Criminogenic Needs: What They Are and Why They Matter

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.

Source

Understanding How and Why People Stop Offending: Insights from Desistance Research

Desistance—the process by which individuals cease offending – is a critical yet complex area of study in criminology and criminal justice. Research led by Fergus McNeill, Stephen Farrall, Claire Lightowler, and Shadd Maruna highlights that desistance is not simply a function of aging or external control, but a multifaceted process influenced by personal, social, and structural factors. Understanding how and why people stop offending has profound implications for improving criminal justice practices, policies, and the broader social environment in which individuals attempt to change their lives.

Historically, explanations for desistance often focused on biological or maturational factors. Early theorists, such as Goring in 1919 and the Gluecks in the 1930s, suggested that aging itself naturally led individuals to desist from crime. While age remains a strong predictor of reduced offending, contemporary research recognizes that age alone cannot explain why people stop engaging in criminal behavior. The effects of aging are mediated by life experiences, social transitions, and personal decisions, making the process of desistance far more nuanced than early biological models suggested.

Subsequent research emphasized the role of individual choice and volition. Studies in the 1980s and 1990s found that many former offenders attributed their decision to stop offending to personal experiences such as shocks or setbacks, growing weary of incarceration, or reassessing their life priorities. While these decisions alone are insufficient to guarantee desistance, they are often a necessary first step, reflecting a readiness to engage in meaningful change. This perspective was complemented by theoretical models, such as Moffitt’s taxonomy of offenders, which distinguished between adolescence-limited and life-course persistent offenders, highlighting how developmental pathways intersect with the likelihood of desisting.

Beyond individual decision-making, the social context of desistance has emerged as a crucial factor. Sampson and Laub’s influential work emphasizes the importance of social bonds to family, employment, marriage, and community institutions. Strong, positive relationships often provide the emotional support, resources, and sense of purpose necessary to sustain change. Conversely, weak or broken social ties can increase the risk of continued offending. More recently, scholars such as Maruna have emphasized the role of self-identity in the desistance process. Developing a coherent, pro-social identity allows former offenders to reinterpret past experiences and view themselves as capable of leading meaningful lives. For many, desistance involves finding ways to use their past experiences constructively, such as mentoring others or contributing to their communities.

Theories of cognitive transformation, such as those proposed by Giordano and colleagues, describe desistance as a process that combines individual agency with social opportunity. It begins with a willingness to change, exposure to turning points or “hooks for change,” the ability to envision a positive alternative identity, and ultimately, a reconceptualization of past deviant behavior as irrelevant or undesirable. These insights underscore that desistance is both a deeply personal journey and a socially mediated process, shaped by the interactions between the individual and their environment.

The implications of desistance research for criminal justice practice are profound. Effective probation and social work supervision must recognize that desistance is complex, subjective, and often non-linear. Supporting change requires building hope and motivation, respecting agency, identifying and nurturing strengths, and facilitating access to opportunities for positive social roles. Supervision that simply enforces compliance or focuses narrowly on risks and deficits is unlikely to foster long-term change. Instead, interventions should work collaboratively with individuals, supporting their aspirations while providing practical assistance with housing, employment, education, and relationships.

Desistance research also has broader implications for the design of criminal justice systems. Innovative approaches to sentencing, such as problem-solving courts or restorative payback schemes, draw on the evidence that engagement, choice, and constructive participation can enhance the likelihood of desistance. Prison systems, too, can play a role in fostering change when they focus on meaningful relationships, skill development, and the cultivation of non-criminal identities, rather than simply containment. However, as the evidence emphasizes, prisons alone cannot secure desistance; reintegration into families, communities, civil society, and the wider social fabric is essential. Countries such as Norway have institutionalized this perspective through legally enforceable reintegration guarantees, highlighting the importance of collective responsibility in supporting ex-offenders.

