Understanding why people commit crimes is essential for building effective rehabilitation programs and reducing reoffending. At the heart of this work lies the concept of criminogenic needs—the dynamic factors that drive criminal behavior. Unlike fixed characteristics such as age or criminal history, criminogenic needs can be changed through targeted, evidence-based interventions. Because of this, they play a crucial role in shaping modern correctional practice and public safety strategies.
What Are Criminogenic Needs?
Criminogenic needs are dynamic risk factors—areas of a person’s life, behavior, or mindset that increase the likelihood of criminal activity and can be improved through intervention. These include substance misuse, negative peer associations, or antisocial attitudes. When these factors are present, an individual is more likely to offend; when they are addressed, the risk of reoffending decreases.
This makes criminogenic needs especially important within the criminal justice system. While static risk factors such as past convictions or early exposure to crime can predict future behavior, they cannot be changed. Criminogenic needs, however, offer an actionable pathway toward rehabilitation.
Key Characteristics of Criminogenic Needs
Criminogenic needs stand out because they influence criminal behavior directly, are changeable through targeted treatment or support, provide clear intervention points for reducing reoffending, and guide individualized rehabilitation plans. By focusing on these dynamic areas, practitioners can help individuals build the skills, habits, and supports necessary to avoid future criminal involvement.
Major Categories of Criminogenic Needs
Antisocial Attitudes and Beliefs
Holding beliefs that support or justify criminal behavior – such as hostility toward authority, lack of empathy, or rationalizations for wrongdoing – significantly increases the likelihood of reoffending.
Antisocial Peer Associations
Spending time with individuals engaged in criminal or high-risk activities reinforces harmful behaviors and normalizes offending.
Substance Abuse
Addiction or heavy substance use can impair judgment, fuel risky behavior, and drive individuals to commit crimes to sustain their habits.
Family and Relationship Problems
Dysfunctional family environments, exposure to criminal role models, lack of support, or poor supervision can contribute to criminal involvement.
Education and Employment Challenges
Low educational attainment, a history of job instability, or lack of employable skills can create financial strain and leave individuals with unstructured time, both of which increase the risk of offending.
Limited Prosocial Leisure Activities
When individuals lack healthy and meaningful ways to spend their time, they may drift toward risky or illegal activities.
Behavioral and Personality Traits
Impulsivity, poor problem-solving skills, aggression, and difficulty managing emotions increase the likelihood of criminal acts.
How Criminogenic Needs Are Identified
Professionals identify criminogenic needs using structured, validated assessment tools. These instruments evaluate a person’s attitudes, behavioral patterns, life circumstances, and history to provide a clear picture of their risk level and intervention needs. The process often includes interviews, reviews of personal and criminal history, analysis of social relationships and substance use, and assessments of thinking patterns and decision-making. These tools promote consistency and reduce reliance on subjective judgment.
Why Understanding Criminogenic Needs Matters
Focusing on criminogenic needs is fundamental to effective rehabilitation. By targeting the root causes of criminal behavior, interventions can reduce reoffending, promote long-term behavioral change, improve public safety, ensure efficient use of resources, and support individualized case planning. Rather than applying general or one-size-fits-all responses, professionals can tailor programs such as cognitive-behavioral therapy, substance abuse treatment, employment support, or relationship counseling to the areas that matter most.
Conclusion
Criminogenic needs provide a roadmap for meaningful change. By identifying and addressing the dynamic factors that contribute to criminal behavior, the criminal justice system can better support individuals in building safer, healthier lives while reducing the risk of reoffending. Understanding these needs is crucial for effective, humane, and evidence-based rehabilitation.
The Good Lives Model (GLM) represents a positive and strengths-based approach to offender rehabilitation. Developed by Tony Ward in 2010, it focuses on promoting personal fulfilment, well-being, and the pursuit of meaningful life goals rather than solely addressing risk factors or deficits. While it differs in emphasis from the traditional Risk-Need-Responsivity (RNR) framework, the GLM complements risk management by providing a more holistic, person-centred and engaging structure for rehabilitation (Ward & Fortune, 2013).
