Formerly Detained Adolescents’ Narratives: On the Interplay between Quality of Life and Desistance

• Author: Nele Van Hecke,Florien Meulewaeter,Wouter Vanderplasschen,Lore Van Damme,Jan Naert,Sara Rowaert,Stijn Vandevelde
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X211023922
• Published date: 01 May 2023
• Date: 01 May 2023
• Subject Matter: Articles

https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X211023922

International Journal of

Offender Therapy and

Comparative Criminology

2023, Vol. 67(6-7) 618 –639

© The Author(s) 2021

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/0306624X211023922

journals.sagepub.com/home/ijo

Article

Formerly Detained

Adolescents’ Narratives: On

the Interplay between Quality

of Life and Desistance

Nele Van Hecke1, Florien Meulewaeter1,

Wouter Vanderplasschen1, Lore Van Damme1,

Jan Naert1, Sara Rowaert1, and Stijn Vandevelde1

Abstract

In recent years, a growing trend to consider strengths and protective factors in

studies on desistance from crime has emerged. The present study explores three

formerly detained adolescents’ narratives, aiming to tease out how Quality of Life

(QoL) and desistance interact in pathways towards a “better life.” The narratives

suggest that the journey towards a better life is highly individual, and may unfold

via multiple pathways characterized by an ambivalent relationship between QoL and

desistance. Alongside the importance of individual aspects and social support, societal

barriers and opportunities play a significant role in creating new chances to re-build

a life and prosocial identities. This reflects earlier findings that desistance is not an

individual responsibility. It is essential to support young people to overcome societal

barriers that impede participation in society and living a good life. This research adds

to growing evidence of strengths-based approaches to rehabilitation, such as the

Good Lives Model (GLM).

Keywords

quality of life, desistance, adolescents, rehabilitation, qualitative research

1Ghent University, Belgium

Corresponding Author:

Nele Van Hecke, Department of Special Needs Education, Ghent University, H. Dunantlaan 2, Ghent,

9000, Belgium.

Email: nele.vanhecke@hotmail.com

1023922IJOXXX10.1177/0306624X211023922International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative CriminologyVan Hecke et al.

research-article2021

Van Hecke et al. 619

Introduction

Rehabilitation of Adolescents with Norm-Violating Behavior

Adolescence is known to be a turbulent period in which significant life changes and

transitions occur (Cicchetti & Rogosch, 2002), often leading to a temporary decrease

in life satisfaction (Goldbeck et al., 2007). It is in this period that most risk-taking and

norm-violating behavior (e.g., truancy, running away, . . .) is displayed, as a conse-

quence of progressing psychosocial maturation and an increased susceptibility to the

influence of peers (Moffitt, 1993; Steinberg et al., 2018). Notwithstanding the fact that

most young people grow up as well-balanced adults without encountering major dif-

ficulties (Cicchetti & Rogosch, 2002), some adolescents find themselves in such prob-

lematic situations that an invasive youth care intervention is deemed necessary for

their own or society’s safety. Adolescents who display norm-violating behavior or

whose physical or psychological integrity is compromised, can be subject to freedom

restricting measures, such as being sent to a youth detention center, a juvenile justice

setting or a closed institution for mandatory care and treatment (CI). The consequences

of norm-violating behavior during youth might interfere with various challenges that

go along with the transition to adulthood, for example, finding a job, going to live

independently or engaging in a stable relationship (Lambie & Randell, 2013; Veysey

et al., 2013). Therefore, treatment and rehabilitation of these youngsters are character-

ized by a tense duality between two related, but somehow hard to unify objectives;

preventing these young people from further offending and supporting them in getting

their lives “back on track.” In recent years, there has been growing interest in strengths-

based approaches to rehabilitation, which envision outcomes of “success” that are

broader than merely the absence of recidivism, but that also focus on (inter)personal

strengths, subjective experiences of recovery or personal growth, and individuals’

sense of well-being (Barnao & Ward, 2015; Nee & Vernham, 2017; Shepherd et al.,

2018; Vandevelde et al., 2017). An example of a strengths-based rehabilitation model

is the Good Lives Model of offender rehabilitation (GLM).

The Good Lives Model of Offender Rehabilitation

The GLM has been developed by Tony Ward about two decades ago as a reaction

against a too narrow implementation of the Risk Need Responsivity (RNR) principles

in sex offender treatment (Ward, 2002; Ward & Stewart, 2003). Where the traditional

RNR-approach, that is considered as the leading model in offender rehabilitation,

focuses primarily on reducing the risk of recidivism, the GLM addresses a dual aim:

(1) supporting persons to pursue a personally fulfilling and prosocial life; and (2)

diminishing the risk on criminal recidivism. According to the GLM, both goals are

intrinsically related and should, therefore, be simultaneously addressed. The GLM

considers human beings to pursue primary goods or basic human needs (Ward &

Fortune, 2013; Ward & Stewart, 2003). Primary goods are classified in eleven dimen-

sions (e.g., knowledge, inner peace, relatedness, . . .) and constitute the core goals in