Ultimately, desistance is not simply a matter of “correcting” the individual; it is a social and moral process that involves repairing relationships, rebuilding trust, and enabling individuals to reclaim meaningful roles in society. By focusing on positive change, development, and potential, desistance research challenges the criminal justice system to move beyond punitive paradigms and toward practices that genuinely support rehabilitation and reintegration. The study of how and why people stop offending offers a roadmap for policies, interventions, and institutions that recognize human capacity for change and the essential social dimensions of transformation.

Source

The Good Lives Model: A Strengths-Based Approach to 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.

Source

Secret Life of Prisons

The Secret Life of Prisons is produced by a charity, the Prison Radio Association. To make a donation please visit prison.radio/donate.
The podcast tells the hidden stories from behind bars.
Paula Harriott is Chief Executive of Unlock. She spent time behind bars and now works to help those who have been to prison to contribute to the debate around crime and justice.
Phil Maguire is the Chief Executive of the Prison Radio Association. He’s worked in prisons for two decades and received an OBE for services to radio.

Listen

Forensic Social Work: Advancing Specialist Education and Practice

Forensic social work has emerged as a critical and highly specialized domain, responding to the intersections of social work, mental health, and legal systems. As societal challenges such as mental illness, criminal behavior, and systemic disadvantages intertwine, this field emphasizes the need for specialized education to prepare practitioners for its complexity. A case study from Australia, published in 2016, sheds light on this vital practice area by evaluating forensic social work education and its impact on professionals working within these contested spaces.

The practice of forensic social work is deeply rooted in addressing the needs of marginalized individuals. These populations often grapple with poverty, substance abuse, mental illness, and involvement with the legal system, reflecting broader societal inequities. This context has reshaped criminality narratives, moving beyond “bad conduct” to exploring environmental and psychological factors. This shift underscores the rising demand for social workers equipped to navigate the nexus of mental health and justice systems. Forensic social work is not limited to corrections or mental health institutions; its scope extends to child protection, disability services, and addiction rehabilitation, encompassing all fields requiring navigation of nonvoluntary systems.

The origins of forensic social work in Australia align with its emphasis on advocating for vulnerable populations. The field evolved from working with incarcerated individuals and juvenile delinquents to addressing broader psychosocial issues within legal frameworks. Practitioners assess risk, recommend rehabilitation, and advocate for client well-being in a legal context that often prioritizes control over empowerment. They challenge misconceptions that equate mental illness with criminality, advocating for nuanced understandings of risk and individual circumstances.

Specialized Education and Its Role in Forensic Practice

Education is a cornerstone in preparing social workers for the complexities of forensic practice. The Monash University Master of Social Work (Forensic Studies) program, introduced in 2010, offers a case study in bridging generic social work skills with forensic-specific knowledge. This graduate program equips social workers with a deep understanding of legal systems, risk assessment, and mental health frameworks. It emphasizes integrating social work values, such as individual dignity and self-determination, into the legal and mental health systems that often dominate forensic contexts.

Study participants—social workers employed by the Victorian Institute of Forensic Mental Health (Forensicare)—highlighted the unique demands of their roles. Forensicare provides services to mentally ill offenders in secure facilities and community settings, as well as assessments for courts. These practitioners stressed that their work requires a distinct skill set, blending traditional social work practices with an acute awareness of legal structures and mental health systems. Their roles often involve advocating for clients in adversarial environments, balancing the rights of individuals with community safety.

The findings revealed that forensic social workers consider their practice to be highly specialized due to its focus on legal issues, statutory guidelines, and the integration of mental health and criminal justice concerns. This specialization requires practitioners to address complex client needs, including stigma, marginalization, and systemic challenges. They must develop strong advocacy skills and maintain collaborative relationships with external agencies, all while navigating the constraints of legal and medical models.

Challenges and Skills in Forensic Social Work

Forensic social work is characterized by its focus on risk assessment, advocacy, and addressing the unique needs of clients. Practitioners must be adept at understanding the legal and psychological factors influencing their clients while maintaining a strengths-based perspective. Study participants emphasized the importance of recognizing clients’ individuality and respecting their voices, even in the context of significant constraints. This approach often contrasts with the deficit-focused models prevalent in legal and medical systems.

