Assisted Desistance in Correctional Centers: From Theory to Practice

• Published date: 01 November 2023
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/00938548231193313
• Author: Melissa de Vel-Palumbo,Mark Halsey,Andrew Day
• Date: 01 November 2023
• Subject Matter: Articles

CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND BEHAVIOR, 2023, Vol. 50, No. 11, November 2023, 1623 –1642.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/00938548231193313

Article reuse guidelines: sagepub.com/journals-permissions

© 2023 International Association for Correctional and Forensic Psychology

1623

ASSISTED DESISTANCE IN CORRECTIONAL

CENTERS

From Theory to Practice

MELISSA DE VEL-PALUMBO

MARK HALSEY

Flinders University

ANDREW DAY

The University of Melbourne

A key issue for policy makers and practitioners is finding a way to identify what constitutes a rehabilitative prison. In this

study, aspects of a carceral experience that successfully ignite desistance journeys, or that “assist” desistance are identified

and measured. We report the findings of a measure to do this, the Macquarie Assisted Desistance Instrument (MADI), which

was co-designed with staff and residents in two correctional centers in New South Wales, Australia. Analysis of data from

both prison staff and residents (N = 604) revealed that the measure was generally coherent (unidimensional), internally

consistent, and stable across time. In addition, those who felt their desistance journeys were being more strongly assisted

reported a greater sense of self-efficacy, providing support for the idea that custodial experiences can lead to better rehabili-

tative outcomes. Suggestions for how to improve prison practice and more meaningfully to assist people to desist from crime

are proposed.

Keywords: desistance; incarceration; crime; rehabilitation; co-design

Despite the intuitive appeal of the idea that harsher punishments will deter criminal

behavior, this is simply not the case. In fact, the available evidence suggests that an

experience of incarceration will often increase the likelihood of recidivism (Loeffler &

Nagin, 2022; Petrich et al., 2021) and it might even be argued that our contemporary prisons

have been designed to expose individuals to a range of criminogenic factors (see Halsey &

de Vel-Palumbo, 2020). This potentially places those who are charged with the responsibility

AUTHORS’ NOTE: This research was funded by Corrective Services NSW under the Premier’s Priorities

initiative. The research reported in this article does not reflect the views of Corrective Services NSW. We sin-

cerely thank those in prison and prison staff who freely gave their time to contribute to this project, as well as

Corrective Services, who funded and facilitated this research. Thanks also to Milla Jane who provided research

assistance. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Melissa de Vel-Palumbo, College of

Business, Government and Law, Flinders University, GPO Box 2100, Adelaide, South Australia 5000,

Australia; e-mail: melissa.devel-palumbo@flinders.edu.au.

1193313CJBXXX10.1177/00938548231193313Criminal Justice and Behaviorde Vel-Palumbo et al. / Assisted Desistance

research-article2023

1624 CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND BEHAVIOR

to rehabilitate “in the uncomfortable position of defending something that the existing evi-

dence concludes is ineffective” (Petrich et al., 2021, p. 402), and points to the importance of

understanding more about the mechanisms that allow some people to become more prosocial

over the course of a sentence (Crewe & Ievins, 2020; Mears et al., 2015). We currently have

few sources of data from which to understand how and when imprisonment will assist desis-

tance journeys. This study reports the development and initial validation of a new tool for

assessing the extent to which a prison is supporting desistance processes.

This research is based on the idea of assisted desistance (Villeneuve et al., 2021) and

has been co-designed with those who live and work in prisons. For Villeneuve and col-

leagues, desistance from crime is a process during which periods of being crime-free lead

to cognitive transformations and identity shifts that are consistent with a desired prosocial

identity and lifestyle. Desistance is the “first step” toward social inclusion, as desisters

come to have a strong sense of belonging to a prosocial community and receive recogni-

tion from others for the changes made. Given that this is a largely social-relational process,

then the obvious question that arises is “Who can help facilitate or hinder the changes initi-

ated by desisters?” (p. 76). And, given many journeys toward desistance will involve some

form of assistance from the criminal justice system, one can explore institutions’ role—

here, prisons—in assisting desistance.

We begin by reviewing what is already known about how and why people desist from

crime and then summarize the key elements of contemporary desistance theories. We then

consider the application of these theories for understanding personal change in prison set-

tings and outline our attempt to measure the extent to which prisons support such

processes.

WHY ASSISTED DESISTANCE?

It is possible to explain how the risk of reoffending increases during imprisonment with

reference to a number of different criminological theories. First, social learning theory (see

Akers, 2009) suggests exposure to antisocial peers reinforces procriminal attitudes and

presents new opportunities to learn from and imitate antisocial behavior. General strain

theory (see Agnew, 1992), on the other hand, proposes that it is a failure to achieve posi-

tively valued goals, the removal of positive stimuli, and the introduction of negative stimuli

that lead to further criminal behavior. Thus, the hypothesis is that the level of strain induced

by imprisonment (e.g., erosion of personal and social capital) will influence its deleterious

effects (Listwan et al., 2013). Social bonding theory (Hirschi, 1969) asserts that the stronger

an individual’s bonds to society, the less likely they will be to deviate from societal norms.

Imprisonment then can increase risk as a result of weakening emotional ties with significant

others, thwarting the pursuit of conventional goals, restricting opportunities to participate in

conventional activities, and promoting the rejection of conventional norms and morals.

Finally, labeling theories (see Lemert, 1951) broadly suggest that prison reflects stigmatiz-

ing societal reactions that are internalized by those in prison and serve to ensnare them in a

criminal trajectory. Related to this is the idea that imprisonment weakens social bonds that

inhibit crime through normative influence, such as with family, and by limiting opportuni-

ties for subsequent employment, education, and housing (Uggen & Stewart, 2015).

The empirical evidence to support the application of each of these theories to understand-

ing desistance in carceral settings is currently limited, but all are likely to have some merit.