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

Social work and age assessments

Age assessment is a critical process used to determine the age of individuals, particularly those who are unaccompanied asylum-seeking children (UASC) or individuals whose age is disputed. This guide explores the necessity, methodology, challenges, and implications of age assessment within the context of social work and immigration policies.

The importance of age assessment lies in its direct impact on the rights and services available to individuals. A fourteen-year-old child, for example, has very different needs from a sixteen-year-old and is treated differently under the law. When accurate documentary evidence such as a birth certificate or passport is unavailable, age assessment ensures that appropriate protections and responsibilities are upheld. Incorrect assessments can have severe safeguarding consequences, such as placing an adult with children or vice versa. The introduction of the Illegal Migration Act 2023 further emphasizes the significance of accurate assessments, as children wrongly classified as adults risk removal from the UK without due consideration of their protection and human rights claims.

The necessity of an age assessment is evaluated based on the presence of doubt about a young person’s claimed age. If reliable, independent documentary evidence exists, an assessment may not be required. However, many young asylum seekers lack such documentation due to reasons including the non-issuance of birth certificates in their home countries, loss of documents during displacement, or advice to discard them for safety reasons.

Upon arrival in the UK, a young person’s first contact is typically with Border Force officials, who refer individuals they believe to be under 19 for assessment. Police officers, who lack age screening authority, must refer such individuals to children’s social work services. Conducting an age assessment at a police station is generally not Merton compliant, as it fails to provide a conducive environment for an accurate evaluation.

Preparation for the age assessment interview involves gathering relevant country of origin reports to enhance the cultural competence of social workers. These reports offer insights into political, social, and cultural contexts that may affect a young person’s statements and behavior. Utilizing reports from multiple reputable sources ensures accuracy and objectivity in the assessment.

The age assessment process itself is inherently stressful for young individuals. Measures should be taken to reduce stress, including providing adequate notice, ensuring appropriate interpreter services, selecting interviewers of the same gender when necessary, and conducting assessments in a suitable setting.

Interpreters play a crucial role in age assessments, particularly when the young person speaks a regional dialect that differs from the mainstream language. A professional interpreter helps ensure accurate communication and avoids misunderstandings that could compromise the assessment.

The interview process should follow a structured but flexible approach. Social workers must employ open-ended questions that allow individuals to provide narrative responses, helping to assess their experiences, education, and chronological age. The use of the ‘circular approach,’ as established by the Merton judgement, allows social workers to cross-reference information provided by the young person throughout different parts of the interview.

Key factors in determining age include physical appearance, demeanor, communication skills, and cultural considerations. However, sole reliance on physical traits such as height, facial hair, or voice tone can be misleading due to genetic and nutritional variations. Similarly, the ability to articulate well does not necessarily indicate adulthood. Trauma, displacement, and life experiences significantly affect behavior, making chronological age assessment complex.

Social workers should also consider external sources of information such as foster carers and teachers, who can provide insight into a young person’s behavior and maturity relative to their peers. However, the responsibility for determining age ultimately lies with the social worker, not other professionals.

The role of social media in age assessments is limited, as information found online may be unreliable, manipulated, or taken out of context. Nonetheless, if a young person voluntarily provides access to their social media as supporting evidence, it can be considered with caution.

The assessment process should be timely, ideally not exceeding 28 days, with a maximum of three months. Lengthy assessments prolong stress for the young person and may delay critical support services.

Once evidence has been gathered, social workers must weigh the information carefully, distinguishing between factual observations and subjective interpretations. The ‘minded to’ process provides the young person with an opportunity to respond to preliminary findings before a final decision is made. This step is legally significant, as failure to conduct it properly can result in judicial reviews overturning the assessment.

Following the ‘minded to’ meeting, a formal decision meeting is held where the young person is informed of the final outcome. If they are deemed a child, they receive the necessary support. If assessed as an adult, careful transition planning is required to ensure continued support where appropriate.

Judicial reviews and appeals against age assessments have become increasingly common. Challenges often arise from over-reliance on physical appearance, failure to conduct a ‘minded to’ meeting, or insufficiently documented assessments. Clear, detailed documentation is essential to withstand legal scrutiny.

The National Age Assessment Board (NAAB), established under the Nationality and Borders Act 2022, employs Home Office social workers to conduct age assessments. The shift from local authority-led assessments to Home Office-controlled evaluations raises concerns about impartiality, as NAAB operates within an immigration enforcement framework rather than a child welfare-focused system.

Scientific methods of age assessment, such as dental and bone analysis, are expected to be introduced under government policies. However, experts estimate that these methods will only be accurate within a five-year range, underscoring the continued importance of professional social work judgment.