At the core of the GLM lies the belief that all individuals strive to achieve certain “primary human goods.” These are fundamental needs and aspirations that contribute to psychological well-being, such as life, knowledge, creativity, pleasure, spirituality, friendship, community, inner peace, excellence in work and play, and excellence in agency or autonomy. People pursue these goods through “secondary goods,” which are the specific activities or means used to achieve them. For example, running might be a secondary good that satisfies the primary good of excellence in play. However, when individuals lack the internal skills or external resources to pursue these goods in healthy and pro-social ways, they may resort to harmful or illegal behaviours. A person might, for instance, engage in harmful sexual behaviour as a misguided attempt to meet needs for intimacy or inner peace (Willis, Yates, Gannon & Ward, 2012).
The GLM views intervention as a process that helps individuals build the skills, strengths, and supports necessary to pursue their goals without harming others. Practitioners work collaboratively with clients to explore their values, aspirations, and personal definitions of a “good life.” Together, they develop a Good Lives Plan, identifying alternative and socially acceptable ways to meet primary goods while addressing risk factors that could hinder success (Purvis, Ward & Willis, 2011). This approach aims to replace harmful behaviours with positive strategies that allow individuals to live meaningful, fulfilling lives that do not cause harm to others.
Although originally developed for adults who had engaged in sexual offending, the GLM has been successfully adapted for use with children and young people by G-MAP, a UK-based service. This adaptation, known as the GLM-A, simplifies the model’s language and concepts to make them accessible and relevant to younger audiences. In this version, “primary goods” are referred to as “my needs,” while secondary goods are described as “how I meet my needs.” The eleven adult-focused primary goods have been condensed into eight primary needs that are more suitable for young people: having fun, achieving, being one’s own person, having people in one’s life, having purpose and making a difference, emotional health, sexual health, and physical health.
The GLM-A provides a framework for understanding the needs that drive a young person’s behaviour and informs the interventions required to help them meet these needs in appropriate ways. Interventions are carried out collaboratively, involving the young person and their family or carers, and recognising the importance of the wider social and systemic context (Fortune, Ward & Print, 2014).
In Scotland, the G-MAP model has been implemented through the Safer Lives Programme, introduced in 2008. This programme trains practitioners to use the GLM-A as part of their therapeutic work with young people who display harmful sexual behaviour. Initial evaluations of the GLM-A have been highly positive (Leeson & Adshead, 2013). Practitioners reported that the model improved their understanding of young people’s behaviours, enhanced engagement with children and carers, and provided a motivational and hopeful framework for change. Young people themselves found the model easy to understand and empowering, as it helped them recognise why they acted as they did and what steps they could take to change.
Further research into the implementation of Safer Lives in Scotland (Simpson & Vaswani, 2015) found that practitioners viewed the GLM-A as enriching their practice, sometimes by adding useful tools, and at other times by transforming their overall approach. They appreciated the model’s alignment with person-centred and strengths-based values and welcomed its shift away from a purely risk-focused perspective toward one that fosters growth and rehabilitation.
Despite its strengths, some critics have argued that the GLM focuses too narrowly on individual change and does not give enough attention to the social contexts that influence offending behaviour. McNeill and Weaver (2010) suggest that building social capital—such as supportive relationships, community involvement, and legitimate opportunities for participation—is essential to long-term desistance from offending.
Although the GLM and GLM-A have been applied primarily to individuals engaging in harmful sexual behaviour, the principles are equally relevant to other forms of offending. By focusing on personal growth, well-being, and the pursuit of pro-social goals, the GLM offers a promising framework for a wide range of rehabilitative practices.
In conclusion, the Good Lives Model and its adaptation for young people mark an important shift in offender rehabilitation, moving from a focus on risk and deficit toward one of growth, meaning, and human potential. By understanding and addressing the underlying needs that drive behaviour, the GLM empowers individuals to build better lives for themselves and safer communities for others.
Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is a lifelong developmental condition that affects how individuals perceive the world, process information, and relate to others. While much attention has historically been directed toward children with autism, recognition of the needs of autistic adults has been steadily growing in recent years. Research suggests that around 1% of the UK adult population, equating to roughly 700,000 people, are on the autism spectrum. Despite this significant figure, adults with autism often experience barriers in accessing support, navigating social services, and achieving independence in their daily lives.
Social workers are uniquely positioned to address these challenges by providing person-centred, strengths-based support that promotes wellbeing, independence, and inclusion. The Manual for Good Social Work Practice: Supporting Adults Who Have Autism (2015), commissioned by the Department of Health, offers practical guidance and values-based frameworks to improve outcomes for autistic adults and their carers. This essay critically examines the principles and practices outlined in the manual, with reference to the Care Act 2014 and the Mental Capacity Act 2005, highlighting best practice approaches in assessment, communication, carer support, crisis intervention, stress management, and advocacy.
Understanding Autism and Its Implications
Autism is described by the National Autistic Society as a “lifelong developmental disability that affects how a person communicates with, and relates to, other people, and how they make sense of the world around them.” Autism is a spectrum condition, meaning individuals share certain traits but experience them in unique ways. While some autistic adults live independently, others require specialist lifelong support due to co-occurring learning disabilities or sensory differences.
One of the greatest misconceptions is that autism manifests in a uniform way. In reality, the adage “if you’ve met one person with autism, you’ve met one person with autism” is particularly true. This underscores the necessity of person-centred approaches in social work. Each autistic adult has their own strengths, needs, coping mechanisms, and goals, which must be recognised without assumption. Furthermore, many autistic individuals experience heightened anxiety due to sensory overload, communication barriers, or difficulties adapting to change. Understanding these factors is fundamental for effective practice.
Core Principles of Social Work with Adults with Autism
The manual emphasises that good social work with autistic adults must be grounded in the principles of the Care Act 2014. These include promoting individual wellbeing, preventing or delaying the need for support, providing person-centred care, and supporting carers. For social workers, this means not only addressing needs but also recognising capabilities, fostering independence, and supporting community inclusion.
Ethical practice requires respect, empathy, and partnership working. Social workers should adopt a strengths-based lens, focusing on what individuals can do and how they can achieve their goals, rather than viewing autism through a deficit model. Additionally, the Mental Capacity Act 2005 requires practitioners to assume capacity unless proven otherwise, ensuring that autistic adults are supported to make decisions rather than having decisions made for them. These legal and ethical frameworks shape every aspect of practice.
Assessment Practices
Assessment is one of the most critical tasks in social work, but also one of the most complex when supporting autistic adults. The manual warns against condition-specific or assumption-based assessments. Instead, practitioners must invest time to build rapport, understand the individual’s perspective, and tailor the process to their communication style and pace.
Practical considerations include minimising repetition, scheduling short and focused visits, and ensuring the assessment environment is calm and sensory-friendly. Social workers should ask open but clear questions about relationships, daily routines, sources of stress, and goals for the future. Importantly, assessments must account for fluctuating abilities and co-existing conditions, as some adults may present differently depending on context.
Creative approaches are encouraged, such as using visual aids, structured agendas, or stress management plans co-designed with the person. For example, agreeing on contingency plans for stressful situations, or using health passports to reduce repetition at medical appointments. Such strategies respect the person’s autonomy while promoting clarity and accuracy in assessment outcomes.
Communication Strategies
Communication is often one of the most significant barriers faced by autistic adults, making this a vital area of social work practice. Clear, consistent, and respectful communication can foster trust and reduce anxiety. The manual highlights several best practices:
Preparation and consistency: Social workers should provide advance notice of meetings, share agendas, and keep appointments punctual. Changes in routine, appearance, or setting should be minimised where possible.