The practice of forensic social work is not without its challenges. Practitioners must navigate conflicting priorities, such as advocating for clients while addressing community safety concerns. They are also tasked with bridging gaps between different professional perspectives, such as those of lawyers and medical practitioners, to ensure holistic client care. Participants in the study noted that these challenges require a high level of specialized knowledge, particularly in areas such as mental health, substance abuse, trauma, and legal frameworks.

The Utility of Advanced Forensic Social Work Education

The Monash University program was widely praised for its ability to prepare social workers for the realities of forensic practice. Study participants highlighted the program’s focus on practical applications, such as risk assessment and case management, as well as its emphasis on interdisciplinary collaboration. They also identified areas for improvement, including greater attention to cultural competency, intellectual disabilities, and community development. These additions would enhance the program’s ability to address the diverse needs of forensic clients.

The introduction of specialized education programs like the Master of Social Work (Forensic Studies) marks a significant step forward in recognizing forensic social work as a distinct and essential practice area. These programs not only provide social workers with the tools they need to navigate complex systems but also elevate the profession by acknowledging the unique contributions of forensic practitioners.

Conclusion

The study underscores the critical role of forensic social work in addressing the intersections of mental health, criminal justice, and systemic inequities. It highlights the importance of specialized education in equipping practitioners to navigate these challenges while maintaining core social work values. As the demand for forensic social work continues to grow, the development of advanced educational programs will be essential in preparing social workers to advocate for vulnerable populations and influence systemic change.

Source

The Silent Struggle: Voices of Women Facing Honour-Based Violence and the Role of Swedish Social Services

Honour-based violence (HBV) represents a pervasive form of gendered oppression rooted in cultural traditions and patriarchal systems. It seeks to control and suppress individual agency, particularly for women and girls, in the name of preserving family or community “honour.” This article explores the narratives of young women in Sweden who have endured HBV, shedding light on their vulnerabilities, the systemic challenges they face, and the role of Swedish social services in providing support and relief.

HBV is not confined to a single culture, religion, or region; it transcends borders and manifests in various forms worldwide. At its core, HBV hinges on the belief that the behavior of women is intrinsically tied to the reputation of their families or communities. For the women subjected to these rigid norms, life is often characterized by a lack of autonomy and agency. They are controlled through restrictions on movement, clothing, education, and social interactions, with severe consequences, including violence, when these norms are violated.

In Sweden, a country that prides itself on gender equality and human rights, the existence of HBV underscores the challenges of integrating diverse populations with varying cultural norms. Estimates suggest that tens of thousands of women and girls in Sweden live under the shadow of HBV, facing threats such as forced marriage, female genital mutilation, and honour-related restrictions. While these numbers highlight the urgency of the issue, they also reveal the limitations of current systems in addressing such deeply ingrained cultural practices.

The study at the center of this discussion focuses on young women aged 18 to 25 who sought help from Swedish social services to escape the grip of HBV. Their narratives provide a vivid picture of the oppressive environments they left behind, as well as the struggles they encountered in their pursuit of freedom. The women described their lives as being tightly controlled by family members, with some recounting experiences of constant surveillance. One woman revealed how her every movement was tracked using bus schedules or even GPS devices, leaving her with no personal space or independence.

The pressure to conform to honour norms extended beyond the immediate family, involving the wider community as enforcers of these standards. Women shared stories of being mocked, shamed, or harassed by neighbors or acquaintances for minor acts of defiance, such as not wearing a veil or attending public swimming pools. These acts of resistance, though small, were seen as affronts to the family’s reputation and often triggered severe backlash.

The decision to seek help from social services was, for many, an act of desperation—a choice made in moments of extreme crisis. For some, this decision came after years of emotional and physical abuse, while others were driven to act by the fear of forced marriage or even death. However, reaching out for help was not without its challenges. The women described the immense psychological burden of breaking family ties, knowing they risked permanent estrangement and even violent retribution. One participant recounted how contacting social services led to threats against her life, as her family viewed her decision as the ultimate betrayal.

