on their reflections of their efforts to go straight, we suggest that desistance strategies mediate (ex-)offenders’ motivation to desist and the structural conditions imposed upon them.

摘要

现有的抗拒理论可以大致分为两种观点：社会情境理论确定生活过程中的事件和社会环境如何促进抗拒，而主观理论则关注实现抗拒的个体差异。尽管两组理论都得到了经验支持，但批评者批评了社会情境框架忽略了支撑它们的过程，而批评了主观解释却忽略了机会结构在限制犯罪者代理方面的影响。当前的研究旨在通过插入止动作用来弥合这一理论鸿沟。对53名缓刑犯和假释者进行了半结构化访谈，询问他们在监督方面的经验以及为遵守其命令和制止犯罪所做的努力。对数据的主题分析揭示了参与者用来避免再次冒犯的四个有目的的行为：（1）隔离，（2）与反社会同伴隔绝，（3）亲社会活动和协会以及（4）变得整洁。我们的参与者将育儿和常规目标作为主要诱因，而阻止策略的障碍包括标签，订购条件和失业。根据他们对努力工作的反映，我们建议 而终止策略的障碍包括标签，订单条件和失业。根据他们对努力工作的反映，我们建议 而终止策略的障碍包括标签，订单条件和失业。根据他们对努力工作的反映，我们建议抵制策略调解了（前）犯人制止的动机以及强加于他们的结构性条件。