Avoiding jargon: Abstract language, metaphors, or ambiguous phrases can cause confusion. Clear, concrete language should be prioritised.
Respecting silence: Many autistic adults require additional processing time. Allowing silence, rather than rushing to fill it, demonstrates patience and respect.
Alternative communication modes: Some individuals may prefer written communication, email, or visual aids. Flexibility in communication methods is essential.
Trust-building is central. Consistency in behaviour, transparency about what is achievable, and sensitivity to sensory issues (such as noise, lighting, or strong perfumes) can help autistic adults feel safe and respected. Importantly, communication must be collaborative, enabling the individual to co-author their support and exercise choice.
Supporting Carers and Families
Carers—whether family members, friends, or partners—play a crucial role in supporting autistic adults, but they too need recognition, validation, and support. The Care Act 2014 establishes carers’ rights to assessment in their own right, acknowledging their needs as distinct from those of the cared-for person.
Social workers must avoid assumptions about carers, especially when parents of autistic adults are themselves autistic. Stigma and mistrust of services are common, stemming from past experiences of blame or exclusion. Good practice involves recognising carers as experts in the person’s life, consulting them respectfully, and planning for the long-term future when carers may no longer be able to provide support.
Supporting carers also means enabling them to pursue their own wellbeing, employment, and social lives. Facilitating access to respite, peer support networks, and community groups can help carers sustain their role without experiencing burnout. Ultimately, supporting carers is inseparable from supporting autistic adults, as both are deeply interconnected.
Crisis Intervention
Autistic adults often face unique challenges in times of crisis, whether related to mental health, social changes, or sensory overload. Effective crisis intervention requires preparation, empathy, and collaboration.
The manual emphasises understanding the individual’s own definition of crisis, which may differ significantly from a professional perspective. For example, a delayed bus may trigger overwhelming distress, while a seemingly “serious” issue may not be perceived as such by the person. Respecting this subjectivity is key.
Pre-emptive planning—such as role-playing scenarios, identifying triggers, and creating safety plans—can help reduce the intensity of crises. Social workers should remain calm, self-aware, and avoid reactive “knee-jerk” responses. At times, firm decision-making may be required to prevent harm, but this must be balanced with respect for autonomy and dignity.
Multi-agency collaboration is critical, as autistic adults often “fall through the gaps” between services. Social workers should coordinate with health professionals, mental health teams, and voluntary organisations, advocating for reasonable adjustments and rapid access to appropriate support.
Stress, Coping, and Minimisation
Stress is a near-constant factor for many autistic adults. What might seem trivial to others—such as a change in bus schedule, an unfamiliar environment, or sensory discomfort—can feel overwhelming. Social workers must approach these stressors with empathy rather than dismissal.
The manual highlights the risk of minimisation, where autistic adults may downplay their struggles as a coping strategy. Social workers should remain attentive, validate experiences, and encourage honest dialogue about stress. Special interests, often stereotyped as obsessions, can in fact serve as valuable coping mechanisms and sources of joy. Practitioners should respect and integrate these interests into support planning rather than pathologising them.
Parallel and contingency planning are also recommended. By preparing for multiple outcomes, autistic adults can feel more secure in navigating change and uncertainty. For example, if a preferred activity is cancelled, having an alternative plan in place can prevent escalation of anxiety.
Representation, Advocacy, and Wider Practice Issues
Advocacy is an essential component of social work with autistic adults, particularly when individuals face barriers in expressing their needs, navigating services, or challenging discrimination. Independent advocates can help ensure voices are heard, rights are respected, and decisions are genuinely person-centred.
Beyond individual cases, social workers also contribute to systemic change. By promoting autism awareness, challenging stereotypes, and building inclusive community services, they help create environments where autistic adults can thrive. This aligns with the Care Act’s emphasis on prevention, wellbeing, and community capacity building.