Swedish social services play a pivotal role in supporting individuals fleeing HBV, yet their effectiveness is often limited by systemic and cultural gaps. While many women expressed gratitude for the support they received, they also shared stories of frustration and disillusionment. Some women experienced delays in accessing services or felt that their situations were misunderstood by social workers unfamiliar with the complexities of HBV. Language barriers further exacerbated these challenges, with one woman describing how her inability to communicate effectively delayed the assistance she desperately needed.

The quality of placements in sheltered housing or foster families also varied significantly. While some women found solace and security in these environments, others experienced isolation and alienation. One woman compared her foster home to a cold, unwelcoming space, where her emotional needs were overlooked in favor of fulfilling basic physical requirements. She poignantly stated that she would have preferred to live in a refugee camp surrounded by loved ones than to endure the loneliness of her placement.

Despite these challenges, social services also provided life-changing support for many of the women. Thoughtful interventions, such as connecting women with peer networks or providing trauma-informed care, made a significant difference. One participant described the profound relief she felt when a social worker took her fears seriously and acted decisively to ensure her safety. Another woman, who had fled a forced marriage, recounted how social services not only provided her with protection but also helped her rebuild her life, describing the social workers as “angels” who gave her a second chance.

The broader societal response to HBV in Sweden, however, remains inadequate in addressing the root causes of this violence. Prevention and education efforts are critical in challenging the patriarchal norms that underpin HBV. Public awareness campaigns, school-based programs, and community engagement initiatives are essential tools in promoting gender equality and empowering individuals to assert their rights. Yet, these efforts must be coupled with robust support systems that prioritize the needs of survivors.

The study also highlighted the importance of recognizing the psychological toll of HBV on survivors. Many women grappled with feelings of guilt, loss, and identity crises as they navigated their new lives. The emotional strain of severing family ties was compounded by the challenges of integrating into a new cultural context. Social services must take a holistic approach to support, addressing not only the immediate safety concerns of survivors but also their long-term psychological and social needs.

Ultimately, the narratives of these women serve as a powerful testament to their resilience and courage. Their stories reveal the immense strength required to break free from oppressive environments and build independent lives. At the same time, they underscore the urgent need for systemic reforms to ensure that social services are equipped to meet the unique challenges of HBV. By listening to the voices of survivors and incorporating their experiences into policy and practice, Sweden can take meaningful steps toward eradicating HBV and supporting the rights and dignity of all individuals.

Source

Relational Trauma: The Enduring Effects of Maternal Imprisonment on Families

The imprisonment of mothers is a multifaceted issue that leaves profound and enduring effects on family structures, relationships, and individual emotional well-being. Sophie Mitchell’s research explores the complexities of this phenomenon, examining the far-reaching consequences of maternal incarceration on children, kinship carers, and the broader family unit. By focusing on relational trauma—a disruption in familial bonds caused by separation and societal stigma—Mitchell sheds light on the hidden struggles faced by these families. This work not only highlights the depth of these impacts but also challenges current criminal justice practices, advocating for more compassionate and relationship-centered solutions.

The rising debate around female imprisonment questions its necessity and the disproportionate harm it causes. Unlike the incarceration of men, the imprisonment of women, especially mothers, disrupts family units in ways that often cannot be repaired. In many cases, women are imprisoned for non-violent or minor offenses, yet the punitive effects are amplified by the emotional and practical upheaval experienced by their children and relatives. Mitchell’s work positions these relational damages as a central issue that policymakers must address when considering the sentencing and rehabilitation of mothers.

Relational theory serves as a foundation for understanding how maternal imprisonment causes harm. This theory suggests that women’s sense of self is deeply intertwined with their relationships. Unlike men, whose social structures often remain intact during imprisonment, women experience profound disruptions to their familial connections. This severance creates what Mitchell terms “relational trauma,” a form of emotional and psychological harm stemming from broken bonds with children, kinship carers, and extended family members. Such trauma is not confined to the incarcerated mothers but radiates outward, affecting generations and perpetuating cycles of emotional distress and social disadvantage.