Additional challenges in age assessment arise from cases of smuggling and trafficking. Traffickers may coach young people to claim specific ages, while victims may be unaware of their actual chronological age. Social workers must navigate these complexities with sensitivity, ensuring that decisions prioritize the protection and welfare of vulnerable individuals.

Age assessment remains a complex yet essential process that directly impacts the legal rights, protection, and welfare of young people. Social workers play a pivotal role in ensuring assessments are conducted ethically, rigorously, and fairly, balancing the need for accurate age determination with the overarching duty to safeguard children and young people from harm.

Source

Cultural Competence in Social Work Practice

Cultural competence is a cornerstone of effective social work practice, representing the ability to understand, respect, and appropriately respond to the diverse cultural backgrounds and experiences of clients. In an increasingly multicultural world, social workers are often at the forefront of addressing complex social issues where cultural identities play a significant role. Cultural competence extends beyond mere awareness of cultural differences; it involves a deep, ongoing commitment to self-reflection, continuous learning, and the application of culturally responsive interventions.

The foundation of cultural competence in social work is rooted in the recognition that clients come from varied backgrounds, each with unique beliefs, values, and experiences. These cultural factors significantly influence how individuals perceive and engage with social services. Social workers must, therefore, be equipped with the knowledge and skills to navigate these differences sensitively and effectively. This involves not only learning about different cultural practices and worldviews but also critically examining one’s own cultural biases and assumptions that may impact professional interactions and decision-making.

One of the critical elements of cultural competence is the integration of intersectionality into practice. Intersectionality, a concept introduced by Kimberlé Crenshaw, provides a framework for understanding how various aspects of a person’s identity—including race, ethnicity, gender, socioeconomic status, sexual orientation, religion, disability, and more—intersect to create unique experiences of privilege and oppression. This perspective is essential in social work, as it highlights the complex, multifaceted nature of clients’ lives and the systemic barriers they may face. Social workers who adopt an intersectional approach are better positioned to develop comprehensive, individualized support plans that address the full spectrum of their clients’ needs.

A transformative case study within the practice illustrates the profound impact of cultural competence. In this case, a social worker navigated the intricacies of cultural beliefs, legal challenges, and systemic inequalities while supporting a family facing multiple stressors. The social worker’s ability to build trust, demonstrate empathy, and apply culturally tailored interventions was pivotal in achieving positive outcomes for the family. The case involved working with interpreters to overcome language barriers, engaging with community leaders to better understand cultural norms, and employing culturally specific therapeutic techniques that resonated with the client’s background. This case underscores the importance of cultural humility, which involves recognizing one’s own biases and limitations while valuing the cultural knowledge clients bring to the therapeutic relationship.

The theoretical and practical insights gained from such cases emphasize the need for continuous professional development in cultural competence. Social workers must engage in lifelong learning, seeking out opportunities to deepen their understanding of different cultural contexts and to refine their skills in culturally responsive practice. This includes participating in cultural competence training, attending workshops and seminars focused on diversity and inclusion, reflecting on personal and professional experiences, and staying informed about current research and best practices in the field. Additionally, mentorship programs and peer supervision can provide valuable spaces for social workers to discuss challenges and share strategies related to cultural competence.

Moreover, advocacy is an integral component of culturally competent social work. Social workers are often in positions where they can influence policies and practices that affect marginalized communities. By advocating for systemic changes that promote equity and inclusion, social workers can address the root causes of social injustice and support the empowerment of diverse populations. This involves not only advocating on behalf of individual clients but also engaging in broader social justice efforts, such as lobbying for policy reforms, participating in community organizing, and collaborating with other professionals and organizations to promote culturally informed practices.

Incorporating cultural competence into social work also requires an organizational commitment. Agencies and institutions must foster environments that support diversity, equity, and inclusion at all levels. This can be achieved through policies that promote cultural competence, regular staff training, diverse hiring practices, and creating spaces where cultural differences are acknowledged and celebrated. Organizational leadership plays a crucial role in setting the tone and expectations for culturally competent practice, ensuring that social workers have the resources and support they need to serve diverse populations effectively.

In conclusion, cultural competence in social work practice is not a static achievement but a dynamic process that requires dedication, reflection, and action. It is about creating meaningful, respectful connections with clients from all backgrounds and working collaboratively to address their needs within the context of their cultural identities. By embracing cultural competence, social workers can enhance the quality and effectiveness of their practice, ultimately contributing to more just and equitable outcomes for individuals and communities. The ongoing journey toward cultural competence challenges social workers to remain open-minded, adaptable, and committed to the principles of social justice and human dignity.

Source