The manual also warns against deficit-based labels such as “high-functioning” or “low-functioning,” which oversimplify complex realities and can obscure genuine needs. Instead, practitioners should focus on practical support and empowerment, recognising that needs vary across contexts and over time.
Conclusion
Supporting adults with autism requires more than technical knowledge—it demands empathy, patience, flexibility, and a commitment to person-centred practice. Social workers must balance legal frameworks with ethical values, ensuring that autistic adults are empowered to live meaningful lives within their communities.
Best practice includes conducting holistic and creative assessments, fostering trust through clear communication, supporting carers as partners, preparing for crises with calm professionalism, and addressing stress with empathy and planning. Advocacy and representation further ensure that autistic adults are not marginalised but instead are recognised as equal participants in society.
As awareness of autism continues to grow, social workers must adapt, learn, and reflect, recognising that each individual’s journey is unique. The guidance provided in A Manual for Good Social Work Practice: Supporting Adults Who Have Autism offers a foundation, but it is through ongoing practice, reflection, and partnership with autistic people themselves that the profession can truly deliver the best outcomes.
Human motivation has long been a central topic in psychological research, particularly in understanding how people initiate and persist in goal-directed behaviors. Most contemporary motivation theories suggest that individuals engage in behaviors based on their expected outcomes. However, self-determination theory (SDT) offers a more nuanced perspective by emphasizing the role of innate psychological needs—competence, autonomy, and relatedness—in shaping motivation, goal pursuit, and overall well-being. This article provides a comprehensive discussion of SDT and its implications for human behavior.
The Concept of Needs in Motivation Theory
Early Needs Theories
Historically, the concept of needs has played a significant role in theories of motivation. Early approaches, such as those proposed by Hull (1943), focused on physiological needs that create drive states prompting behavior. However, this approach struggled to account for behaviors like curiosity and play, which are not directly linked to physiological drives. Murray (1938) introduced psychological needs as acquired motives rather than innate necessities, broadening the scope but failing to define a core set of needs essential for psychological well-being.
Needs theories in psychology evolved further with the work of Maslow (1943), who proposed a hierarchy of needs that move from basic physiological requirements to higher-order psychological and self-actualization needs. While this model provided valuable insights, SDT refined the concept by emphasizing that competence, autonomy, and relatedness are fundamental to well-being and not merely steps in a hierarchy.
The Nature of Needs in SDT
In contrast to learned motives, SDT posits that competence, relatedness, and autonomy are fundamental psychological needs that are universal across cultures and individuals. These needs are not learned but rather inherent in human nature and essential for optimal psychological growth and well-being. The satisfaction of these needs fosters effective functioning and well-being, while their thwarting leads to negative consequences, including diminished motivation and psychological distress.
The need for competence involves feeling effective and capable in one’s activities, striving to master tasks, and achieving desired outcomes. Autonomy refers to the sense of volition and self-governance, where individuals feel they are the originators of their actions rather than being externally controlled. Relatedness concerns the need to establish meaningful connections with others, feeling supported, valued, and cared for in social relationships.
The Role of Psychological Needs in Goal Pursuit
Differentiating Goal Content and Regulatory Processes
SDT differentiates between the content of goals and the processes by which goals are pursued. Goal contents refer to what individuals seek to attain, while regulatory processes pertain to how these goals are pursued. SDT suggests that different types of goals and regulatory styles influence motivation and well-being by differentially satisfying basic psychological needs.
For instance, pursuing goals based on personal growth, meaningful relationships, and health (intrinsic goals) tends to satisfy psychological needs, leading to greater well-being. Conversely, pursuing goals driven by external rewards such as wealth, fame, or status (extrinsic goals) can undermine well-being if they fail to meet these core psychological needs.
Intrinsic Motivation and Psychological Needs
Intrinsic motivation, characterized by engaging in activities for their inherent enjoyment, is strongly linked to competence and autonomy. Research has demonstrated that intrinsic motivation is enhanced in environments that provide choice, positive feedback, and opportunities for self-expression. When individuals engage in tasks they find interesting and fulfilling, their motivation is self-sustained and leads to creativity, persistence, and high-quality performance.