A central theme of this research is the unique impact on children, who are often the most vulnerable victims of maternal incarceration. While paternal imprisonment typically allows children to remain in the care of their mothers, only a small fraction—around 5%—of children stay in their family homes when their mothers are imprisoned. Most are placed with grandmothers, other female relatives, or into state care. This sudden displacement uproots their lives, causing significant emotional and psychological challenges. The lack of stability, combined with the absence of a primary caregiver, leaves children grappling with feelings of abandonment and insecurity.

Mitchell’s study brings a much-needed focus to the experiences of older children, a group often overlooked in discussions about maternal imprisonment. Adolescents and young adults face unique challenges, including navigating their own transitions into adulthood without maternal guidance. Many report feelings of anger, resentment, and confusion, often struggling to reconcile their love for their mothers with the stigma and disruption caused by their incarceration. For instance, one mother described her teenage son’s outbursts of anger and difficulty maintaining relationships, showing how deeply the loss of maternal support affected his emotional well-being.

For younger children, the trauma manifests differently. They may not fully understand the circumstances of their mother’s absence, but they experience its effects acutely. Symptoms such as bed-wetting, anxiety, and social withdrawal are common. Mitchell describes the concept of “ambiguous loss,” where children grapple with the absence of their mother despite her psychological presence in their lives. This conflict, compounded by societal stigma, leaves deep scars that shape their emotional development and future relationships.

Kinship carers, often grandmothers, also bear the brunt of maternal imprisonment. These caregivers step into roles they may not have anticipated, often at great personal cost. Financial strain, emotional exhaustion, and physical health challenges are common as they take on the responsibility of raising children in their later years. Many report feeling isolated and unsupported, navigating a system that offers little assistance to non-parental caregivers. Mitchell recounts the story of a grandmother who aged visibly while caring for her grandson during her daughter’s imprisonment, illustrating the toll this role reversal takes on older family members.

The relational strain extends beyond the caregiving arrangement. The incarceration of a mother often fractures relationships between the mother and her own parents or siblings. Grandmothers, in particular, face difficult decisions about whether to shield children from the reality of their mother’s imprisonment or facilitate contact. This dynamic can create tension and resentment, further complicating familial bonds. One participant shared how her mother refused to bring her young daughter to visit her in prison, prioritizing the child’s emotional well-being but deepening the estrangement between mother and grandmother.

Mitchell’s research underscores the enduring impact of these relational fractures, which do not simply heal upon a mother’s release. For many families, the damage is permanent. Mothers returning from prison often face insurmountable challenges in rebuilding their relationships with children and kinship carers. The stigma of incarceration, combined with feelings of guilt and shame, creates barriers to reconciliation. Some children, particularly adolescents, struggle to forgive their mothers, while others feel conflicted about re-establishing a relationship. These dynamics perpetuate cycles of emotional disconnection and relational trauma.

The systemic failures highlighted in Mitchell’s work call for a reevaluation of criminal justice policies regarding mothers. The use of custodial sentences for non-violent offenses must be reconsidered in light of the relational harm caused. Alternatives to imprisonment, such as community-based programs, could offer more compassionate solutions that preserve familial bonds. Countries like Germany have implemented innovative approaches, allowing mothers to care for their children during the day while returning to custody at night. Such programs not only maintain relationships but also provide opportunities for rehabilitation and growth.

In conclusion, Mitchell’s research paints a compelling picture of the far-reaching consequences of maternal imprisonment. By centering relational theory and the concept of relational trauma, her work challenges policymakers to rethink how justice is administered to mothers. The findings highlight the need for systemic changes that prioritize the well-being of families, offering support to mothers, children, and kinship carers as interconnected parts of a fragile ecosystem. In a system that often values punishment over rehabilitation, Mitchell’s work stands as a vital call for empathy, compassion, and a deeper understanding of the human cost of incarceration.

Source

Navigating Gender and Justice: Ideological Dilemmas in Scottish Social Work

Justice social work has long been a field where practitioners navigate a delicate balance between care and control, embedded within inherently gendered practices and structures. The historical association of social work as a “women’s profession” contrasts with the male-dominated spaces of probation and criminal justice interventions. This article explores the findings of a study examining how justice social workers (JSWs) in Scotland perceive and engage with gender in their work, highlighting the ideological dilemmas they encounter and offering a person-centered, intersectional approach as a way forward.

