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.

Source