Conversely, extrinsic rewards, surveillance, and external pressure can undermine intrinsic motivation by reducing the perception of autonomy. Studies have shown that offering rewards for activities that individuals already find enjoyable can decrease their intrinsic interest, as external incentives shift the focus from internal satisfaction to external gain (Deci, 1971).
Internalization and the Integration of Extrinsic Motivation
Internalization, the process by which individuals adopt external regulations as their own, is another crucial aspect of SDT. This process varies in degree, ranging from external regulation (controlled by external rewards and punishments) to integrated regulation (where behaviors align with one’s core values and sense of self). The successful internalization of extrinsic motivations depends on the social environment’s ability to support autonomy, competence, and relatedness.
Individuals who internalize regulations effectively experience greater personal coherence and authenticity. They perform extrinsically motivated behaviors willingly because they find them personally valuable rather than feeling coerced. This process leads to more sustainable motivation, higher engagement, and greater psychological well-being.
The Impact of Social Context on Motivation
Autonomy-Supportive vs. Controlling Environments
Social environments significantly influence whether individuals experience their goal pursuits as autonomous or controlled. Autonomy-supportive environments foster self-determination by providing choice, acknowledging individuals’ perspectives, and minimizing external control. Such environments enhance intrinsic motivation, engagement, and psychological well-being. In contrast, controlling environments, characterized by pressure and contingent rewards, lead to controlled motivation, which can result in anxiety, diminished performance, and lower well-being.
Research in Educational and Organizational Contexts
Research in educational and organizational settings supports these claims. Studies have shown that students who experience autonomy-supportive teaching exhibit greater engagement, conceptual learning, and persistence compared to those in controlling environments. Teachers who encourage student participation, provide meaningful choices, and minimize coercion help foster greater intrinsic motivation and better learning outcomes.
Similarly, in the workplace, autonomy-supportive leadership has been linked to higher job satisfaction, performance, and psychological health. Employees who perceive their managers as supportive of their autonomy report higher levels of engagement, creativity, and overall job satisfaction compared to those who experience micromanagement and excessive external pressure.
Goal Content and Psychological Well-Being
Intrinsic vs. Extrinsic Goals
Beyond the distinction between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, SDT also considers the nature of the goals themselves. Goals can be classified as intrinsic (e.g., personal growth, meaningful relationships) or extrinsic (e.g., financial success, fame). Research suggests that pursuing intrinsic goals leads to greater well-being and fulfillment, as these goals inherently satisfy psychological needs. In contrast, extrinsic goals are less likely to provide lasting satisfaction and can even contribute to stress and decreased well-being.
The Role of Need Satisfaction in Well-Being
The satisfaction of basic psychological needs has been shown to predict greater well-being, resilience, and overall life satisfaction. When individuals pursue goals that align with their innate psychological needs, they experience greater personal fulfillment and psychological health. On the other hand, when goal pursuits are driven by external pressures and lack personal endorsement, individuals are more likely to experience stress, burnout, and dissatisfaction.
Studies have also highlighted the negative consequences of need thwarting, where individuals feel controlled, isolated, or incompetent. Such experiences can lead to decreased intrinsic motivation, emotional distress, and increased susceptibility to anxiety and depression.
Conclusion
SDT provides a robust framework for understanding human motivation by emphasizing the role of psychological needs in goal pursuit. The theory highlights the importance of both the “what” (goal content) and “why” (regulatory processes) of motivation, demonstrating that optimal functioning and well-being depend on the satisfaction of competence, autonomy, and relatedness. By fostering environments that support these needs, individuals and institutions can enhance motivation, performance, and overall psychological health. Understanding SDT’s principles can lead to better educational practices, workplace policies, and social relationships that empower individuals to thrive.
Beyond Barriers 