The study, rooted in feminist, intersectional, and post-structural frameworks, reveals that JSWs grapple with tensions surrounding gender neutrality versus the recognition of gender differences. These tensions are reflective of broader societal and institutional structures that influence their practice. Gender is frequently seen through the lens of societal constructs, fluid and diverse, yet often constrained by binary and essentialist narratives in practice.

Historically, justice social work has mirrored societal norms about gender. Early probation officers embodied prevailing ideas about appropriate behaviors for men and women. Male officers predominantly worked with male offenders on issues like theft and violence, while female officers focused on women’s offenses, such as infanticide and prostitution. The women’s liberation movement and subsequent feminist criminology challenged these approaches, advocating for gender-specific responses to women in the justice system. Despite these advances, the sector continues to wrestle with the gendered legacies of its past.

Contemporary justice social work in Scotland operates within a framework emphasizing equality, evidence-based practices, and trauma-informed approaches. The Scottish Government’s “Vision for Justice” outlines principles aimed at creating fairer, person-centered services while acknowledging the historical male-centric design of justice systems. However, the implementation of these principles often places JSWs in a position of reconciling competing discourses around equality and difference.

The study employed mixed methods, including a national survey and focus groups, to uncover how JSWs perceive gender in practice. Responses indicated a wide range of views, from assertions of gender neutrality to recognition of gender-specific needs. Some practitioners dismissed gender as irrelevant, while others acknowledged its significance in specific contexts, such as working with women or addressing offenses like domestic violence and sexual assault. These varied perspectives reveal the complexity of integrating gender into justice social work.

One recurring theme was the role of trauma in shaping gendered approaches. Women in the justice system are often survivors of trauma, leading to calls for gender-responsive practices that address their unique needs. However, the focus on women’s trauma has begun to extend to men, recognizing that many male clients also carry deep-seated trauma. This shift highlights the need for a nuanced understanding of how trauma intersects with gender in shaping offending behaviors and responses.

Another significant dilemma revolved around the suitability of practitioners based on their gender. Discussions emphasized the value of mixed-gender teams, particularly in addressing stereotypically gendered offenses like domestic violence. Yet, these arguments also raised concerns about reinforcing gender stereotypes or implying deficiencies in practitioners based on their gender. Practitioners navigated these dilemmas by framing their arguments around client needs and evidence-based practices, striving to balance gender-specific considerations with broader principles of equality.

The findings underscore the persistent challenges of addressing gender in justice social work. While some practitioners advocate for gender-neutral approaches, others highlight the importance of acknowledging gender differences to provide effective, equitable services. The study’s use of discourse analysis illuminated how JSWs construct and negotiate these positions, often reflecting broader ideological tensions within the field.

Moving forward, the article advocates for a person-centered, intersectional approach to gender in justice social work. Such an approach recognizes the multiplicity of factors shaping individuals’ experiences and identities, moving beyond binary and essentialist narratives. Intersectionality, as defined by Patricia Hill Collins, emphasizes the interplay of race, class, gender, and other social factors in constructing complex inequalities. By applying this lens, practitioners can better address the diverse needs of clients and navigate the tensions inherent in gendered practices.

Additionally, the integration of care ethics alongside principles of justice offers a pathway for more holistic, inclusive practices. Care ethics emphasizes the importance of tailoring interventions to meet individuals’ unique needs while recognizing the broader social and power dynamics at play. This perspective aligns with the profession’s commitment to social justice, providing a framework for addressing the enduring conflicts within justice social work.

Ultimately, the article calls for creating deliberative spaces where practitioners can reflect on and engage with the complexities of gender in their work. Such spaces are essential for fostering dialogue, learning, and innovation, enabling the profession to advance its commitment to equality and social justice. By embracing a person-centered, intersectional approach and integrating care ethics, justice social work can navigate its ideological dilemmas and contribute to more equitable and effective practices.

Source

Adverse Childhood Experiences and Adolescent Cannabis Use Trajectories: A Longitudinal UK Cohort Study

Cannabis use in adolescence, especially in patterns of early and persistent use, poses a significant public health concern due to its association with potential psychiatric disorders and substance use disorders. Given evolving cannabis policies and increasing accessibility, it is crucial to understand which individuals are at heightened risk for problematic use. Adverse childhood experiences (ACEs)—ranging from various forms of abuse to household dysfunction—emerge as powerful risk factors that shape behavioral and mental health trajectories into adolescence and adulthood. This article examines findings from a longitudinal study assessing how different types and cumulative numbers of ACEs influence patterns of adolescent cannabis use.

Study Background and Objectives

This study utilized the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC), which tracked participants’ cannabis use from age 13 to 24 years. The primary goal was to assess the impact of both the cumulative and individual ACEs on cannabis use patterns, focusing on the timing and frequency of use. The study accounted for potential genetic and environmental confounders, such as polygenic risk for substance use and parental mental health issues, to isolate the effect of childhood adversities on adolescent cannabis trajectories.

Methods

Data Collection and Analysis The study included data from 5,212 participants. Cannabis use data were collected via self-reported questionnaires at nine points between the ages of 13 and 24. ACE data, covering experiences from birth to age 12, were gathered from parental and self-reports at multiple intervals. Ten ACEs, including physical and sexual abuse, bullying, and parental substance abuse, were evaluated individually and cumulatively.

The analysis used multinomial logistic regression to estimate relative risk ratios for cannabis use patterns, categorized as low/no use, later onset occasional or regular use, and early persisting occasional or regular use. Confounders such as genetic risk and socioeconomic status were controlled to ensure a clearer view of the ACE-cannabis use association.

Key Findings

Patterns of Cannabis Use Five distinct cannabis use trajectories emerged from the analysis:

Low or no cannabis use.
Later onset occasional use.
Early persisting occasional use.
Later onset regular use.
Early persisting regular use.

Impact of ACEs on Cannabis Use Trajectories The study found a clear dose-response relationship, with higher numbers of ACEs correlating with increased risk for early and persistent cannabis use. Specifically:

Adolescents exposed to four or more ACEs were over three times more likely to engage in early, persistent regular cannabis use compared to those with no ACEs.
Individual ACEs such as parental substance use, emotional abuse, and parental separation significantly increased the likelihood of early persistent regular use.

ACE-Specific Findings Parental substance use and abuse was a particularly potent risk factor, associated with nearly quadruple the risk of early persistent regular cannabis use. Other ACEs, such as parental mental health issues and experiences of physical or emotional abuse, were also significantly linked to higher risks of problematic cannabis trajectories.

Discussion and Implications

The study underscores the role of early adversity in shaping substance use behaviors during adolescence. The findings suggest that cumulative exposure to ACEs and specific adversities like parental substance abuse increase the likelihood of problematic cannabis use. This effect persists even after accounting for genetic predispositions, highlighting the impact of environmental factors independent of genetic risk.

The association between ACEs and early cannabis use suggests a potential avenue for intervention through public health policies aimed at reducing childhood adversities. Early interventions targeting families experiencing mental health and substance use issues could mitigate the impact of ACEs on adolescents. Additionally, addressing ACEs might not only reduce the likelihood of early cannabis use but also benefit mental health outcomes indirectly by decreasing the compounding effect of substance use on psychiatric health.

Limitations

The study faced several limitations, including potential under-reporting of sensitive ACE data and a limited ability to control for all confounding factors. Attrition within the ALSPAC cohort also led to a sample that was predominantly White and female, which could limit the generalizability of findings.

Conclusion

This longitudinal study provides robust evidence that childhood adversities, especially cumulative ACEs and parental substance abuse, elevate the risk of early and frequent cannabis use in adolescence. Public health interventions aimed at reducing ACEs could play a vital role in mitigating the risks associated with adolescent cannabis use.

Source